• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Al Gore Predicted North Pole Would Be Completely Ice Free by Today

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
4,389
Likes
2,815
#41
 

nickndfl

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
12,274
Likes
10,352
Location
Florida
#42
The three hottest years on record are 2016, 2015 and 2017. You do the math.
You are assuming that temperature has been measured the same for how long? Do you think instruments were as accurate in the 19th century as they are now? Do you think they measure at the same frequency too? You are making a lot of assumptions in your weather religion.
 

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,245
Likes
37,157
#43
Last winter was mild, this winter is brutal. Kind of just like the weather cycles I have seen my entire life.
If old algore lived in a off grid Yurt hand pumping well water surrounded by livestock I would give the guy a break like any other true believing kook.

But he travels by jet and limousine telling people not to drive cars. 1,700 private airplanes flew into Davos Switzerland for a global warming conference.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...53101051056/&usg=AOvVaw0UjjdM4N62AUoB0Qj_cmMO

Sorry folks. This is a bizarre religion to some and a complete scam to others where the participants don't even believe the bullshit they spew.


.
 

ZZZZZ

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
667
Likes
1,569
Location
Northern Arizona
#44
The three hottest years on record are 2016, 2015 and 2017. You do the math.
The official "record" is only a couple of hundred years old. It has been both much hotter and much colder in the more distant past. Mankind has almost nothing to do with "climate change." It is all about cycles, the sun, and other natural forces that fluctuate over time.

Surely the fleet of private jets flown by FaTAl Gore, Leonardo DiCapria and their lackeys hasn't caused "climate change" on Mars and Jupiter.
.
.
 

anywoundedduck

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
2,529
Likes
2,616
Location
Kentucky
#45
We are entering a mini ice age. 15 to 18 years.
Record cold temps in Minnesota today. Artic vortex reaching Cuba. Thanks Al, you bastard!
I just heard that this so called mini ice age could last as long as 50 year.
Shouldn't we open all the coal generators that Obama closed, and full stop the globalists chemtrail airplanes?
 

Someone_else

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
2,074
Likes
2,456
#46
I am willing to believe that there are many factors that affect climate. Right now, I think that the two primary factors are the solar cycles and cosmic rays. The theory is that cosmic rays affect our weather directly by their role in cloud formation and rain. Cloud coverage affects the Earth's albedo. And the solar activity affects the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth.

If someone has a model that fits past data points and it accurately predicts the future, that is useful. And vice versa. A model that has to be modified to agree with the future is not valid. It might as well be a formula to predict winning lottery numbers based on past winning numbers. "Oh, we just have to make a few more tweaks to get it right..."
 

ZZZZZ

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
667
Likes
1,569
Location
Northern Arizona
#47
I am willing to believe that there are many factors that affect climate. Right now, I think that the two primary factors are the solar cycles and cosmic rays. The theory is that cosmic rays affect our weather directly by their role in cloud formation and rain. Cloud coverage affects the Earth's albedo. And the solar activity affects the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth.

If someone has a model that fits past data points and it accurately predicts the future, that is useful. And vice versa. A model that has to be modified to agree with the future is not valid. It might as well be a formula to predict winning lottery numbers based on past winning numbers. "Oh, we just have to make a few more tweaks to get it right..."
This is a key point.

All of the models being used to predict the future cannot be back-tested to explain or account for the past behavior of the climate.
.
.
 

DodgebyDave

Metal Messiah
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
6,769
Likes
5,504
#48
"Carbon Tax"..................never forget what this is really about.

Owning a "clearing house bank" looks to be quite lucrative.....................................
 

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
4,389
Likes
2,815
#49
I am willing to believe that there are many factors that affect climate. Right now, I think that the two primary factors are the solar cycles and cosmic rays. The theory is that cosmic rays affect our weather directly by their role in cloud formation and rain. Cloud coverage affects the Earth's albedo. And the solar activity affects the amount of cosmic rays hitting the Earth.

If someone has a model that fits past data points and it accurately predicts the future, that is useful. And vice versa. A model that has to be modified to agree with the future is not valid. It might as well be a formula to predict winning lottery numbers based on past winning numbers. "Oh, we just have to make a few more tweaks to get it right..."
Yes, indeed a given hypothesis should need to accurately predict future events. The sunspot theory clearly does not.

Looking backwards, solar cycles do appear to have an effect on climate. However in the last 50 years, solar irradiation has moved opposite of temperature. It doesn't even correlate with, never mind cause the rapid warming trend in the last 50 years.

co2 clearly correlates, but there are multiple ways of demonstrating causation.


600px-Temp-sunspot-co2.svg.png


As for cosmic rays, I haven't been able to find any solid hypothesis that can be verified or falsified up til now. If there's some experimental evidence to support the idea, please point me in that direction.
 

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
4,389
Likes
2,815
#50
As Someone_else said, any theory should be able to predict the future at least somewhat accurately. Climate skeptics don't have valid theories, so their predictions are way off.

