Johnny Rico said:
Gertch said:
Blogger Finds Y2K Bug in NASA Climate Data
NASA has now
silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place. 1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II. Anthony Watts has put the new data in chart form, along with a more detailed summary of the events.
The effect of the correction on global temperatures is minor (some 1-2% less warming than originally thought), but the effect on the U.S. global warming propaganda machine could be huge.
"The 'hottest year on record' is no longer 1998, but 1934. Another alleged swelterer, the year 2001, has now dropped out of the Top 10 altogether, and most of the rest of the 21st century – 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 – plummeted even lower down the Hot 100. In fact, every supposedly hot year from the Nineties and this decade has had its temperature rating reduced. Four of America's Top 10 hottest years turn out to be from the 1930s, that notorious decade when we all drove around in huge SUVs with the air-conditioning on full-blast. If climate change is, as Al Gore says, the most important issue anyone's ever faced in the history of anything ever, then Franklin Roosevelt didn't have a word to say about it." -- Mark Steyn, on the updated temperature data from NASA.
So does this corrected data really suggest that the problem isn't as dire as has been touted? Obviously there are other things happening (ice shelves breaking off, shorter freeze-overs in the Arctic) but could they just be normal fluctuations as has happened over the ages?
Like I've always said...I'll leave it up to the scientists who actually study the bloomin' thing to give me the lowdown, and not some old washed-up ex-politician.
So if you listen to the scientists, why does everything in the rest of your post contradict scientific results? Perhaps you should listen to Al Gore more, because he actually does a good job of summarizing the scientific evidence for global warming.
I've known this for ages...but the global warming fanatics won't listen. You bring up the FACT (now) that the planet was actually warmer in the 1930s than it is now, and they look at you with a befuddled look on their face.
What do you think caused the Great Dust Bowl of the 1930s? And there weren't millions of SUVs driving all over the planet then either?
The
planet was not warmer then, although temperatures in the United States were about the same as today. Also, the dust bowl was caused by a drought, not a heat wave. According to
this study, cooler than normal north Pacific water temperatures combined with warmer north Atlantic temperatures shifted weather patterns to greatly reduce rainfall.
That said, read on...
Look folks, this is a SOLAR issue. Not a GLOBAL one. There is "global warming" going on all over the solar system. MARS is warming up, JUPITER is warming up, and so is the former planet PLUTO.
The universe, and thus the solar system, goes through cyclic, well cycles, where the star goes through variations in its burning stages.
Yes, but
solar variability cannot explain current warming. The science is clear - human activities have become increasingly important drivers of warming and are now 10 times as important as solar factors. If you just take natural factors into consideration, there should have been essentially no temperature increase in the past 40 years.
As for your other evidence, Pluto is warming because of its extremely elongate orbit. Just like it is warmest in the mid-afternoon on Earth, Pluto is in the "mid-afternoon" of its orbit now. There is no
global warming on Jupiter - rather
regions have warmed up because of changes in latitudinal heat transport. There is evidence for warming on Mars, but the actual temperature increase is minimal (and likely due to the small solar variation that has contributed about 10% to the warming here). The most dramatic changes (in the southern ice caps, for example) are more a factor of dust storms, which can exert a tremendous influence on Mars's climate.
What do you think caused all the Ice Ages? It's all CYCLIC. It ain't got nothing to do with us humans. As Earth was coming out of the last Ice Age, it warmed up an average of 10 degrees over normal in just a 10 year period. With this current "crisis", we're talking about a 1 degree warm-up over a 100 years. Ooooo, spooky...
And that's really the whole crux of the matter, isn't it? Are humans and our actviities the cause of this phenomenon? And at this point, I'd have to say a big, F'in NO! All the "going green" precautions we take ain't gonna amount to a hill of beans.
There is no evidence that global temperatures increased 10 degrees in 10 years during deglaciation. There can be rapid regional climate changes in northern Europe or eastern North America due to oceanographic changes in the North Atlantic, but those are regional changes and not global in scale. In fact, the current rate of warming is unprecedented in the last several hundred thousand years. Also, the predicted temperature increase over the next 100 years is anywhere from 3-7 degrees celsius, not 1 degree. No one disputes that cyclic temperatures changes, and are continuing to occur, but those natural factors are only a small part of the current warming trend.
-MEC
