patrick.net

Onvacation says

How much warmer is it now than 2010?

Let me help you

Onvacation says

Onvacation says

How much warmer is it now than 2010?

Let me help you

This does not seem right. How could the temp have risen over the last 150 years but fallen over the last couple of decades. Help me Dan
Onvacation says

How much warmer is it now than 2010?

Onvacation says

Do you think the ipcc is credible? If so why have their predictions failed?

I don't expect a straight answer but hope to be entertained by your response.

Here's the full quote:

Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms but could cause an increase in freezing rain if average daily temperatures fluctuate about the freezing point.

Did you leave off the conditional phrase because you didn't understand it or you wanted to lie about what was in the IPCC report? Do you even see how this is not contradictory to what Dan wrote regarding increased snow in the north but decreased snow in the south?

I'm not amused by your posts. If they are sincere, I'm disheartened by the lack of clarity and truthfulness.

YesYNot says

Did you leave off the conditional phrase because you didn't understand it or you wanted to lie about what was in the IPCC report?

We were talking about record snow.

Maybe you can answer:
Onvacation says

How much warmer is it now than 2010?

There is also the component of thermal expansion that I don't see mentioned on this thread.

https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth107/node/887

"Thermosteric estimates are based on measurements of warming of both deep water areas as well as warm water areas of the ocean."

Onvacation says

We were talking about record snow.

We were talking about whether or not one would expect more or less snow with global warming. The answer is more snow in some areas and less in others. That was too complicated for you. Why did you misrepresent the IPCC report?

Onvacation says

Maybe you can answer:

If you are asking what is the increase in the yearly average temperature in the lowest region of the atmosphere since 2010, it is 0.1 oC according to this: http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
You posted the temperature in a specific location during 3 months of the year. Global climate change does not mean an equal warming in summer and winter months. A warmer global temperature could also cause local cooling by changing circulation patterns. This should be obvious.

Onvacation says

I have no say in policies.

I was talking about politicians denying climate change.

Onvacation says

Can you answer the questions:

Onvacation says

How much warmer is it now than 2010?

Onvacation says

Do you think the ipcc is credible? If so why have their predictions failed?

- How much warmer is it now than 2010?

Source: NASA: Despite Subtle Differences, Global Temperature Records in Close Agreement

No, I don't know the exact change in mean global temperature (MGT) from the arbitrary, and likely cherry picked, years of 2010 and 2017. The raw data is available online for free if you want to go through the spreadsheet.

However, what matters is that the MGT has been rising for the past 150 years, and that rise is accelerating. From the above graph, the MGT has risen 0.6°C since 1940, which is the year that represents the mean temperature for the 20th century. A 0.6°C rise is enormous. It is utter foolishness to say otherwise simply because you as a human being would not notice this. The amount of heat this requires and the change on the climate as a result of such a change is very significant.

- Do you think the ipcc is credible? If so why have their predictions failed?

Yes, the IPCC is credible, and no, their predictions have not failed. Nor has NASA's. Furthermore, the empirical rise in GMT is undeniable and proves man-made global warming and climate change.

Contrary to Contrarian Claims, IPCC Temperature Projections Have Been Exceptionally Accurate

There is a new myth circulating in the climate contrarian blogosphere and mainstream media that a figure presented in the "leaked" draft Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report shows that the planet has warmed less than previous IPCC report climate model simulations predicted. Tamino at the Open Mind blog and Skeptical Science's own Alex C have done a nice job refuting this myth.

Not surprisingly, the Frame and Stone result is very similar to our evaluation of the FAR projections, finding that they accurately simulated the global surface temperature response to the increased greenhouse effect since 1990. The study also shows that the warming since 1990 cannot be explained by the Earth's natural temperature variability alone, because the warming (red) is outside of the range of natural variability (black and gray).

As shown above, the IPCC has thus far done remarkably well at predicting future global surface warming. The same cannot be said for the climate contrarians who criticize the IPCC and mainstream climate science predictions.

Here's the thing about lying about scientific facts. You'll get caught every time. Science is verifiable. That's why it works. That's why fraud never succeeds against science.

YesYNot says

If you are asking what is the increase in the yearly average temperature in the lowest region of the atmosphere since 2010, it is 0.1 oC

So 0.01 degrees per year average.

Pollution and overpopulation are real problems in the world. Muslim terrorism is a real problem in the world. Lying cheating governments are a real problem in the world. Manmade climate change not so much.

Onvacation says

So 0.01 degrees per year average.

Yeah, if you pick those particular years, and round down. You will probably think that 0.01 oC per year increase is nothing to worry about. You'd be stupid to make that assumption for two reasons. Reason 1: The pattern is accelerating in general, though you can cherry pick some years to get a smaller number.
Reason 2: It is cumulative. Over 100 years, that has led to 1 oC. Eventually, that will be 4 oC. It will probably be sooner than you think. There are a number of reasons that 4oC would be bad, even if an extra 4 oC would not kill you this afternoon.

Onvacation says

Did a little more "research". I didn't realize how noaah manipulated their data.

https://realclimatescience.com/2016/12/100-of-us-warming-is-due-to-noaa-data-tampering/

Of course this IS a denier site.

NOAA does not manipulate data or publish fraudulent data. Nor does NASA or any other of the hundreds of reputable scientific organizations around the world. Any mistake, no matter how slight, would be attacked relentlessly by scientists who have enormous incentives to disprove papers.

Just because something is on the Internet does not make it credible. There are plenty of sites that are run by the TenPoundBasses of the world that simply publish complete bullshit.

It's not hard to distinguish between creditable sources and fraudulent ones. Creditable sources have long histories often going back before the World Wide Web. The world scientific community is so large that it's easy to verify which organizations are real scientific organizations and which are fake ones. The real ones are acknowledged by the community as a whole. You'll never see realclimatescience.com referenced by NASA or the Royal Meteorological Society except perhaps if they are debunking the source.

In short there is no excuse for being fooled by random asshole spouting lies on the Internet. It's not that hard to distinguish real scientific organizations from propaganda mills.