2015 sets new record for warming

[billvon 2,734]

2015 was the warmest year on record by a wide margin. 2014, the previous warmest year on record, was .29F above average. 2015 was 1.62F above average.

I suspect we will hear less nonsense about the "pause" now. On the other hand, this will give some people the chance to say "there's only one problem with global warming - it ended in 2015!" in a few years.

[cvfd1399 0]

Yep it's warming at a natural pace with minimal man input.

[rushmc 18]

Yep. The newest instruments we have are not to be believed.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[headoverheels 329]

El nino is bringing the moisture, but it would be better snow at 1-2 degrees F cooler.

[billvon 2,734]

>Yep. The newest instruments we have are not to be believed.

Keep trying; someone may believe you. You might find someone else whose income depends on not understanding/believing the science.

[JerryBaumchen 1,271]

Hi Biil,

Quote

You might find someone else whose income depends on not understanding/believing the science.

Oh, I am very sure that he understands it.

Jerry Baumchen

[winsor 222]

billvon

2015 was the warmest year on record by a wide margin. 2014, the previous warmest year on record, was .29F above average. 2015 was 1.62F above average.

I suspect we will hear less nonsense about the "pause" now. On the other hand, this will give some people the chance to say "there's only one problem with global warming - it ended in 2015!" in a few years.

Sorry, Venkman, I'm terrified beyond the capacity for rational thought.

[RonD1120 58]

billvon

2015 was the warmest year on record by a wide margin. 2014, the previous warmest year on record, was .29F above average. 2015 was 1.62F above average.

I suspect we will hear less nonsense about the "pause" now. On the other hand, this will give some people the chance to say "there's only one problem with global warming - it ended in 2015!" in a few years.

If we can keep the progressive liberals out of office we'll be OK.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>Yep. The newest instruments we have are not to be believed.

Keep trying; someone may believe you. You might find someone else whose income depends on not understanding/believing the science.

Oh oh. I think I struck a nerve

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,734]

And the denial season is officially kicked off!

Denials so far on DZ.com:

RushMC: "It's not the warmest year, the data is wrong"
CVFD: "So it's the warmest year, it's natural"

Denials so far from other places:
Heartland: "It's not the warmest year, the data is wrong" (hmm, wonder where RushMC got his opinion?)
CEI: "So it's the warmest year, it was an El Nino year, so of course it was"
Pielke: "So it was the warmest year, but it will all be good for us!"

What's cool about this is they have neatly hit all three denials at once within a day of the report:

Type I - it's not warming!
Type II - OK, so it's warming, but it's all natural!
Type III - OK, so it's warming and we are partly responsible - but the warming will be good!

Washington Times:
==================
But while climate-change groups responded by doubling down on calls to reduce CO2 emissions, climate skeptics challenged the agency methodology and noted that the results were actually cooler than climate-model projections.

“2015 Was Not Even Close to the Hottest Year on Record,” said James Taylor, Heartland Institute senior fellow for environment policy, in a Wednesday op-ed for Forbes.

He argued that satellite temperatures show 1998 was the warmest year on record since 1979, and noted that the 136 years of record-keeping fail to take into account other indicators showing “temperatures have been warmer than today for most of the past several thousand years.”

Skeptics also argued that climate models show that last year’s temperatures should have been even higher, given the El Nino factor.

“Yes, 2015 was warm. It ‘smashed’ the previous record because of a strong El Nino,” said Chip Knappenberger, assistant director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, in an email.

“Yet, despite breaking the old global temperatures ‘by far,’ the observations only approached the climate model projections for the temperature of an ‘average’ year for 2015,” he said. “In other words, climate models continue to run too hot.”

He referred to the discrepancy between climate models and actual temperatures as “lukewarming.”

Roger Pielke Jr., environmental studies professor at the University of Colorado Boulder, said that there were fewer extreme weather events despite the warm temperatures. Climate-change groups have argued that global warming contribute to hurricanes and other weather-related disasters.

“It’d be great if just one journalist (any!) would note that 2015 — warmest year ever — also had the lowest catastrophe losses in a generation,” Mr. Pielke said on Twitter.
=================

[cvfd1399 0]

How does your figures include the El Niño? Of course it is off the "charts" it's an El Niño. It would have been slightly higher without, but for the uninformed "blowing the fucking doors off 2015 with a flow of hot lava to your face" sounds way scarier doesn't it.....smh

[billvon 2,734]

> It would have been slightly higher without

Exactly. There is normal variation in the climate; some years are warmer, some years are cooler. Climate change is elevating the _baseline_ temperature.

