2019 set to be warmer than 2018

[longview]

We pretty much know what the 2018 average temp is, denier.

Well the tell us with words, the you think the average will be higer or lower than 2017?

 

[longview]

In these measurements, they remove all ENSO effects. That's the whole point. Please stop this nonsense.



So you're so focused on a 2 year trend, that you don't care about 40+ years of trends? Please stop this nonsense, too.



"Warmest" is a relative measure, and I'm pointing out that the last decade are the warmest on record. Anyone with half a brain understands what this means. Please stop etc.



Good grief. No, "hottest" is not a "steady state," it's a relative measure. As your ilk likes to say, "words have meaning." You really ought to learn the meaning of the words you're reading, before you criticize.

And yes, we can reasonably estimate the impacts of ENSO effects. There was plenty of data, and we accumulate more data, and refine it, every time there is another ENSO event.

Words have meaning, Hottest and warmest are not moving descriptors, and in 2017 we would not know what 2018 would look like, and so could not use it in an average.

 

[Threegoofs]

Well the tell us with words, the you think the average will be higer or lower than 2017?

Can’t understand graphs, point estimates and confidence intervals, eh?

Explains a lot.

 

[longview]

Can’t understand graphs, point estimates and confidence intervals, eh?

Explains a lot.

Cannot use your own words, that also explains a lot.

 

[Media_Truth]

We pretty much know what the 2018 average temp is, denier.

We very well may see a warmer 2019. CO2 rose substantially between October and November of 2018 ---> 0.6 PPM. Usually the monthly rise is only about 0.3 to 0.4 PPM...

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

 

[Lord of Planar]

We very well may see a warmer 2019. CO2 rose substantially between October and November of 2018 ---> 0.6 PPM. Usually the monthly rise is only about 0.3 to 0.4 PPM...

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

Anything from the bloggers who post at climate dot nasa should be treated with caution. I don't know why NASA still gives those three idiots a voice.

 

[Surface Detail]

Anything from the bloggers who post at climate dot nasa should be treated with caution. I don't know why NASA still gives those three idiots a voice.

climate.nasa.com is not a blog. It is an official NASA website.

 

[Media_Truth]

climate.nasa.com is not a blog. It is an official NASA website.

He doesn't even say what it is that he is arguing. Is it the CO2 measurement? Or it just "anything". On the WEBSITE, this is stated:

This research is broadly consistent with similar constructions prepared by the Climatic Research Unit and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

 

[Lord of Planar]

climate.nasa.com is not a blog. It is an official NASA website.

It's nothing but blog level punditry. Have you ever looked at the credentials of the three people who run it? I have, not a single one has the right credentials.

 

[Media_Truth]

It's nothing but blog level punditry. Have you ever looked at the credentials of the three people who run it? I have, not a single one has the right credentials.

Enlighten us...

 

[Lord of Planar]

Enlighten us...

OK, here they are:

 

[Threegoofs]

It's nothing but blog level punditry. Have you ever looked at the credentials of the three people who run it? I have, not a single one has the right credentials.

I’m guessing you have less credentials than any of them.

And they actually at least converse with climate scientists.

Pundit, indeed.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I’m guessing you have less credentials than any of them.

And they actually at least converse with climate scientists.

Pundit, indeed.

I have more than all of them combined, that are applicable to science.

 

[Into the Night]

NASA has just posted a projection of the 2019 global temp, and it looks like it’s gonna be another hot one!




That’s:
...1.2±0.15 ºC above the late 19th C. A warmer yr than 2018 (which will #4), almost certain >1ºC yr, and 1 in 3 chance of a new record.

Meh. THAT was unexpected. :lamo

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.

 

[Into the Night]

We shall see. An El Nino year here and there can pause the ongoing cooling, but it can't stop it. This looks like wishful thinking.

El Nino doesn't change the temperature of the Earth, nor can it stop any affects of warming or cooling that do occur.

El Nino is caused by a very slight shift in ocean currents. It is normal variance in these currents.

