First Five Months of 2015 Hottest on Record

[Ben Dhyan]

From what I have read so far its that these last three years in particular have been on the lower end of the predictions. They haven't been wrong but they have been on the lower end. However the sea levels have risen right along as predicted however and I think that is important to note.

Also the last five years, only about three of those five years have been anything but jumps in temperature. (For example this year if meaned only with itself rather than the cold year we had a few years ago which has kept the statistical five year mean down for the last five years) This year so far is the highest average temperature for a year ever recorded.

This is a graph of each of the averaged temperatures 4 times a year. You will notice that it spiked at its second highest in 2010. Then for the years 2011 and 2012 it went well below what the temperatures were at for 2010 and then shot back up at 2013 and has reached the highest nearly the end of 2014. Since then it has increased even more in 2015. Soon as the years 2011 and 2012 rotate out the five year mean will drastically shoot up. In fact soon as just one of those years rotates out the projection for 2016 will jump and in 2017 (assuming there isn't another cold year in 2016) it will most likely be significantly higher than even the 2010 five year mean reading.

We are still only talking about present temperatures at their 140 year 0.7C high (since records began)....and have they been pretty much stalled this century.... The increasing deviation of observed from vast majority of IPCC models is still a present fact....and those that are close to observed temperature are predicting only moderate warming this century...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Pollution and climate change are inseparable. There are certain aspects of pollution that may not have to do with climate change but there is no aspect of climate change that we are addressing that does not have to do with pollution.

Ok...what sort of pollution causes global warming?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

We are still only talking about present temperatures at their 140 year 0.7C high (since records began)....and have they been pretty much stalled this century.... The increasing deviation of observed from vast majority of IPCC models is still a present fact....and those that are close to observed temperature are predicting only moderate warming this century...

The temperatures have skyrocked this century. The only "stalling" that I have seen on any graph is the five year average graph and that is from 2011-2014. Prior to that every single graph I have ever seen shows that they have increased significantly over the last century.

Ok...what sort of pollution causes global warming?

Are you seriously asking this question? Do you know what the simplistic of basics of the arguments are? Carbon air pollution is the most important aspect of the global warming argument. How the CO2 levels in the atmosphere seems to exactly correlate with the rise in temperatures.

 

[Ouroboros]

Yeah, I was being facetious.

Ah.

I firmly believe the climate is changing. Some places are hotter, some places are colder. I think we're going to have a hot summer here, if "spring" is any indication. We had several weeks of below 0 temps., not including wind chills during the winter. Frozen and burst pipes all over the area (twice for me) because we're not prepared for it in our construction. The year 2000 saw some of the hottest temps. we've had in a long time also, for almost a week > 100°.

We're starting to break the records here as well, in sunny, oh so sunny California. And with increasing water restrictions.

 

[Ouroboros]

I remember some 35 years ago, in Arizona, sitting in the shade, just watching beads of sweat form on my skin. I'd dry it off and within seconds my skin would be wet with sweat again.

On a local note, California has faced 200 year long droughts in the past. It has actually been a lot wetter this century than in the past.

Only difference... not many people lived here.

From what I heard, SoCal (where I live), is considered a desert (or rather a step, I guess, since it's not sandy but just low plants).

The state could have done a lot to prepare for such a drought. They've done nothing for 40 years. Now they're complaining that folks are taking too long in the showers. All that money taken in by the government, what is it really used for?

100% with ya'.

Now suddenly, the 7% of the water use (private, non-commercial) have to stop all their use, so Nestle can keep on filling bottles. That's how we solve it. Increase the dry plants... i.e. fuel for the wildfire season. Then we can call in the fire department and lift water from the reservoirs and use all the water we could have used to water the plants and reduced the risk of fire... go figure...

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the desalination plants. But they're most likely placed in locations that will be under water in the next 20 years.

 

[Nakosis]

Only difference... not many people lived here.

From what I heard, SoCal (where I live), is considered a desert (or rather a step, I guess, since it's not sandy but just low plants).

Pretty much, as least the southern half. Maybe why someone should have seen it coming.

100% with ya'.

Now suddenly, the 7% of the water use (private, non-commercial) have to stop all their use, so Nestle can keep on filling bottles. That's how we solve it. Increase the dry plants... i.e. fuel for the wildfire season. Then we can call in the fire department and lift water from the reservoirs and use all the water we could have used to water the plants and reduced the risk of fire... go figure...