>but for the uninformed "blowing the fucking doors off 2015 with a flow of hot
>lava to your face" sounds way scarier doesn't it

The only person saying that is you.

Yes, El Nino made this year exceptionally hot (baseline warming plus normal variation.) It also made 1998 exceptionally hot. Back then the pattern from the deniers was:

1998: "This was an exception! You can't count this year; it was an isolated, unusual event, not anything to do with climate change."

2006: "There's only one problem with climate change - it ended in 1998!"

We'll see if that pattern repeats.

[rushmc 18]

You post the comment about me in quotes in this thread

You are a liar

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,734]

Keep trying, Rush!

The updated list of warmest years on record:

#1 2015
#2 2014
#3 2010
#4 2005
#5 1998
#6 2013
#7 2003
#8 2002
#9 2006
#10 2009
#11 2007

[rushmc 18]

billvon

Keep trying, Rush!

The updated list of warmest years on record:

#1 2015
#2 2014
#3 2010
#4 2005
#5 1998
#6 2013
#7 2003
#8 2002
#9 2006
#10 2009
#11 2007

You avoided your lie about me sir

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 723]

That's below the belt, even for you.

[rushmc 18]

normiss

That's below the belt, even for you.

I neverd posted what he quoted me as saying

That is below the belt

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 212]

Ok. So let me get this straight.
1) if it's warmer, it's because of warming
2) If it's cooler then it is because of climate change.
3) if there is no wind, it must be warming, unless it is windy then it's still warming.
4) if weather happens, it is either warming or climate change, it depends on which one is more catastrophic and news worthy.
5) your only two choices ever available to you in any circumstance ever is A) warming, or B) climate change.

Got it.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 2,734]

>Ok. So let me get this straight.
> . . . .
>Got it.

You don't have it straight.

[DanG 1]

How about: it's warming. Period.

- Dan G

[DanG 1]

Quote

You post the comment about me in quotes in this thread

You are a liar

Most reasonable people would say the statement, "the newest instruments we have are not to be believed," is the same thought as, "the data is wrong."

No, you didn't actually type out the letters, "the data is wrong," but that's what you were trying to communicate.

- Dan G

[rushmc 18]

DanG

Quote

You post the comment about me in quotes in this thread

You are a liar

Most reasonable people would say the statement, "the newest instruments we have are not to be believed," is the same thought as, "the data is wrong."

No, you didn't actually type out the letters, "the data is wrong," but that's what you were trying to communicate.

Another fail
He has used "A" data set to make the claim
Fine
But he ignores (because of a lack of support for his agenda) this years LTL data


And the satellite data also does not support the claim he made

Is his data wrong?
Or is the other data set wrong?

I did not make a claim one way or the other
I did questioned him about the other data sets

I did not say what he quoted me as saying.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

turtlespeed

Ok. So let me get this straight.
1) if it's warmer, it's because of warming
2) If it's cooler then it is because of climate change.
3) if there is no wind, it must be warming, unless it is windy then it's still warming.
4) if weather happens, it is either warming or climate change, it depends on which one is more catastrophic and news worthy.
5) your only two choices ever available to you in any circumstance ever is A) warming, or B) climate change.

Got it.

They got the bases all covered

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 212]

billvon

>Ok. So let me get this straight.
> . . . .
>Got it.

You don't have it straight.

Who does then?

What am I missing?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[brenthutch 419]

MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen balked at claims of the ‘hottest year’ based on ground based temperature data.
“Frankly, I feel it is proof of dishonesty to argue about things like small fluctuations in temperature or the sign of a trend. Why lend credibility to this dishonesty?” Lindzen, an emeritus Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT, told Climate Depot shortly after the announcements.
“All that matters is that for almost 40 years, model projections have almost all exceeded observations. Even if all the observed warming were due to greenhouse emissions, it would still point to low sensitivity,” Lindzen continued.
“But, given the ‘pause.’ we know that natural internal variability has to be of the same order as any other process,” Lindzen wrote.