Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
BFB

Global warming at a standstill

183 posts in this topic

The Met Office has downgraded its forecast for global warming to suggest that by 2017 temperatures will have remained about the same for two decades.

A new scientific model has revised previous figures for the next five years downwards by around a fifth.

The forecast compares how much higher average world temperatures are likely to be than the “long-term average” from 1971-2000.

It had been thought that this would be 0.54C during the period 2012 -2016 but new data puts the figure for the 2013-2017 period at 0.43C.

This figure is little higher than the 0.40C recorded in 1998, the warmest year in the Met Office Hadley Centre’s 160-year record – suggesting global warming will have stalled in the intervening two-decade period

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/9787662/Global-warming-at-a-standstill-new-Met-Office-figures-show.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this good? legit question, i seriously don't know what this means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

is this good? legit question, i seriously don't know what this means.

If the ice caps keep on melting at the same rate they are now it is not good, the cold released by melting ice there should have brought down temperatures. If they stop melting it is as we will have a new "normal" that nature can adjust to. If they keep on melting as soon as they are gone temperatures will raise again.

The bets are that they will keep on melting.

Edited by questionmark
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet is that global warming has reached some sort of tipping point, and that there is nothing mankind can do to reverse the process. Not sure whether he ever could have reversed the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sorry but we are no where near the tipping point yet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My say is we as a species have changed the environment to suit ourselves while at the same time damaging it for many other established species, this will just cause change and upheavel, extinction, etc. Other species have done it in the past. How do you think we got a oxygen majority atmosphere? Cause it was the waste product of an organism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sorry but we are no where near the tipping point yet

I think we are nearer than many would like to think.

The loss of summer Arctic sea ice will likely have massive effects on the weather systems of the Northern Atlantic (I think it already is). The loss of permafrost is destabalizing the methane deposits which will produce another jolt in temperatures. Already we are seeing the Rainforests tipping into been net carbon/methane emitters from their naturally carbon neutral state. All of this on top of significant carbon releases from flash fires caused by the increasingly frequent heatwaves.

So many significant tipping points are on the horizon - I do not share your optimism.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are nearer than many would like to think.

The loss of summer Arctic sea ice will likely have massive effects on the weather systems of the Northern Atlantic (I think it already is). The loss of permafrost is destabalizing the methane deposits which will produce another jolt in temperatures. Already we are seeing the Rainforests tipping into been net carbon/methane emitters from their naturally carbon neutral state. All of this on top of significant carbon releases from flash fires caused by the increasingly frequent heatwaves.

So many significant tipping points are on the horizon - I do not share your optimism.

Br Cornelius

I agree, but we haven;t reached the tipping point yet. I would say 7 more years of not cutting down emissions and then we there. 2020 i believe would be the tipping point

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

this article says a computer model predicts a 0.03C rise in the next few years, which essentially means there will have been no global warming for 20 years, and you all claim this means thermageddon.

"by 2017 temperatures will have remained about the same for two decades."

get some perspective people.

co2 will have increased about 10-15% over this 20 year period which means that co2 is not the deadly gas you all think it is, or to say the same thing differently, something else controls the temperature.

Edited by Little Fish
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this article says a computer model predicts a 0.03C rise in the next few years, which essentially means there will have been no global warming for 20 years, and you all claim this means thermageddon.

"by 2017 temperatures will have remained about the same for two decades."

get some perspective people.

co2 will have increased about 10-15% over this 20 year period which means that co2 is not the deadly gas you all think it is, or to say the same thing differently, something else controls the temperature.

We discussed why the current pause is not significant and that the trend is still upwards - did you forget. The article focuses on that anomalous year of 1998 to make the point that the upward trend has slowed - but we know that choosing a start date like 1998 skews the short term trend to such a degree that it distorts the overall result. Bad stats again.

However the current ongoing wild weather across the globe is evidence that the effects are starting to manifest at an increasing rate. Statistically each of those extreme weather events is adding to an overall trend of rising catastrophic weather.

Br Cornelius

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't trust the met office, they always get it wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We discussed why the current pause is not significant and that the trend is still upwards - did you forget. The article focuses on that anomalous year of 1998 to make the point that the upward trend has slowed - but we know that choosing a start date like 1998 skews the short term trend to such a degree that it distorts the overall result. Bad stats again.

However the current ongoing wild weather across the globe is evidence that the effects are starting to manifest at an increasing rate. Statistically each of those extreme weather events is adding to an overall trend of rising catastrophic weather.