Whichever climate skeptic you pay attention to, see if you can find any predictions and please share.

Checkmate: how do climate science deniers' predictions stack up?

Graham Readfearn
The years 2017, 2016 and 2015 will make up the three hottest years on record for the planet. But there’s no convincing some people

The Eagle Creek wildfire burns as golfers play at the Beacon Rock golf course in Washington state on 4 September. Photograph: Kirsti McCluer/Reuters
Mon 18 Dec ‘17 20.18 EST

When the global temperature readings are in for 2017, it’s going to be a very hard sell for climate-science deniers: 2017 will likely be ranked either side of 2015 as the second or third hottest year on record, with 2016 still in top spot.

The hottest five-year period recorded in the modern era will be the one we’ve just had.

Communities around the world, and the flora and fauna we share it with, feel the effects of that steady rise through extreme weather, droughts, heatwaves, shifting rains, melting ice and rising sea levels.

Levels of carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels, deforestation and land clearing keep climbing.
But some remain convinced that the whole thing is an elaborate hoax and readily find a home for their conspiracy theories and pseudoscience in conservative media outlets and, too often, on publicly funded ones too.

Climate-science deniers love to fling around accusations that climate change models are massively over-egging the global warming pudding and should not be trusted (climate scientist Zeke Hausfather has a great technical explainer on this).

While many pseudo-sceptics are quick with an unfounded criticism, it’s rare for them to put their own alchemy to the test by making firm projections about what’s to come.

But sometimes they do and the results are often spectacularly and comically bad. Let’s have a look at a few.

The $10,000 bet

In 2005, two Russian solar physicists, Galina Mashnich and Vladimir Bashkirtsev, accepted a $10,000 bet with the British climate modeller James Annan that will be concluded in a couple of weeks.

At the time, Annan had been looking around for sceptics willing to put money behind their predictive prowess.

He bet the two Russians $10,000 that the six years between 2012 and 2017 would be warmer than the six years between 1998 and 2003.

Temperature data from the US National Climatic Data Centre – since renamed the National Centres for Environmental Information – would be used.

Annan thought human-caused global warming would keep pushing temperatures higher. The Russian pair thought solar activity would drop away and this effect would be enough to cause global temperatures to fall.

With only one month of data to go, you don’t need a maths degree to see who is rubbing their hands.

So far, only two years between 1998 and 2003 rank in the top 10 warmest years, compared with at least five years between 2012 and 2017.

Annan told me: “Yes I am confident of winning the bet, even the threatened eruption of Agung couldn’t matter … even if it had happened earlier this year. With only a few weeks to go, there is no chance of sufficient cooling for me to lose.”

El Niño enough?
In 2011, a group of Australian and New Zealand “sceptics” predicted that temperatures were about to plummet. The year 2011, they said, would likely be “the coolest year globally since 1956 or even earlier”.

Largely ignoring the role of increasing levels of greenhouse gases, the group, led by Australian John McLean, thought instead that the cycle of warming El Niño and cooling La Niña weather patterns would be enough to explain what would happen that year. This natural cycle had entered its cooler phase in late 2010.

You might have guessed it, but the group was wildly wrong.


FacebookTwitterPinterest
Global temperature chart from 2011 showing the failed prediction of a group of climate science deniers Composite: Graham Readfearn/NOAA
For the globe to be as cool as 1956, the temperatures would have to have been about 0.15C below the 20th century average. Instead, they were about 0.5C above the 20th century average.

According to data from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2011 tied as the 11th warmest year on record. At the time, 2011 ranked as the warmest La Niña year on record.

What about Newsweek?

In April 1975, Newsweek magazine ran a story highlighting how some scientists thought the world was heading for global cooling.

Climate science deniers love to cite that Newsweek story to claim there was a consensus among scientists in the 1970s that the world was heading for global cooling. They cited it so often, it became Newsweek’s most popular ever.

The dodgy logic goes like this. Because scientists were wrong then about future temperatures, they might be wrong now about projections of further warming.

Don’t think too hard about the internal inconsistency of the argument where they use some flawed predictions from the 70s to try and disprove the global warming we’re actually experiencing, but that they will also say isn’t happening.

The real story is this. Some scientific studies in the 1970s did suggest the world was going to cool. But even back then, analysis has shown that for every study predicting cooling there were six studies predicting warming.

Plimer minus £1,000
In 2008, Prof Ian Plimer, an Australian geologist and mining industry figure, accepted a bet from a British climate policy expert and economic modeller, Dr Chris Hope.

Hope had been at a conference in Cambridge where, he later wrote, “most of the participants were sceptical about the influence of humans on the climate”.

Hope took the microphone and offered a £1,000 bet that 2015 would be hotter than 2008. Plimer, who thinks climate change is all natural and nothing to do with humans, accepted the bet.

Oops. According to the UK’s MetOffice, 2015 turned out to be the hottest year on record. In fact, every year from 2009 to 2015 was hotter than 2008.

