chart is from Paul Krugman, who talks about this important story: It was the hottest April on record in the NASA dataset. More significantly, following fast on the heels of the hottest March and hottest Jan-Feb-March on record, it's also the hottest Jan-Feb-March-April on record. The record temperatures we're seeing now are especially impressive because we've been in “the deepest solar minimum in nearly a century.†It now appears to be over.It's just hard to stop the march of manmade global warming, well, other than by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, that is. Most significantly, NASA's March prediction has come true: “It is nearly certain that a new record 12-month global temperature will be set in 2010.″ Software engineer (and former machinist mate in the US Navy) Timothy Chase put together a spreadsheet using the data from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (click here). In NASA's dataset, the 12-month running average temperature record was actually just barely set in March - and then easily set in April. Actually, NASA first made its prediction back in January 2009: Given our expectation of the next El Niño beginning in 2009 or 2010, it still seems likely that a new global temperature record will be set within the next 1-2 years, despite the moderate negative effect of the reduced solar irradiance.†Of course, there never was any global cooling - see Must-read AP story: Statisticians reject global cooling; Caldeira - “To talk about global cooling at the end of the hottest decade the planet has experienced in many thousands of years is ridiculous.†In fact, the 12-month record we just beat was set in...2007!
Hooray for high temperatures! To bad it took till May for temps to quit being shit. A random frost 2 weeks ago destroyed all my crops! And make no mistake this isn't the hottest temperatures on earth ever. The Earth was hotter than it is now during the time of the dinosaurs. And also just because temperatures are going up does not mean c02 from humans is the only thing causing it. The malinkovitch cycles for example.
Damn, we're going on data from the past 12 years, when our Earth is 5 billion years old. Also, you gotta love how Krugman and Co. call others 'deniers'. Yes, denying that anthropogenic global warming isn't verifiable scientific fact, is equivocal to denying that Hitler murdered millions of jews, etc. Selective Denialism - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine Remember guys, modern day leftists are 'open minded' insofar as you agree with them. If you don't, you're out! It's sad, but Sir Elliot and Dronetek are right on this front. I feel dirty for agreeing with them
Yes, it's hard to determine exactly how much of the warming is cyclical (natural) and how much is human-caused. I think it would be a mistake to assume either cause is solely responsible for the increase in temperatures
Fortunatly, even a cursory examination of actual facts shows how fubar'd GISS data is. And let's not ignore Romm's complete and total lack of scientific credentials in the field. Or Krugman's for that matter. GISTEMP -vs- HadCRUT | Watts Up With That? This graph is only made possible when... shockingly... a guess must be made as to the temperature of huge portions of the earth's surface. A guess. With no actual data. Ahh the scientific method... which doesn't apply when discussing global warming. So as long as we keep using data that doesn't exist, from scientists who have no credentials in the field, limiting scope of time to statistically insignificant sample sizes, base the guesses off of comparisons to already fudged data from the 1950s, and then use really big charts to try and cover up the fact that we're talking about 1/2 of 1 degree variation over the course of 25 years despite having a mean average that's essentially even... we can assert that global warming is like totally for real. Jeezus christ. How do you people even tie your shoes in the morning? Talk about riding the intellectual short bus. EDIT: OH AND your year-by-year guesses conveniently have to increase every year, because if you, you know, guess in the wrong direction even once the whole chart falls apart. How do we know it's warmer in the areas we have NO data for, and thus how to make the chart? WHY BECAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING OF COURSE! And how do we know there is global warming? JUST LOOK AT THE CHART IT SHOWS WARMING! ... So the globe is warming because the chart shows it... And when guessing for which data to make up and use in the chart... you assume the globe is warming. Fucking brilliant. EDIT 2: And of course, the guesses have to be accurate to 1/100ths of a degree. But seriously,this isn't bullshit science at all. I mean, how hard can guessing the temperature of THOUSANDS of locations you have absolutely no data for to accuracy within 1/100ths of a degree possibly be? I mean, we can totally predict the exact temperature tomorrow, so how hard can figuring out the exact temperature, to within 1/100ths of a degree, for all sorts of locations that no data exists for, be?
umm duhh the temperatures are gonna go up since the 80's considering in the 70's people were talking about another ice age coming.. this globull warming bullshit is complete... bullshit.. leaked e-mails have already shown that data is being manipulated in favor of the hoaxers just to make a profit.. By the way BOTH POLAR ICE CAPS ARE GROWING.. just thought i'd ad that to the hoaxer agenda..
This is true. But it's just plain wrong to seek alternative energy while actively lying to billions of people to get them to change their behavior, and the proposed forms of 'alternative energy' are fucking terrible. The answer to climate change is nuclear power. But no, everyone flips the fuck out when you suggest it, despite the fact that it's the cheapest, most efficient fuel on the planet. It's so efficient that there's more nuclear fuel in a brick of coal from the trace uranium commonly found in coal, than there is actual potential energy from combusting coal. Food for thought.