Br Cornelius

so, you concede there has been no global warming for the past 16 years, and yet (you claim) the weather has become "increasingly wild", and you conclude that global warming has caused this "wild" weather. do you see the error in your logic?

wb4.png?w=960&h=720

Edited by Little Fish
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of course you concede nothing, tis the way of a believer.

you claim the weather has recently got wilder which you blame on global warming.

the majority of the indices show zero global warming over the last 16 years, therefore any recent change in extreme weather cannot be due to global warming (whether natural or AGW). since the "global temperature" has been stable for 16 years, any recent extreme weather you point to must be within normality.

and the "skeptical" "science" video is an argument from ignorance fallacy.

"we take away what we think volcanoes, the sun and el nino caused, what's left must be due to humans"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of course you concede nothing, tis the way of a believer.

you claim the weather has recently got wilder which you blame on global warming.

the majority of the indices show zero global warming over the last 16 years, therefore any recent change in extreme weather cannot be due to global warming (whether natural or AGW). since the "global temperature" has been stable for 16 years, any recent extreme weather you point to must be within normality.

and the "skeptical" "science" video is an argument from ignorance fallacy.

"we take away what we think volcanoes, the sun and el nino caused, what's left must be due to humans"

http://en.wikipedia...._from_ignorance

Just because you don't accept climate scientists have a legitimate and informative role in attributing natural forcings doesn't mean that they can't - afterall it is the whole of their job to distinguish and differentiate all the trend including natural ones.

El Nino and La Nina have no effect on surface temperature then ?

Neither do volcanoes ?

Extreme weather events have been on a higher and increasing rate for more than the 16years. They are a response to the continued elevated temperature regime we currently live under.

Your a funny man.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are resorting to misrepresenting what I am saying again.

Extreme weather events have been on a higher and increasing rate for more than the 16years
they have? such as?

we've been over this, did you forget?

Edited by Little Fish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are resorting to misrepresenting what I am saying again.

they have? such as?

we've been over this, did you forget?

Extreme precipitation and heatwaves have shown a definite upward trend - or did you forget ?

Would you like to try to use an extreme event (1998) to disprove extreme events :clap:

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IPCC turns sceptic on cyclones, floods and droughts

http://blogs.news.co...s_and_droughts/

Look to every reporting continent and there is a clear upward trend in precipitation an extreme precipitation events(even the Antarctic).

And I will take Pielkes selective quoting with the skeptism it deserves.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take Pielke over an anonymous internet activist.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely top chat again - but its off to bed for me.

There's only so much life to waste on these little chats.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<deleted double post>

Edited by Little Fish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look to every reporting continent and there is a clear upward trend in precipitation an extreme precipitation events(even the Antarctic).

CAMS-OPI precipitation data shows that global precipitation has decreased since 1979 (the last 34 years), here:

http://bobtisdale.fi...png?w=960&h=624

...don't forget this will you.

the current ongoing wild weather across the globe is evidence that the effects are starting to manifest at an increasing rate. Statistically each of those extreme weather events is adding to an overall trend of rising catastrophic weather.
way too funny.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

American precipitation trends;

Secular Trends of Precipitation Amount, Frequency, and Intensity in the United States

Thomas R. Karl and Richard W. Knight

"Twentieth century trends of precipitation are examined by a variety of methods to more fully describe how precipitation has changed or varied. Since 1910, precipitation has increased by about 10% across the contiguous United States. The increase in precipitation is reflected primarily in the heavy and extreme daily precipitation events. For example, over half (53%) of the total increase of precipitation is due to positive trends in the upper 10 percentiles of the precipitation distribution. These trends are highly significant, both practically and statistically. The increase has arisen for two reasons. First, an increase in the frequency of days with precipitation ]6 days (100 yr)−1[ has occurred for all categories of precipitation amount. Second, for the extremely heavy precipitation events, an increase in the intensity of the events is also significantly contributing (about half) to the precipitation increase. As a result, there is a significant trend in much of the United States of the highest daily year–month precipitation amount, but with no systematic national trend of the median precipitation amount.

These data suggest that the precipitation regimes in the United States are changing disproportionately across the precipitation distribution. The proportion of total precipitation derived from extreme and heavy events is increasing relative to more moderate events. These changes have an impact on the area of the United States affected by a much above-normal (upper 10 percentile) proportion of precipitation derived from very heavy precipitation events, for example, daily precipitation events exceeding 50.8 mm (2 in.).

"

http://journals.amet...STOPAF>2.0.CO;2

Trends in Intense Precipitation in the Climate Record

Pavel Ya Groisman

"Observed changes in intense precipitation (e.g., the frequency of very heavy precipitation or the upper 0.3% of daily precipitation events) have been analyzed for over half of the land area of the globe. These changes have been linked to changes in intense precipitation for three transient climate model simulations, all with greenhouse gas concentrations increasing during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries and doubling in the later part of the twenty-first century. It was found that both the empirical evidence from the period of instrumental observations and model projections of a greenhouse-enriched atmosphere indicate an increasing probability of intense precipitation events for many extratropical regions including the United States. Although there can be ambiguity as to the impact of more frequent heavy precipitation events, the thresholds of the definitions of these events were raised here, such that they are likely to be disruptive. Unfortunately, reliable assertions of very heavy and extreme precipitation changes are possible only for regions with dense networks due to the small radius of correlation for many intense precipitation events.