Plimer continues to be invited on to conservative media outlets to speak as an “expert” on climate change, while publishing books disparaging climate science and renewable energy and serving on the boards of several mining companies, including those owned by Australia’s richest person, Gina Rinehart.

Plimer gave an interview to the London-based Global Warming Policy Foundationa few weeks ago, shortly after the former Australian prime minister, Tony Abbott, had given that group’s annual lecture.

In October on Sky News, Plimer told the News Corp political commentator and fellow climate science denier Andrew Bolt that human-caused climate change was a “fallacy based on fraud promoted by fools”.

As in 2008, Plimer continues to be wrong.

Archibald prize?
In 2006 and 2007, the Perth-based geologist David Archibald made several predictions about the coming years and decades. It was going to be cool, cool, cool.

“The sun drives climate change and it will be colder next decade by 2C,” wrote Archibald.

He dismissed the role of extra CO2 in driving temperatures (big mistake) and instead plumped for solar cycles as the key driver of global temperatures. He predicted that years would get progressively cooler heading out to 2030.

According to Archibald, this would see temperatures peaking in 1998, with temperatures bottoming out around the year 2025 to levels not seen since at least the late 19th century.

What happened? When Archibald made his “prediction”, 1998 was the hottest year on record and he thought it would stay that way until at least 2030.

Now, 1998 has dropped all the way down to eighth warmest, according to the US government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Archibald last made headlines in early 2017, when the geologist was running for the far-right One Nation party in Australia’s federal election, and called single mothers “ugly” and “lazy”.

Cooling any minute
Don Easterbrook is a geology professor at Western Washington University who has been making predictions of imminent global cooling for the best part of two decades.

Easterbrook, a regular at climate science denial meetings run by the Heartland Institute, rejects the role of increasing CO2 and thinks that all you need for predicting future climates is to look at natural cycles of the past.

So in 2001 Easterbrook thought: “If the cycles continue as in the past, the current warm cycle should end in the next few years, and global warming should abate, rather than increase, in the coming decades.”

So it was any minute now for cooling. In 2006 Easterbrook said: “The current warm cycle should end soon and global temperatures should cool.”

In 2008 he wrote that his “predicted cooling seems to have already begun”.

That year he also wrote: “In a nutshell, in 2001 I put my reputation on the line and published my predictions for entering a global cooling cycle about 2007 (plus or minus three to five years), based on past glacial, ice core, and other data ... If the present cooling trend continues, the [United Nations climate change] reports will have been the biggest farce in the history of science.”

So, what happened?

According to NOAA, the following year, 2009, was the fifth warmest year on record, 2010 tied for the warmest, then 2011 and 2012 were relatively cool at the 11th and 10th warmest years. When the data was in for 2013, it was the fourth warmest year. The years 2014, 2015 and 2016 were all progressively ranked warmest on record.

That global cooling is just round the corner though. Any minute now.

Rapid cooling
Kevin Long is an Australian mechanical engineer and one of those “long-range” weather forecasters who pull together things like moon cycles and sun spot activity to make predictions.

In January 2014, Long declared the world was heading for “the most rapid global cooling trend for two centuries” and that during 2016 this event “should become very obvious to all”.

Long said it was “unlikely” the public would be told about the coming global cooling, because of all the “anthropogenic global warming propaganda” that the United Nations intergovernmental panel on climate change was endlessly “peddling”, backed by an “extremely biased world media”.

So how’s that rapid global cooling trend going? We sort of know already, but 2017 is likely to be the second or third warmest year on record.

Climate fail army
Fellow Guardian environmental blogger Dana Nuccitelli wrote a whole book about the predictive qualities of this failed army of “sceptics”, called Climatology versus Pseudoscience: Exposing the Failed Predictions of Global Warming Skeptics.

Apart from being wrong, all these failed predictions have one thing in common: they all reject the role that human emissions of carbon dioxide are having on global temperatures.

The natural cycles used by many to make predictions, such as El Niño or the Pacific decadal oscillation or the activity of the sun, are well known and well studied.

But as the failed predictions show, those natural cycles have lost their grip on the world’s temperature. Carbon dioxide is increasingly in charge.

So allow me to make a couple of predictions.

First, based on their record, climate-science deniers will keep telling you that global cooling is just around the corner or that all that extra CO2 will be just great anyway.

Second, many will look to the comments section to yell that climate models are broken and global temperature records are being nefariously tampered with.

In short, the climate fail army will descend.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#51

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#52
Figures Do Not Lie, but Liars (AGWers) Figure:

"No C02 Warming for the Last 40 Years
It is very cold here in the Eastern US and the President is joking about the lack of global warming. More interesting by far is the fact that there appears to have been no CO2 induced warming in the last 40 years, which is as far back as the satellite measurements go.

That this incredible fact has gone unnoticed is due mostly to the scientific community’s fixation on the warming shown by the surface temperature statistical models. But as explained here, these complex computer models are completely unreliable.