 

[Into the Night]

As I said, the track record is excellent.

The track record of a self fulfilling prophecy would be after all.

 

[Into the Night]

I’m guessing you have less credentials than any of them.

And they actually at least converse with climate scientists.

Pundit, indeed.

I prefer not to talk to climate 'scientists' anymore. They just deny science and mathematics.

 

[Into the Night]

I have more than all of them combined, that are applicable to science.

Whether you do or don't actually becomes irrelevant on forums. There is always someone that doesn't believe you. It's not possible to prove credentials on blind forums. People claiming you don't have them can't prove their statements either.

It's the arguments themselves that count. You certainly present better thought out ones then anything I've seen out of a lot of people here.

 

[Mr Person]

Whether you do or don't actually becomes irrelevant on forums. There is always someone that doesn't believe you. It's not possible to prove credentials on blind forums. People claiming you don't have them can't prove their statements either.

It's the arguments themselves that count. You certainly present better thought out ones then anything I've seen out of a lot of people here.

Shouldn't you instead be calling Planar's statement an "Appeal to Authority Fallacy" and Goof's an "Ad Hominem Fallacy"?

After all, Planar claimed that NASA's official website is not credible because it's just punditry, whereupon Goofs questioned whether Planar claims to have more credentials than those who contribute to NASA's website, which in turn triggered Planars appeal to his own claimed authority, that being more degrees than apparently all contributors to NASA's site combined.

I prefer not to talk to climate 'scientists' anymore. They just deny science and mathematics.

Now, see, that's an "Ad Hominem Fallacy" you've aimed at climate scientists. Why do you not recognize this?

:thinking

 

[Media_Truth]

I have more than all of them combined, that are applicable to science.

You're a legend in your own mind. You do not show the aptitude, humility, and thirst for knowledge to have an accredited scientific degree. My guess is you have some kind of 2-year Tech school degree.

 

[Threegoofs]

Shouldn't you instead be calling Planar's statement an "Appeal to Authority Fallacy" and Goof's an "Ad Hominem Fallacy"?

After all, Planar claimed that NASA's official website is not credible because it's just punditry, whereupon Goofs questioned whether Planar claims to have more credentials than those who contribute to NASA's website, which in turn triggered Planars appeal to his own claimed authority, that being more degrees than apparently all contributors to NASA's site combined.






Now, see, that's an "Ad Hominem Fallacy" you've aimed at climate scientists. Why do you not recognize this?

:thinking

Logical Thinking Fallacy.

 

[Renae]

20 warmest years on record are in the last 22, and the last four were the warmest of those. I would say the odds are with the OP.

Every year will be nearly the warmest on record.
At least as long as the need for it to be deemed so is still there.

 

[Threegoofs]

Every year will be nearly the warmest on record.
At least as long as the need for it to be deemed so is still there.

Because it’s all a....Giant Global Conspiracy!

Luckily, we have high school educated weather technicians who understand more than the climate scientists to blow the lid off of the charade!

 

[Renae]

Whether you do or don't actually becomes irrelevant on forums. There is always someone that doesn't believe you. It's not possible to prove credentials on blind forums. People claiming you don't have them can't prove their statements either.

It's the arguments themselves that count. You certainly present better thought out ones then anything I've seen out of a lot of people here.

Meh, some in this thread care about: Do you agree with my agenda, if you do your science or related credentials are immaterial! If you disagree, then no matter what experience, training or the like you have it will be attacked and belittled and you will be branded a terrible human for daring to disagree.

 

[Threegoofs]

Meh, some in this thread care about: Do you agree with my agenda, if you do your science or related credentials are immaterial! If you disagree, then no matter what experience, training or the like you have it will be attacked and belittled and you will be branded a terrible human for daring to disagree.

Well... no.

It’s the people who tell us that they know more than the scientists who study this (but have little credentials or education themselves) that get belittled and ridiculed.

Appropriately, I might add.