Why should short periods of time have less magnitude effects than long periods of time? The human body has a relatively stable average temperature over a long period of time, but there can be drastic variances and changes in temperature over shorter periods of time.
You were the one who said,
"Good thing we're not only using this single datapoint then, but rather an entire century or more, eh?"
How do you interpret your own words?
Thats a good answer but your course of action is based on suspicious assumptions
In either case without an increase in global temps we would be facing global cooling which is much more stressful on humans
You just don't get it. Humans are not capable of living in high temperatures and neither are our food crops, we/they didn't evolve that way. Much of the Earth will become uninhabitable if temperatures return to those of many millions of years ago if we don't starve first.
Why should short periods of time have less magnitude effects than long periods of time? The human body has a relatively stable average temperature over a long period of time, but there can be drastic variances and changes in temperature over shorter periods of time.
Wouldnt mass algae blooms lower the CO2 levels?Mass die offs due to out of control algae blooms in our oceans will not be good for you or your garden.
Wouldnt mass algae blooms lower the CO2 levels?
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
What "suspicious assumptions?"
That man-made-global-warming is primarily caused by humans and it will lead catastrophic harm to the earth
If you can come up with some type of scientific data to show that the earth is prone to dramatic short term temperature pertubations that are greater than long term ones, I'd love to see it.
Because I havent seen anything that suggests that to be a fact at all.
Well THATS a fake graph.
The projections 31 years ago (and previous to that) were that we would be warmer than ever recorded in 30 years.
Looks like they nailed it.
In this case not much, Nature provided a big fat El Nino event that skewed the first 4 months of the year.
Of course counting the warming from a known weather event as part of a warming trend is disingenuous at best.
Are you pretending to so hilariously misunderstand my post or are you actually that wrong?
It's been 'disingenuous' at best for all the science deniers who kept claiming there was no warming while using one satellite tropospheric data set 'counting' from the 1997/98 extreme el Nino year.
Here's a breakdown of the el Nino contribution:
View attachment 67212590
Note the different scales on the temperature color bars.
If it wasn't recorded with the sensitivity of measurement we have today, how do we know it was all that stable? How do we know this change is magnitudes faster than any other 130-year period in geological history? It seems like some large assumptions must be made to come to that conclusion.
No, it is not, however the rate of the temperature rise during an El Nino event is like 10 times faster than would be possibleIn a greater context.
You can whine about picking data during an el nino, but the truth is that's not the only data showing we're getting warmer.
Where did I say there was no warming?It's been 'disingenuous' at best for all the science deniers who kept claiming there was no warming while using one satellite tropospheric data set 'counting' from the 1997/98 extreme el Nino year.
Here's a breakdown of the el Nino contribution:
Note the different scales on the temperature color bars.
Also it is hypercritical to on the one hand say counting from 1997/98 extreme el Nino year is wrong,Since it takes an mean of at least 40 months to average out the spike of an El Nino weather event.
We will not know for another 20 months if 2016 was anything special.
The "change" people don't tell me what they want to change the climate to, or what year or decade they want to use as "normal" weather.
U.S. scientists officially declare 2016 the hottest year on record. That makes three in a row.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-makes-three-in-a-row/?utm_term=.c828ea762717
Remember how the deniers told us that the scientists were always wrong about predictions on warming? Remember when they said there was no significant warming? Remember when they said the earth was going into a 'cooling phase' in 1990 errr..1995, errrrr..... 1999, errr 2003, errrr..... 2008, errr....2012, errr.... 2015?
In addition to this obvious record, we also are seeing record lows in arctic sea ice, gigatons of melt in Greenland, significant melt in parts of Antarctica, and disappearing glaciers all over the globe - from the Alps to the Himalayas to the Andes.
But Donald Trump says its a hoax made up by the Chinese.
No, it is not, however the rate of the temperature rise during an El Nino event is like 10 times faster than would be possible
from the other sources. The contamination of the data is such, that it takes at least 40 months to average the spike out.
We could do that, but it would mean we would not know if 2016 was anything specialGreat, so lets use 30 years.
We could do that, but it would mean we would not know if 2016 was anything special
for another 15 years.
Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?