Ill remember that when sleeping at 27 c in the early hours. will be nice to see the snow on TV at Lambeau
That is admittedly a stinker; haven't had a night that warm for three years. Might regret not taking leave tomorrow like many others have.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ill remember that when sleeping at 27 c in the early hours. will be nice to see the snow on TV at Lambeau
They're obviously not doing a good enough job homogenising the data...Coldest first 55 days of summer in Melbourne since 2001-02, and by a fair margin. It was hotter in the 1850's - even after homogenisation.
Second by a nostril is my guess.
NASA Says 2020 Tied for Hottest Year on Record
Meanwhile NOAA put the year just behind 2016 in the charts, but it was remarkably hot by either agency’s measurewww.scientificamerican.com
Phew!So your argument is the planet isn’t warming?
Even if it was only the poles melting, you can’t see the problem with that?Which regions (other than the poles) are far above the long-term average?
Even if it was only the poles melting, you can’t see the problem with that?
Sea level hasn't risen noticeably but I can see the potential problem. Northern polar melt is about where it was in the early 1940's. I remain skeptical about how much we can influence climate.
The “actual” science. Even for you this is embarrassing.
The “actual” science. Even for you this is embarrassing.
The “actual“ science you were referring to is the models? When the models weren’t even mentioned as part of the discussion right now. It’s hilarious to me how much you intend on embarrassing yourself here.Of course, i'm referring to the models.
I assume a person of average intelligence would have figured that out.
Ooooooooookay....Climate science is hopelessly biased. It's like the WHO investigation into COVID's origins, after the team was handpicked from a select WHO subgroup and one of the investigators has already discarded the possibility of it originating at the Wuhan lab.
"The idea that this virus escaped from a lab is just pure baloney. It’s simply not true. I’ve been working with that lab for 15 years. And the samples collected were collected by me and others in collaboration with our Chinese colleagues. They’re some of the best scientists in the world. There was no viral isolate in the lab. There was no cultured virus that’s anything related to SARS coronavirus 2. So it’s just not possible."
- Peter Daszak
At the same time as saying they are open to the possibility that it came from a country other than China... It will end up being an operation to restore China's reputation.
Worse than pseudoscience. Corrupted science.
The “actual“ science you were referring to is the models? When the models weren’t even mentioned as part of the discussion right now. It’s hilarious to me how much you intend on embarrassing yourself here.
That would be your dream, wouldn’t it? You desperately sad little man.
Sea level hasn't risen noticeably but I can see the potential problem. Northern polar melt is about where it was in the early 1940's. I remain skeptical about how much we can influence climate.
That's incorrect, from 1939 to 1942 was one of the worst El Ninos, which recorded one of warmest ocean temperatures on record. But 2/3rds of the heating has occurred after 1975, this is not in dispute. Despite that it's still incorrect and have been discussed here before, you are getting your data from the same place Sankey gets his datas from
...
Model simulations suggest that the recent warming could — theoretically — have happened without any influence from human-caused climate change at all. That said, the researchers do believe climate change has played some role in the recent trends.
“[We] conclude that there is little evidence of anthropogenic SAM-induced driving of the recent temperature trends … compelling evidence pointing to natural climate variability as a key contributor to the recent warming of West Antarctica and of the Peninsula“
Yeah data is sketchy from that period, but polar warming doesn't appear to be well understood. Climate modelling hasn't been able to reproduce the complete loss of Arctic sea ice during the last interglacial period.
Re the south pole:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-is-the-south-pole-warming-so-quickly-its-complicated/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-016-3230-4
So you have now gone from Arctic to Antarctic cause the data doesn't add up? you said the Norther polar melt was the same was 1940's, this is clearly false. You are argue this is due to natural causes etc etc, but your initial argument is clearly false.
I don't think it's "clearly false" at all. There is evidence pointing to extremely rapid glacier melt in that decade, but the data is not of high quality. You've pointed me to skepticalscience.com which is as rabidly pro-warming as any denier site is anti-.
Was just looking up the science on polar warming because the fact that it accounts for the lion's share of total warming is not often discussed.
Politics & climate change