Also, the satellite measurements do show some global warming, which people have mistakenly assumed somehow supports the hypothesis of human caused, CO2 induced warming. Careful inspection shows that this assumption is false. There is in fact no evidence of CO2 warming in the entire satellite record.

To see this one must look at the satellite record in detail. To understand this, bear in mind that science is all about the specific details of an observation. These details can overthrow grand theories that are widely accepted.

For example, the negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment led to the revolutionary special theory of relativity. When it comes to global warming, the 40 year satellite measurements provide a strong negative result for the CO2 warming hypothesis. The CO2 warming just is not there"......

https://www.cfact.org/2018/01/02/no-co2-warming-for-the-last-40-years/
 

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,245
Likes
37,157
#53
aacraz.gif


Global warmers and the cult of algore is the strangest most aggressive religion I have ever seen.
Got to give them credit though, when it comes to shaking down the weak minded for $$
with scare tactics, ever changing labels and ten dollar words they are highly successful.


.
 
Last edited:

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,245
Likes
37,157
#54
Delingpole: The Frozen U.S. Is Paying a Terrible Price for Green Lies


JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

by JAMES DELINGPOLE4 Jan 20186,864

The North-Eastern U.S. is experiencing record-breaking cold. Even the very sharks are dying as they swim.
Happily the New York Times is here to put it all in context. It’s all further evidence of global warming, of course!

All is ‘explained’ in a story headed “Why so cold? Climate Change May Be Part of the Answer”

As bitter cold continues to grip much of North America and helps spawn the fierce storm along the East Coast, the question arises: What’s the influence of climate change?

Some scientists studying the connection between climate change and cold spells, which occur when cold Arctic air dips south, say that they may be related. But the importance of the relationship is not fully clear yet.

The Arctic is not as cold as it used to be — the region is warming faster than any other — and studies suggest that this warming is weakening the jet stream, which ordinarily acts like a giant lasso, corralling cold air around the pole.

The facts need not detain us here – because there aren’t any. It’s just speculation – “could”, “may” – gleaned from conversations with tame “experts” at institutions like the notoriously alarmist and fervently left-wing Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. And there’s plenty more nonsense where this came from, as Thomas Williams reported here earlier.


This determination to argue, against all evidence, that the planet is in a warming phase and that we must do more to try to cool it down would be quite funny if it didn’t have such terrible real world consequences.

One of these is the current energy crisis being experienced across New England. Blue states which bought into the man-made global warming narrative, shut down their coal-fired power stations, rejected the Access Northeast Pipeline and instead, despoiled their landscapes with more ugly, expensive, bat-chomping, bird-slicing eco crucifixes are now paying a bitter price.

As Michael Bastasch reports at Climate Change Dispatch:

Unrelenting cold since late December has caused energy demand to spike, pushing up prices and straining supplies. New England power companies are struggling to keep up with demand.

New England’s current energy woes are the result of years of state and federal policies aimed at closing coal and oil-fired power plants, largely as part of the region’s effort to fight global warming.


Yep. It’s true that mostly liberals are affected by this – and created this mess. But still, liberals’ children feel the cold as badly as conservatives’ children. In fact, being less robust and more snowflakey, probably even more so. Must they really suffer for their parents’ stupidity?

Another is the havoc the green ideology has wreaked on honest science and on once-trustworthy government institutions such as National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The doughty Paul Homewood has unearthed what looks very much like yet another NOAA data-rigging scandal.

Put simply, researchers such as Marlene Kretschmer – the expert from the Potsdam Institute heavily quoted in the New York Times piece – are trying to pin recent cold winters on movements of the jet stream. This enables them to promote their “global warming is still happening” narrative. But for it to work it requires them to write off the recent cold winters, such as the one in 2013/14, as being “anomalous” – ie abnormally cold.

If they are anomalous, though, how come this fact doesn’t show up in NOAA’s temperature charts?

Homewood notes:

When she introduced [Kretschmer’s] work on the subject in 2014, Jennifer Francis specifically referred to the severe cold snap that affected the Northeast in January and February 2014, using it as an example.

The cold weather began on Jan 2nd, and lasted into April.

Yet again NOAA show absolutely nothing unusual going on in either of those months..





Homewood smells a rat:

Put very simply, NOAA’s temperature record bears no relevance to reality.


Knowing what I do of NOAA’s data-faking track record, I think I’m inclined to agree…

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...-s-is-paying-a-terrible-price-for-green-lies/
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#55
AGWers 13 Billion Dollars PER YEAR War Chest supplied by previous US Admin. and other world .Govs
So AGWers beat us over our heads with our own TAX PAYER MONEY !!

"EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt recently issued a directive to end a 20-year string of “sue and settle” cases that have funneled untold millions of tax dollars to environmental organizations. Predictably, those groups and their allies have been apoplectic about it.

