Meanwhile in the Arctic

[olofscience 420]

On 1/14/2022 at 9:12 PM, brenthutch said:

That is why I u̶s̶e̶ ̶N̶O̶A̶A̶’̶s̶ ̶d̶a̶t̶a̶  misinterpret NOAA's simplified press release for the entire year.

fixed it for you.

Also you keep forgetting that the relatively lower temperature of 2021was already predicted, and explained in December 2020. They even predicted it would be the SIXTH hottest, and their prediction was spot on.

The limit of your predictive capabilities is "it will be colder...just because!" Nothing about how much, because you don't really have any idea what you're talking about.

Edited January 15, 2022 by olofscience
fixed link

[Phil1111 910]

On 1/14/2022 at 3:59 PM, SkyDekker said:

I have a feeling you are cherry picking again....probably trying to compare local temp to global temp. 

In life there are people who can see a big picture and there are those who can only handle one little moment at a time.

Brent sees the world through a peephole. It seems large to him.

[brenthutch 383]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

Brent sees the world through a peephole. It seems large to him.

I don’t see the world through rose colored glasses.  I prefer to live in the real world.

I don’t think EVs will overtake IC vehicles in the next three years (sorry Olof)

I don’t think a “green new deal” will be implemented 

I don’t think renewables will overtake fossil fuels 

I don’t think that a few additional ppm of CO2 represents an existential threat to mankind

I DO  think CO2 levels will continue to rise.

I think economies that aggressively pursue zero carbon policies will continue to suffer higher energy costs 

I do not think global temperatures will skyrocket in response to higher levels of CO2.

I disagree with NASA’s prediction of a 24% reduction of global corn production by 2030

We will call these my predictions for 2022.  Any questions?

Edited January 16, 2022 by brenthutch

[billvon 2,395]

11 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Are we sure Brent isn’t Hannity?

I'm sure all of Hannity's fans were saying "wow he really pwned that out of touch liberal elite because he made fun of him!"

[brenthutch 383]

18 minutes ago, billvon said:

I'm sure all of Hannity's fans were saying "wow he really pwned that out of touch liberal elite because he made fun of him!"

How bout addressing my 2022 predictions?

(BTW I think Hannity is a doofus)

Edited January 16, 2022 by brenthutch

[olofscience 420]

10 hours ago, brenthutch said:

How bout addressing my 2022 predictions?

Met Office, December 2020: "2021 will be slightly cooler than 2020 due to the La Nina, but is still expected to be the sixth warmest year on record at approximately 1.0C higher than the baseline". (proved spot on by Jan 2022)

Brent, January 2021: "I do not think global temperatures will skyrocket"

 

One is a prediction, the other is a joke

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

15 minutes ago, olofscience said:

Met Office, December 2020: "2021 will be slightly cooler than 2020 due to the La Nina, but is still expected to be the sixth warmest year on record at approximately 1.0C higher than the baseline". (proved spot on by Jan 2022)

Brent, January 2021: "I do not think global temperatures will skyrocket"

 

One is a prediction, the other is a joke

Jokes are generally funny.

[olofscience 420]

2 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Jokes are generally funny.

Some are sad.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

1 minute ago, olofscience said:

Some are sad.

More like 'pathetic'.

[olofscience 420]

Notice how almost all his "predictions" start with "I don't think" - because negatives are usually more difficult to disprove, but he also puts gigantic loopholes in them so he can wriggle out easily. Using words like "skyrocket" or "suffer high energy costs" so that he doesn't have to put a number on them.

Edited January 16, 2022 by olofscience

[wmw999 2,120]

11 hours ago, brenthutch said:

I don’t see the world through rose colored glasses.  I prefer to live in the real world.

I don’t think EVs will overtake IC vehicles in the next three years (sorry Olof)

I don’t think a “green new deal” will be implemented 

I don’t think renewables will overtake fossil fuels 

I don’t think that a few additional ppm of CO2 represents an existential threat to mankind

I DO  think CO2 levels will continue to rise.

I think economies that aggressively pursue zero carbon policies will continue to suffer higher energy costs 

I do not think global temperatures will skyrocket in response to higher levels of CO2.

I disagree with NASA’s prediction of a 24% reduction of global corn production by 2030

We will call these my predictions for 2022.  Any questions?

Piece by piece. We’re not as far apart on the topic of as you like to make out; we value the long term and short term differently 

I also don’t think that EVs will overtake ICs in the next three years. For one thing, even if they were to in segments of the market, there is a gigantic installed base. But the direction is towards EV; it’s the least bad that reasonably fits the lives many of us already live. 110 years ago, making the system better for IC was a much smaller proposition than moving the technology. 

The Green New Deal, as exactly proposed (in all the many forms, depending on the person), won’t happen. But, again, it’s the direction we should head. If nothing else, conserving resources is better than using them up so you get your “fair share.” It’s more responsible. 

Eventually fossil fuel will be a niche product, kind of like leaded gasoline. Not in our lifetimes, but my lifetime isn’t the only one that matters. Nor even leaving the most moola and stuff to my offspring. BTW, he agrees with me. 