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the desalination plants. But they're most likely placed in locations that will be under water in the next 20 years.

Yes, we could of had them in place if the government had the foresight. Now the complaint is it would cost too much to deal with the current crisis. However if we had spread the costs out over the last twenty years, I'd expect we'd be in a lot better position.

 

[Ouroboros]

Climate change has been happening all throughout the earths history. I don't see anything unique about it that sets things apart other than making an adjustment to the new weather patterns.

Absolutely agree. There was a time where Earth had about 4-5 degrees average temp (celsius I think) higher than today. The water level was then 20 meter higher (60 feet), which means most of our ports. Our ports didn't exist 600,000 years ago or at any other time when the temperature was this high. So the situation is different now, since we're here and have built our infrastructure and cities around the current sea level.

The problem here shouldn't be that it's not happening (because it really is happening), but rather what can we do to survive through the changes or do something to change the problem. Just a few degrees higher is a problem. The point that we've reached is that we'll have a 5 meter (15 feet) guaranteed water rise. How long it will take to get there isn't clear, but with the speed the glaciers are melting it's fairly clear that it's coming.

 

[Ouroboros]

From what I have read so far its that these last three years in particular have been on the lower end of the predictions. They haven't been wrong but they have been on the lower end. However the sea levels have risen right along as predicted however and I think that is important to note.

Probably because (if I remember right) the sun has gone into a cooling cycle. We're probably on the top, the hottest of the curve when it comes to natural influences from the sun and other things. That's why all this is alarming, because we're supposed to see a cooling down, not heating up.

 

[Ouroboros]

Pretty much, as least the southern half. Maybe why someone should have seen it coming.

I think we all were warned... but, the human species, we don't do anything until it's right in our face. Imminent and direct danger. That's the only thing we respond to in masses and politics. It's unfortunate, but that's just how it is.

Yes, we could of had them in place if the government had the foresight. Now the complaint is it would cost too much to deal with the current crisis. However if we had spread the costs out over the last twenty years, I'd expect we'd be in a lot better position.

Agree.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The temperatures have skyrocked this century. The only "stalling" that I have seen on any graph is the five year average graph and that is from 2011-2014. Prior to that every single graph I have ever seen shows that they have increased significantly over the last century.


Are you seriously asking this question? Do you know what the simplistic of basics of the arguments are? Carbon air pollution is the most important aspect of the global warming argument. How the CO2 levels in the atmosphere seems to exactly correlate with the rise in temperatures.

What has been the global temperature increase according to IPCC used data such as UAH, or RSS since year 2000? You will see the trend has pretty much stalled!

Yes...it is a serious question... fyi...CO2 is not a pollutant...it is colourless, odorless, and essential to life on earth...it is plant food....the earth is getting greener due to the increase in CO2 levels... Records show that CO2 levels actually lag temperature increase, not precede it...

 

[Monk Of Reason]

What has been the been the global temperature increase according to IPCC used data such as UAH, or RSS since year 2000? You will see the trend has pretty much stalled!

The trend has not stalled. And even if it had, which it hasn't, we are in a cooling period. We also have to account for El Nino and la Nina events when looking at averages. Every single decade has been higher than the previous decades. The two highest years for temperature was 2010 and 2005. The hottest 12 month period of was between 2009 and 20010. The first five months of 2015 have broken all records prior to that and if the trend continues 2015 will be the new hottest year yet.

Is it not strange that 9 of the 10 hottest years on record are after the year 2000. The only year that is on the top 10 list that is prior to 2000 is 1998.

How do you account with the cooling period of the sun yet we still see continued rises in global temperatures? Since 1880 it as risen .8 degrees Celsius. In the 90's it was only .68. That is a significant jump in just fifteen years.

Yes...it is a serious question... fyi...CO2 is not a pollutant...it is colourless, odorless, and essential to life on earth...it is plant food....the earth is getting greener due to the increase in CO2 levels... Records show that CO2 levels actually lag temperature increase, not precede it...