Many of these groups have grown from grassroots citizen movements to gigantic cash-flush conglomerates, with much of the cash coming from the government they appear or pretend to be fighting. Many now have separate legal arms with hundreds of attorneys, whose primary job is to sue the government and keep the cash flowing. They are part of the $13 billion per year U.S. environmental industry and lobby. " ...

https://www.cfact.org/2017/12/24/time-to-get-them-off-our-gravy-train/
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#56
SOUND CLIMATE SCIENCE (22 minutes)
 

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,245
Likes
37,157
#58
zzzxs.jpg
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#59
AL is doubling down if not tripling down. Shear your sheep Al but you won't shear me.
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV


I think FaTal Gore's brain is frozen.

And hasn't Mann been totally discredited?

 

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,245
Likes
37,157
#61
How come there is ice from the North Pole to Pensacola, Florida?
Well you know sir, ice is caused by global warming and so is sexual harassment.
This explosion of women being sexually harassed is a proven, direct result of global warming.

The warmer it gets the moar womens get groped. Prolly all the bare legs and open toed shoes.

true.jpg
 

the_shootist

The war is here on our doorstep!
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
19,868
Likes
20,941
Location
Somewhere out there!
#63
AGWers 13 Billion Dollars PER YEAR War Chest supplied by previous US Admin. and other world .Govs
So AGWers beat us over our heads with our own TAX PAYER MONEY !!

"EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt recently issued a directive to end a 20-year string of “sue and settle” cases that have funneled untold millions of tax dollars to environmental organizations. Predictably, those groups and their allies have been apoplectic about it.

Many of these groups have grown from grassroots citizen movements to gigantic cash-flush conglomerates, with much of the cash coming from the government they appear or pretend to be fighting. Many now have separate legal arms with hundreds of attorneys, whose primary job is to sue the government and keep the cash flowing. They are part of the $13 billion per year U.S. environmental industry and lobby. " ...

https://www.cfact.org/2017/12/24/time-to-get-them-off-our-gravy-train/
Government screwing us again!
 

the_shootist

The war is here on our doorstep!
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
19,868
Likes
20,941
Location
Somewhere out there!
#64
Well you know sir, ice is caused by global warming and so is sexual harassment.
This explosion of women being sexually harassed is a proven, direct result of global warming.

The warmer it gets the moar womens get groped. Prolly all the bare legs and open toed shoes.

View attachment 96984
That's exactly what we should expect...I think!:don't    know2:
 

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,245
Likes
37,157
#66
Photos: Rare snow falls in the Sahara Desert for the 4th time since 1979

By Chaffin Mitchell, AccuWeather staff writer
January 11, 2018, 8:23:49 AM EST

On Jan. 7, snow fell in one of the hottest places on Earth, blanketing the Sahara Desert north of Algeria’s city of Ain Sefra.

While snow is a rare occurrence in the desert area, a similar snow phenomenon happened last year.

"The Ain Serfa region experienced accumulating snow back on Jan. 21, 2017. Snow also fell over the region in December 2016 and January 2012," AccuWeather Meteorologist Jason Nicholls said.

Before 2012, the most recent snowfall in this region appears to have occurred in February 1979.

The desert saw snow due to cold air aloft associated with a surface storm drifting from Spain into northern Algeria.

"The cold pool of air coupled with precipitation from the surface storm led to precipitation falling as snow instead of rain. The same feature responsible for the snow over the Sahara brought the heavy snow to the Alps earlier this week," Nicholls said.


Trevor Jade Knaphus ·
Richfield High

The Sahara desert was once a tropical jungle. As little as 6,000 years ago, the vast Sahara Desert was covered in grassland that received plenty of rainfall, but shifts in the world's weather patterns abruptly transformed the vegetated region into some of the driest land on Earth. .................OH WOW natural CLIMATE CHANGE. Always been here, always will change.








https://www.accuweather.com/en/weat...a-desert-for-the-4th-time-since-1979/70003798
 

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
4,389
Likes
2,815
#67
Screen Shot 2018-01-13 at 8.55.38 PM.png
Beautiful pics of the Sahara.

Climate scientists don't argue that the climate has always been in flux. Simply that all the known causes of past climate change have been eliminated and are not driving the present rapid warming trend.

Also, please stop confusing climate with weather. The Sahara is getting hotter, just like the globe as a whole. An extreme cold spell doesn't change that. This map is 2016. The 2017 map should be released in a week or two.
 

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,245
Likes
37,157
#69
Brrr… So Much for Global Warming Junk Science – US Has Snow Cover in All 50 States
January 18, 2018 by Jim Hoft 87 Comments


The US has snow in all 50 states today.
The last time this happened was in 2010.

Liberals will tell you this has nothing to do with global warming. Just like the record cold temperatures across the US this winter.


 

Thecrensh

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
3,754
Likes
3,900
#70
The three hottest years on record are 2016, 2015 and 2017. You do the math.
Some immediate problems come to mind;

1) "the record" only goes back to 1880. IPCC and NASA use of terms like "on record" is like a Mayfly talking about how how "it's the warmest it's ever been" at 1pm on the day it was born...very incomplete datasets

2) The climate IS changing and always has...nobody should argue that. The real debate is how much impact the human CO2 addition is driving this change.