"

http://journals.amet...1175/JCLI3339.1

Trends in precipitation and streamflow in the eastern U.S.: Paradox or

perception?

David Small

"Many studies have reported that total precipitation is

increasing across the United States with most of the increase

resulting from a positive trend in the upper tail of the daily

precipitation distribution. Other studies have found that

low and moderate, but not high flows are also increasing

across much of the United States. How can precipitation,

especially that produced by intense events, increase

without a corresponding increase in high flows? We

analyzed trends in annual 7-day low, average and high

flows along with seasonal precipitation that is averaged

over individual basins. Our findings suggest that

statistically significant trends in both fall precipitation

and 7-day low flow are found in a large percentage of the

basins in the upper Mississippi and Great Lakes regions of

the country. A large fraction of the trends in annual

precipitation can be explained by an increase in fall

precipitation. By estimating trends in precipitation at the

spatial scale of individual basins, we offer a simple

explanation for the apparent paradox of lack of trends in

high flows. At the spatial scale of individual basins,

precipitation is increasing during the fall but not during the

spring, the season when high flows are generally observed.

The increase in fall precipitation appears to result in an

increase in the low flows while the lack of trends in

precipitation in spring explains the lack of widespread

trends in the high flows. Citation: Small, D., S. Islam, and

R. M. Vogel (2006), Trends in precipitation and streamflow in

the eastern U.S.: Paradox or perception?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33,

L03403, doi:10.1029/2005GL024995."

http://engineering.t...-streamflow.pdf

Meanwhile in Europe;

Consistency of recent European summer precipitation trends and extremes with future regional climate projections

Jeremy S. Pal, Filippo Giorgi, Xunqiang Bi

"Summer climate over Europe in recent decades has been characterized by a drying trend and by the occurrence of especially devastating drought and flood events, such as in the summers of 2002 and 2003. We compare these trends with results from regional climate model simulations of future climate over Europe under increased greenhouse gas concentrations (GHG). We find that the projected changes in mean summer precipitation and large-scale circulations are remarkably consistent with the observed changes in recent decades. Although we cannot directly attribute the observed changes to an anthropogenic GHG forcing, this result suggests that the observed drying trend over most of Europe might continue in the future. Our experiments additionally indicate substantial changes in the intensity and persistence of summer drought and flood. We identify the Central Mediterranean and Central/Western Europe to be especially vulnerable to increases in both summer drought and flood."

http://onlinelibrary...019836/abstract

This one shows an important point about looking at precipitation records - on the large scale it can be argued that there is no trend, but on the regional level there are dramatic trends. The point is that with any dataset if you choose the wrong scale you can use them to mislead and draw just about any conclusion you like;

"Annual precipitation records averaged across Europe show no significant changes since 1950 according to the E-OBS dataset , based on the European Climate Assessment dataset [ii]. At the sub-continental scale, the trend in precipitation is most significant in north-eastern and south-western Europe. The majority of Scandinavia and the Baltic States have observed an increase in annual precipitation of greater than 14 mm per decade, with an increase of up to 70 mm per decade in western Norway. In contrast, annual precipitation has decreased in the Iberian Peninsula, in particular in north-western Spain and in northern Portugal (Figure 1). While there is some evidence linking land use, in particular forest cover, to local and regional precipitation patterns[iii], it is not clear if the relatively minor land-use changes since 1950 have influenced the observed precipitation trends.

"

http://www.eea.europ...on-1/assessment

Within Ireland there has been a century long upward trend in precipitation across the whole west of the country, yet on the East cost the trend has been flat or slightly downwards. You might conclude that precipitation has remainjed the same across Ireland - but that would be the wrong conclusion brought on by the wrong question.

As usual Little Fish, it all depends on how you choose to pick your cherries.

Any old idiot would find it difficult to argue that flooding hasn't become more of a serious issue across large parts of the world - all within the context of no overall global trend in precipitation. Britain has just experienced its greatest run of precipitation induced flooding in history, with many areas seeing flooding for the first time in centuries - which comes on the back of record breaking flooding within the last decade. Cherries Cherries Cherries.

It all has a baring on what climate change actually means. Climate is the prevailing pattern of weather in any given region, and climate change can be said to be happening when significant regional areas see shifts in the prvailing local weather systems. That is definiately happening and is far more dramatic than the "average" change of the Global climate system.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I showed you the global data.

you picked the cherries.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.