Carbon pollution drastically increases the CO2 and CO levels in the air. They are the direct cause of the human aspect of global warming. It is a pollutant. A scant amount has always existed naturally but it is still a pollutant when spewed by our cars, trucks, planes, trains, ect.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The trend has not stalled. And even if it had, which it hasn't, we are in a cooling period. We also have to account for El Nino and la Nina events when looking at averages. Every single decade has been higher than the previous decades. The two highest years for temperature was 2010 and 2005. The hottest 12 month period of was between 2009 and 20010. The first five months of 2015 have broken all records prior to that and if the trend continues 2015 will be the new hottest year yet.

Is it not strange that 9 of the 10 hottest years on record are after the year 2000. The only year that is on the top 10 list that is prior to 2000 is 1998.

How do you account with the cooling period of the sun yet we still see continued rises in global temperatures? Since 1880 it as risen .8 degrees Celsius. In the 90's it was only .68. That is a significant jump in just fifteen years.

Ok...then what do you make of the graph below based on IPCC approved UAH and RSS satellite data....is that a pause or not? Now as to the hottest temperature on record...of course that is tp be expected if we understand that the average global temperature has risen 0.7C over the last 140 years...the temperature is staying at its highs during the pause....at the end of the 20th century, it was about 0,7C higher than in 1880, now in 2015, it is still about 0.7C higher than in 1880.. If the pause continues until the end of the 21st century...you can still go on about the temperature being at or near records highs....but the temperature would still be around 0.7C higher than 1880...do you see how that works?

ps...what are talking about...the cooling cycle of the sun?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Ok...then what do you make of the graph below based on IPCC approved UAH and RSS satellite data....is that a pause or not? Now as to the hottest temperature on record...of course that is tp be expected if we understand that the average global temperature has risen 0.7C over the last 140 years...the temperature is staying at its highs during the pause....at the end of the 20th century, it was about 0,7C higher than in 1880, now in 2015, it is still about 0.7C higher than in 1880.. If the pause continues until the end of the 21st century...you can still go on about the temperature being at or near records highs....but the temperature would still be around 0.7C higher than 1880...do you see how that works?

ps...what are talking about...the cooling cycle of the sun?

To correct you yet again it is .8 higher. Not .7
I have already provided the graphs, the charts and the links to the places that help show how the data is projected. Why it is that the overwhelming number of scientists still support the current models.

WHAT IS ALSO SIGNIFICANT is that your charts are not of temperatures. They are of the change in temperature from the previous years. They are the anomalies. There is still increases in temperatures, in ocean height ect. These are cherry picked charts that seem misleading for those that don't know how to read them. I myself am not versed well in reading them and took a little bit of time to see why the temperatures in the charts didn't seem to match at all what seems to have actually been measured. This is not a list of their temperatures but on the anomalies.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

To correct you yet again it is .8 higher. Not .7
I have already provided the graphs, the charts and the links to the places that help show how the data is projected. Why it is that the overwhelming number of scientists still support the current models.

WHAT IS ALSO SIGNIFICANT is that your charts are not of temperatures. They are of the change in temperature from the previous years. They are the anomalies. There is still increases in temperatures, in ocean height ect. These are cherry picked charts that seem misleading for those that don't know how to read them. I myself am not versed well in reading them and took a little bit of time to see why the temperatures in the charts didn't seem to match at all what seems to have actually been measured. This is not a list of their temperatures but on the anomalies.

UN IPCC agw climate model predictions are just that.....predictions...naturally all climate scientists who get paid good money by their governments to produce the predictions, stand by them...but the observed temperatures are not increasing as they were expected with increased CO2.....and so the science is not settled...if the pause continues...the AGW theory will have to be abandoned... Iow, the science is only as good as its ability to predict correctly...if it doesn't, it has been falsified and refuted...that is the scientific method....

You are mistaken....the anomaly graphs are used by the UN IPCC so that the different data sources which came into use at different times relative to the earlier can be compared on the same graph....the IPCC does not use absolute temperature...but in any case, if absolute temperature was used ...it would not change the data...the pause is real... So you are in error and if you do not accept it, then please provide an actual absolute temperature graph for the same period?

In fact, your point on the tmeperatue anomaly graphs show you are ignorant of the technical side of basicscience...and should bow out now before you are further embarrassed..