3) The climate varied quite a bit in the last 8,000 without human introduced CO2...but even those variations are NOTHING compared to the changes leading into and out of an ice age

4) The surface observation data is being weighted by NASA...i.e., it's being altered to match what the satellites are showing...even though the surface obs are quite accurate

5) The climate models suck. They are incapable of predicting the future...and only show the past accurately after the formulas and computer code is updated

6) Climatologists really don't understand how much CO2 the ocean is capable of holding...this is a huge part of the atmospheric equation

7) NASA is showing global maps showing "departure from normal" data...in areas that have no data (see #4)

8) There are issues with the siting of many surface observing sites around the country and probably around the world. Many locations have the temperature sensors too close to buildings or inadequately housed in proper and functioning "stephenson screens". This can lead to warmer temperatures being recorded than actually felt (i.e., buildings radiate heat well after sundown and can drive the temperatures up in a few meter vicinity)
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#71
View attachment 97231 Beautiful pics of the Sahara.

Climate scientists don't argue that the climate has always been in flux. Simply that all the known causes of past climate change have been eliminated and are not driving the present rapid warming trend.

Also, please stop confusing climate with weather. The Sahara is getting hotter, just like the globe as a whole. An extreme cold spell doesn't change that. This map is 2016. The 2017 map should be released in a week or two.

FYI gnome, NOAA is modifying their mapping prior to releasing to the general public. The true results are cooler than what NOAA proposes.
I'll try and find one where NOAA increased most of the warmer areas and show the original which of course is not near as melodramatic .
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#72
Tc, :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: :2 thumbs up: jus' sayin'
 

Thecrensh

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
3,754
Likes
3,900
#73
Some immediate problems come to mind;

1) "the record" only goes back to 1880. IPCC and NASA use of terms like "on record" is like a Mayfly talking about how how "it's the warmest it's ever been" at 1pm on the day it was born...very incomplete datasets

2) The climate IS changing and always has...nobody should argue that. The real debate is how much impact the human CO2 addition is driving this change.

3) The climate varied quite a bit in the last 8,000 without human introduced CO2...but even those variations are NOTHING compared to the changes leading into and out of an ice age

4) The surface observation data is being weighted by NASA...i.e., it's being altered to match what the satellites are showing...even though the surface obs are quite accurate

5) The climate models suck. They are incapable of predicting the future...and only show the past accurately after the formulas and computer code is updated

6) Climatologists really don't understand how much CO2 the ocean is capable of holding...this is a huge part of the atmospheric equation

7) NASA is showing global maps showing "departure from normal" data...in areas that have no data (see #4)

8) There are issues with the siting of many surface observing sites around the country and probably around the world. Many locations have the temperature sensors too close to buildings or inadequately housed in proper and functioning "stephenson screens". This can lead to warmer temperatures being recorded than actually felt (i.e., buildings radiate heat well after sundown and can drive the temperatures up in a few meter vicinity)
Another thing. I can view the observing sites across the globe...just at my house the other morning, the local area had several observing sites showing temperatures in the low 30's. My car thermometer showed what the other probably accurate sites showed - 24F. Although those 2 or 3 temperature sensors are probably not accurate, they are not going to be taken out of the system as "erroneous". They'll be input into the computer datasets and into the climate models. There were 2 or 3 just within a 5 mile radius...this data is on a NOAA/NWS website. How many sites like this are there around the nation? Around the world? Artificially jacking up the temperature when it's really not "that" warm? I submit to you that it's more common than not to have the temperatures increased slightly by faulty data.
 

keef

Пальто Crude
Platinum Bling
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
5,171
Likes
4,115
Location
here
#74
Who's Al Gore? Did he play for the mets?
 

southfork

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Mother Lode
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
14,555
Likes
12,780
#76
Written by James E. Kamis, guest post on October 1, 2015. Posted in Latest news

The ‘Entire’ Atlantic Ocean is Cooling, contrary to media reports

Figure 1. Sea Surface Temperature (SST) anomaly maps that illustrate recent Atlantic Ocean cooling.

Scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and many universities are at a loss to explain recent conflicting temperature trends from Earth’s oceans and atmosphere. It can be boiled down to this: temperatures of the Earth’s three big fluid systems are each trending in different directions. The temperature of the Pacific Ocean is rising, the temperature of the atmosphere has remained constant, and the temperature of the Atlantic Ocean is cooling.

That’s a problem.

These variances in temperature trends are not fitting previous climate model predictions and talking points released to the media. To counter this problem and almost, as predictably as rain in springtime, climate scientists favoring the theory of man-made global warming are flooding the media with new, and this time supposedly very reliable, explanations that are generated from their latest super-computer climate models. Their explanations, or better yet, their rationalizations for two of the three fluid temperature trends, Pacific Ocean warming and the atmospheric warming “pause”, have been discussed in previous CCD posts.