On exactly how many ppm of CO2 will be the tipping point; I don’t want to stumble into it. Is that how we should manage our lives — spend everything and then hope something comes through? That’s kind of like using the lottery as your safety net. And I agree that levels will continue to rise; I just don’t think that’s a good thing.

The whole thing about pursuing low and zero carbon policies is to reflect the actual (as we understand it now) cost; not the short term “we’ll solve that problem when we have to” cost. Because we’re suffering the costs of lack of planning — crumbling infrastructure, toxic waste and air that have to be dealt with, etc.

As far as temperatures skyrocketing, I think that if you consider the number of people who depend on a fairly narrow range of temperatures, and who will be displaced by that range changing or widening (maybe they’ll want to come to Pennsylvania), maybe the definition of “skyrocketing” isn’t one that you’re qualified to make.

As far as the NASA prediction of corn, do you have any basis other than wanting to see them wrong for your assertion? Or if it’s 24% reduced, will you come back and say “told ya!” Or if we’ve discovered a new strain of grass that’s even better so no one wants to plant corn any more?

So we can agree on some facts and likelihoods. However, I rather doubt that any acknowledgment will come other than something to the effect of “Wendy thinks I’m right — as usual.” Which is utter and arrant bullshit, because individual facts paint a story; if a story is what you’re after, more power to you, but understand it’s just a story.

Wendy P. 

[ryoder 1,381]

Meanwhile in Colorado:

Denver Post: Colorado had hottest six months in history, new data shows

 

[brenthutch 383]

1 hour ago, olofscience said:

Brent, January 2021: "I do not think global temperatures will skyrocket"

 

How about 2022 will continue to show a lack of additional warming despite record levels of CO2?

Edited January 16, 2022 by brenthutch

[olofscience 420]

21 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

a lack of additional warming

Still working in vague negatives I see Let's pin that down - are you saying 2022 will be on average within 0.01C of 2021?

[billvon 2,395]

3 hours ago, ryoder said:

Meanwhile in Colorado:

Denver Post: Colorado had hottest six months in history, new data shows

 

Yep.

The last eight years were the hottest on record.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-13/climate-change-made-the-last-eight-years-the-hottest-on-record

[billvon 2,395]

1 hour ago, olofscience said:

Still working in vague negatives I see

I recall that in January of 2016, when NASA GISS announced that 2016 had been the hottest year on record, I predicted that within the month the "there's only one problem with global warming - it ended in 1998!" thread started so many years ago would be replaced by a "there's only one problem with global warming - it ended in 2016!" thread.

And sure enough, the climate change deniers did not disappoint.  They made exactly the same mistake on schedule.

Perhaps they should just skip ahead and say "there's only one problem with global warming - it will end in 2022!"  Just to be prepared, of course.

[olofscience 420]

4 hours ago, billvon said:

And sure enough, the climate change deniers did not disappoint.  They made exactly the same mistake on schedule.

Well here's another (unfortunate) prediction - some weather organisations have identified that there's a "double-dip" La Nina (which made 2021 cooler, among other effects) and the ENSO oscillation won't shift to El Nino until the end of the year, so we'll probably be seeing more of his "the warming has paused!" posts until approximately mid-summer.

Then when the El Nino starts hitting at the end of 2022 and into 2023, we'll see him shift to a different type of post.

[gowlerk 1,905]

29 minutes ago, olofscience said:

Then when the El Nino starts hitting at the end of 2022 and into 2023, we'll see him shift to a different type of post.

I hope so. The winter here has been colder and wetter than last year, as predicted. I miss El Nino.

[billvon 2,395]

44 minutes ago, olofscience said:

Then when the El Nino starts hitting at the end of 2022 and into 2023, we'll see him shift to a different type of post.

Generally at that point it becomes "I NEVER said that the warming had stopped!  I just said we didn't do it."

[brenthutch 383]

It is pretty obvious, at this point, that the climate system is not particularly sensitive to higher levels of CO2.  All is not lost however.  You can blame the continued lack of warming on volcanic activity. (For this year at least)

[olofscience 420]

26 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

It is pretty obvious, at this point, that the climate system is not particularly sensitive to higher levels of CO2.

By the way, you haven't answered my question about making your temperature prediction for 2022 more specific. Will 2022 be 10th warmest? Will the global anomaly be more or less than 1.10 C?

[olofscience 420]

crickets...

[BIGUN 1,051]

8 minutes ago, olofscience said:

crickets...

Give it time. It's a process that starts with . . .

[brenthutch 383]

17 minutes ago, olofscience said:

By the way, you haven't answered my question about making your temperature prediction for 2022 more specific. Will 2022 be 10th warmest? Will the global anomaly be more or less than 1.10 C?

You said:
“2022 will be on average within 0.01C of 2021?”

now you say 1.10

I will remain “crickets” until you have a conversation with yourself and figure out just what you are trying to say.

”never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake”

 

[olofscience 420]

8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

now you say 1.10

I said global anomaly of 1.10.

...you do know what a global anomaly is, right? So for example if 2021 was at 1.10, then being within 0.01C of that means 1.09 to 1.11.

 

So...can you answer the question now?

 

Edited January 17, 2022 by olofscience