 

[psychoslice]

There is always going to be records broken, the earth has been changing for millions of years, and all of a sudden we start recording weather or whatever, and expect it all to stay the way it is lol.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

UN IPCC agw climate model predictions are just that.....predictions...naturally all climate scientists who get paid good money by their governments to produce the predictions, stand by them...but the observed temperatures are not increasing as they were expected with increased CO2.....and so the science is not settled...if the pause continues...the AGW theory will have to be abandoned... Iow, the science is only as good as its ability to predict correctly...if it doesn't, it has been falsified and refuted...that is the scientific method....

True. But when you look at the actual data and not cherry picked graphs that have been sorted through by anti-climate change groups whose whole existance is to deny climate change (yeah I'm sure they are the unbiased ones) you will see the trend has continued. Slowed but continued upwards. In fact the whole point of showing you the actual temperature graphs earlier was that there was two years in which it decreased somewhat in comparison to the previous year. That was the year 2011 and 2012. However every year after that in both 2013 and 2014 were significantly warmer which follows right along side the increase. And as you have even admitted before all the way up till 2010 the graph is undeniable. THE ONLY leg you have had to stand on was the stagnant two years that followed. The end of 2013, all of 2014 and now record breaking 2015 continue to the trend upwards. Do you deny this?

You are mistaken....the anomaly graphs are used by the UN IPCC so that the different data sources which came into use at different times relative to the earlier can be compared on the same graph....the IPCC does not use absolute temperature...but in any case, if absolute temperature was used ...it would not change the data...the pause is real... So you are in error and if you do not accept it, then please provide an actual absolute temperature graph for the same period?

In fact, your point on the tmeperatue anomaly graphs show you are ignorant of the technical side of basicscience...and should bow out now before you are further embarrassed..

I don't claim to be a climate expert. I do claim to be educated in the basics of it. You however deny the very basics of it. So I don't really care for you to call me out as an ignorant on the subject when you have no leg to stand on and get your graphs for cherry picked sifting websites. Its much like the anti-evolution crew quotemining. And simply saying that climate scientists are paid by the government, when this isn't absolutely true, there are dozens and dozens of independent groups that have verified their findings and concur with the conclusions (so there goes your brilliant theory but I'm sure you have a second excuse to move the goalposts).


Though this has already been explained to you I shall state it again. The surface temperature of the earth is not the end all measurement. In fact the majority (about 90%) of the heat that is absorbed isn't absorbed at all by the surface but by our oceans. The rise in ocean levels is the primary way that we are able to accurately gauge the progression of global warming. It seems since 1992 when they first started to measure it there has been an average of .12 inches of increase in sea level every year and it seems to be increasing. This trend continues through 2014.
Is sea level rising?

If you have more questions on why global warming is still occurring even if the surface temperatures haven't changed as significantly as predicted lets look at the more important aspects or at least look at them on a smaller scale than five year averages as these loose their meaning when we are talking about a timeframe as little as 15 years.
Has Global Warming Paused? - Scientific American

Here talks more about the ocean currents and why certain years have been lower in temperature which have skewed the graph

The “Pause” in Global Warming Is Finally Explained - Observations - Scientific American Blog Network

 

[Ouroboros]

...

Good links.

One of them pointed out something important to understand. The graphs that are used to reject global warming are mostly based on the air temperature. The global air temperature hasn't changed much, it's the land and sea, where the heat is trapped and stored that is increasing. NASAs number of increasing average temp is based on the ground temp, if I understand it right (probably should look it up to confirm). The UAH graphs is troposphere. I could be wrong about this, but this is my impression of what's going on between these data.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Ok...for those who don't like the anomaly graphs,,,,or satellite data source....here is one of absolute temperature from 1881 to 2013....using ground based thermometer....scary yeah? ...lol

 

[metis]

Ok...for those who don't like the anomaly graphs,,,,or satellite data source....here is one of absolute temperature from 1881 to 2013....using ground based thermometer....scary yeah? ...lol

It seems that you are totally unaware of the fact that an overall temperature of a mere 2 degrees F. is terrible news for a place called "Earth". See: Global Warming Fast Facts from National Geographic.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It seems that you are totally unaware of the fact that an overall temperature of a mere 2 degrees F. is terrible news for a place called "Earth". See: Global Warming Fast Facts from National Geographic.

Oh yeah...than how about 8 or 9 degrees F...cos that's the range variation of Earth temperature....and it has nothing to do with humans...fortunately we are now in an interglacial period...lol...