This article will discuss the validity of the latest explanation put forward by the consensus climate science community concerning recent cooling of the North Atlantic Ocean. These scientists contend that recent cooling of the northern portion of the Atlantic Ocean is the result of increased worldwide human induced atmospheric warming which is acting to melt the Greenland ice cap at alarming rates. This Greenland ice cap melt water is flooding into the northern portion of the Atlantic Ocean, thereby lowering the seawater temperature in this region.

As further supporting evidence they cite previous research publications which supposedly prove that ancient atmospheric warming also melted the Greenland Ice Cap and cooled the northern portion of the Atlantic Ocean.

There are many problems with this explanation as summarized below.

  1. The atmosphere has not warmed in 18.7 years according to the most accurate data derived from satellites. Even utilizing NASA’s recently “adjusted” atmospheric temperature data, there has only been very minor and uniform increases in the temperature during the last 18.7 years. Neither of these trends properly explains / fits the recent cooling of the entire Atlantic Ocean.
  2. Recent research from NASA’s Operation Ice Bridge clearly shows that Greenland’s ice mass loss is only occurring in areas immediately adjacent to the ocean. This perimeter-based ice loss is greatest in areas where the ice cap overlays known deep geological fault zones that are emitting geothermal heat onto the base of the ice cap. The interior portions of the Greenland Ice Cap are in ice mass balance. NASA admits they are not completely sure why the Operation Ice Bridge results do not fit into a nice neat global warming theory context.
  3. The extent of Arctic Ocean sea ice has increased the last three years, and not decreased as predicted.
  4. The Antarctic Ice Cap extent has increased steadily for thirty five years, and not decreased as predicted.
  5. The ancient melting of the Greenland Ice cap is most likely related to ancient volcanic eruptions (see previous CCD post) and associated local geothermal heat flow, not paleo-atmospheric warming.
  6. The true nature of what drives ocean heating and cooling is not well understood. It is likely a mixture of many forces including: variations in deep ocean geological heat and fluid flow, long-term variations in astronomical phenomenon, and long-term variations in major deep ocean currents.
  7. Lastly, and most telling, by carefully examining the shallow SST (sea surface temperature) anomaly maps atop this article (Figure 1.), it becomes very apparent that the entire Atlantic Ocean is cooling, and not just in the northern portion of the Atlantic that is adjacent to Greenland. This strongly suggests that outflow of summertime Greenland Ice Cap melt water into the northern portion of the Atlantic Ocean is not the primary driving force behind cooling the entire Atlantic Ocean.
Many noted and well-intentioned climate scientists and universities are now starting to publicly admit that overwhelming amounts of new research indicates that the theory of man-made global warming does not properly explain many observed climate trends. It certainly does not explain why the temperatures of Earth’s three most dominant fluid systems—the Pacific Ocean, the Atlantic Ocean and the atmosphere—are trending in different directions.

Reason dictates that a more balanced approach to studying climate trends is needed. Any approach needs to take into account the effects of natural variability and whether man is having a real influence. Let’s stop trying to force fit every observed climate occurrence, including cooling of the entire Atlantic Ocean, into a global warming context.

It’s time to jump off the consensus bandwagon!

James Edward Kamis is a Geologist and AAPG member of 41 years and who has always been fascinated by the connection between Geology and Climate. Years of research / observation have convinced him that the Earth’s Heat Flow Engine, which drives the outer crustal plates, is also an important driver of the Earth’s climate.

REFERENCES

http://www.wunderground.com/climate/greenland.asp

http://www.reportingclimatescience....ds-ice-sheet-winter-growth-above-average.html

http://www.livescience.com/49224-greenland-ice-sheet-melt-changing.html

http://climatecrocks.com/2015/09/28/nasa-omg-oceans-are-melting-greenland/

http://www.dailypress.com/news/science/dp-nws-bipolar-science-nasa-20150804-story.html

http://vencoreweather.com/2015/03/2...term-shift-in-temperatures-from-warm-to-cold/

http://www.livescience.com/49967-pacific-ocean-global-warming-pause.html

http://www.natureworldnews.com/arti...t-not-to-blame-for-north-atlantic-cooling.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...culation-with-potentially-major-consequences/

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/

Be Social:
Related
Global warming 'is FAKE': Volume of ice caps is INCREASING, claims top geologistOctober 7, 2015

How geological forces are behind the 'Warmest Year Ever'January 21, 2016

Naturally-Occurring El Niño Makes 2015 The Hottest Year On RecordJanuary 20, 2016


div > .uk-panel'}" data-uk-grid-margin="">
Donate Today!
Fighting the global warming alarmists takes time and money. Please donate today!


Be Social!
Latest News
Get a daily digest of the day’s headlines
Every day, you'll get an email showing you the day's headlines posted here at CCD. Email goes out between 5 and 7 E.S.T.




 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#77

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
4,389
Likes
2,815
#78
Another thing. I can view the observing sites across the globe...just at my house the other morning, the local area had several observing sites showing temperatures in the low 30's. My car thermometer showed what the other probably accurate sites showed - 24F. Although those 2 or 3 temperature sensors are probably not accurate, they are not going to be taken out of the system as "erroneous". They'll be input into the computer datasets and into the climate models. There were 2 or 3 just within a 5 mile radius...this data is on a NOAA/NWS website. How many sites like this are there around the nation? Around the world? Artificially jacking up the temperature when it's really not "that" warm? I submit to you that it's more common than not to have the temperatures increased slightly by faulty data.
A bunch of climate skeptics funded by the Koch brothers and Heartland Institute went around the US checking weather stations with the explicit intention of revealing a warming bias. They, indeed, found a bunch of problems with inaccurate weather stations. But when the data was analyzed (by themselves) it revealed a cooling bias, not a warming bias. These are people who wanted to believe with all their hearts that the data was being skewed and they proved exactly the opposite.

This is why climate skeptics do essentially zero field research. It inevitably reveals that the earth is warming and humans are the primary driver.


One of the country’s most prominent global warming skeptics has openly admitted he was wrong. Over the weekend, Richard Muller, a professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote an op-ed for the New York Times titled “The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic.”

Dr. Muller began the piece by writing, quote, “Call me a converted skeptic. Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”

Richard Muller’s admission has gained additional attention because some of his research has been funded by Charles Koch of the Koch brothers, the right-wing billionaires known for funding climate skeptic groups like the Heartland Institute. Richard Muller is the author of the newly published book, Energy for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines.

Welcome to Democracy Now!, Professor Muller. Talk about your change.

RICHARD MULLER: Well, I felt there were legitimate issues that had not been addressed. There’s the whole issue of climate change and whether hurricanes are increasing and so on, but the most solid evidence was the temperature data, and questions had been raised. The stations that were used were of poor quality. Could that be addressed? Could you use such data? There were issues that prior groups had highly selected the data—in the U.K., using only 5 to 7 percent of the data, here in the U.S., only 20 percent of the stations. It was a concern whether they had picked stations that showed warming and not the others. There were other issues, too, about the influence of urban heat islands. Cities get warmer, but that’s not the greenhouse effect. So, is that—how do we estimate the greenhouse effect? And there was the data adjustment and then the huge computer programs that they used to make the attribution to humans. All of these things deeply concerned me, and I could not get the answers in a satisfactory way.

As a scientist, on such an important issue, I felt it was my duty to be what I would call properly skeptical. And the only way to answer this was to put together a program. So, we gathered together a group of truly eminent scientists, so people who are really good at analyzing data. These include Art Rosenfeld, who’s a hero in the energy conservation field, and Saul Perlmutter, who actually last December, after working on our project for a year, over a year, was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, not for work he was doing for us but for prior work he had done in astrophysics.

So, it began to come together about a year ago. We were able to show that the poor station quality, although it affected the temperature measurements, didn’t affect the temperature changes. We were able to use 100 percent of the data, not the 20 percent that others had used. We found that data selection bias didn’t affect things. We looked at the urban heat island. It came together. We concluded that global warming was indeed real.

But then, about three to six months ago, thanks largely to the effort of a brilliant young scientist named Robert Rohde, who we hired to do and use the best possible statistics in order to be able to use all the data, he was able to push our record back to 1753. That’s before the American Revolution. That’s back when the measurements in the U.S. were being made by Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. With that long record, we could look for the fingerprints. We could see how much was due to volcanoes, how much was due to ocean currents, how much was due to the variability of the sun. We could do this much better than people had done before.

And I’ve got to admit, I was shocked when I saw the results. There was short-time—short-term variability that was due to volcanoes, essentially nothing due to the solar variation. Theoretically, that’s not too surprising, but I was surprised nonetheless. But the remaining curve, the rise in that curve, was dead on to human production of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. At that point, the data had led me to a conclusion I would not have expected a few years earlier.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#79
Your PROG boy at the PROG controlled university shouted his CRAP 4-5 YEARS AGO.

Here's something more recent ( One Year Ago):

ONE and ONE HALF YEARS AGO:
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,397
Likes
6,548
#80
No CO2 warming for the Last 40 Years:
"
It is very cold here in the Eastern US and the President is joking about the lack of global warming. More interesting by far is the fact that there appears to have been no CO2 induced warming in the last 40 years, which is as far back as the satellite measurements go.

That this incredible fact has gone unnoticed is due mostly to the scientific community’s fixation on the warming shown by the surface temperature statistical models. But as explained here, these complex computer models are completely unreliable.

Also, the satellite measurements do show some global warming, which people have mistakenly assumed somehow supports the hypothesis of human caused, CO2 induced warming. Careful inspection shows that this assumption is false. There is in fact no evidence of CO2 warming in the entire satellite record."...

More Here : https://www.cfact.org/2018/01/02/no-co2-warming-for-the-last-40-years/

ps - I was a Conservationist before Environmentalist quit shitting in diapers. gb