A ‘head scratcher’ – No Atlantic Hurricane by August in First Time in 11 Years

[Synthaholic]

The IPCC said that climate change is linked to the intensity of hurricanes.

How's that worked out?

Not so good, looks like.

To the INTENSITY.

NOT to the frequency.

Is that difficult to understand?

Not at all. Can you understand that you can't have more intense hurricanes if you don't have any hurricanes at all?

Let's put it into a context you can understand:

I don't bitch-slap you with the frequency that I use to, but when I do it's a much more pronounced, devastating bitch-slap.


Does that help?

 

[Synthaholic]

No. Warm water is being driven down by altered wind patterns and a reduced amount of cold water is moving down due to disruptions of the Meridional Overturning Current caused by warming and melt water at the poles.

Right. Warm water is sinking, and cold water is floating on top of it.

What's so hard for you to accept, here? This is exactly what you're saying.

Ocean Currents - An Overview of Ocean Currents

Density differences are a function of temperature and salinity. Warm water holds less salt than cold water so it is less dense and rises toward the surface while cold, salt laden water sinks. As the warm water rises though, the cold water is forced to rise through upwelling and fill the void left by the warm. By contrast, when cold water rises, it too leaves a void and the rising warm water is then forced, through downwelling, to descend and fill this empty space, creating thermohaline circulation.

 

[edthecynic]

Because it didn't stop, obviously.

I'm sure you believe you did.

There you are on both sides of the fence again!

I Googled your claim.

Nothing showed up.

On edit. Ooops! I made a mistake. Obviously, warming HAS stopped.

BULLSHIT!!!

2012 Was 9th Warmest Year on Record, Says NASA - ABC News

The year 2012 was the ninth warmest globally since record keeping began in 1880, said climate scientists today from NASA. NOAA, crunching the numbers slightly differently, said 2012 was the tenth warmest year, and both agencies said a warming pattern has continued since the middle of the 20th century.
NASA had already said last week that for the contiguous United States, 2012 was the warmest year ever recorded. The hottest years on record for the planet, it said, were 2005 and 2010.
“One more year of numbers isn’t in itself significant,” said Gavin Schmidt, a climatologist at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in a statement. “What matters is this decade is warmer than the last decade, and that decade was warmer than the decade before.

snip/

“Including 2012, all 12 years to date in the 21st century rank among the 14 warmest in the 133-year period of record,” NOAA said. “Only one year in the 20th century — 1998 — was warmer than 2012.”

 

[testarosa]

1880 to 2013 is but an iota of an iota of a drop in the bucket.

Go back farther, farther, farther, farther.

This is a non-issue.

 

[daveman]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/310960-global-warming-expedition-foiled-by-ice.html

A) Never said it wasn't there, only that it is disappearing.

B) That expedition was disrupted by severe weather

C) To try to "debunk" that ice is disappearing by showing that story amounts to little more than trying to claim a desert is a lush rain forest because someone once saw it drizzling in Death Valley

I'm sure it comforts you to pretend that, but it's not much comfort to the trapped sailors who are trapped, perhaps, because they believed the AGW cult's claims that the ice is disappearing.

 

[daveman]

To the INTENSITY.

NOT to the frequency.

Is that difficult to understand?

Not at all. Can you understand that you can't have more intense hurricanes if you don't have any hurricanes at all?

Let's put it into a context you can understand:

I don't bitch-slap you with the frequency that I use to, but when I do it's a much more pronounced, devastating bitch-slap.


Does that help?

Not really, although it's just as accurate as the cult's hurricane predictions.

What's the count up to now?

Oh, yeah -- zero.

 

[Katzndogz]

It should not be surprising or a mystery. The sun moves in 11 year cycles. There is no such thing as global warming.

 

[daveman]

There you are on both sides of the fence again!

I Googled your claim.

Nothing showed up.

On edit. Ooops! I made a mistake. Obviously, warming HAS stopped.

BULLSHIT!!!

2012 Was 9th Warmest Year on Record, Says NASA - ABC News

The year 2012 was the ninth warmest globally since record keeping began in 1880, said climate scientists today from NASA. NOAA, crunching the numbers slightly differently, said 2012 was the tenth warmest year, and both agencies said a warming pattern has continued since the middle of the 20th century.
NASA had already said last week that for the contiguous United States, 2012 was the warmest year ever recorded. The hottest years on record for the planet, it said, were 2005 and 2010.
“One more year of numbers isn’t in itself significant,” said Gavin Schmidt, a climatologist at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in a statement. “What matters is this decade is warmer than the last decade, and that decade was warmer than the decade before.

snip/

“Including 2012, all 12 years to date in the 21st century rank among the 14 warmest in the 133-year period of record,” NOAA said. “Only one year in the 20th century — 1998 — was warmer than 2012.”

They're stacking the deck to get the results they want.

A Different Take on the ?Hottest Month on Record.? | Debunk House

NOAA’s hottest month ever is based on the homogenized US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN). THe USHCN is a subset of the GHCN…

Investigation of methods for hydroclimatic data homogenization

--

From the global database GHCN-Monthly Version 2, we examine all stations containing both raw and adjusted data that satisfy certain criteria of continuity and distribution over the globe. In the United States of America, because of the large number of available stations, stations were chosen after a suitable sampling. In total we analyzed 181 stations globally. For these stations we calculated the differences between the adjusted and non-adjusted linear 100-year trends. It was found that in the two thirds of the cases, the homogenization procedure increased the positive or decreased the negative temperature trends.​

This is why “U.S. temperature trends show a spurious doubling due to NOAA station siting problems and post measurement adjustments.”

Poor station siting in the USHCN is also the reason that NOAA’s new U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) shows July 2012 to be 75.5°F (about 2°F cooler than the USHCN. The homogenized USHCN supports AGW by artificially cooling the past and artificially warming the present.​

They're stacking the deck -- and suckers are falling for it.

 

[Two Thumbs]

wasn't the artic sea ice supposed to be nearly gone by now?

Who knows? That it is disappearing is a fact.

You missed my point

warmers are fearmngering liars

The ice caps were supposed to be nearly gone by now. hell one link says its gone this year.

We were supposed to have worse and worsening storm seasons every year. About 3 years ago they finally stfu about it when it became know that one hurricane season was record low.

 

[daveman]

More evidence of the deck-stacking, although the cultists will not accept it, seeing as it contradicts their dogma:

New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial | Watts Up With That?

Using Leroy 2010 methods, the Watts et al 2012 paper, which studies several aspects of USHCN siting issues and data adjustments, concludes that:

These factors, combined with station siting issues, have led to a spurious doubling of U.S. mean temperature trends in the 30 year data period covered by the study from 1979 – 2008.

Other findings include, but are not limited to:

· Statistically significant differences between compliant and non-compliant stations exist, as well as urban and rural stations.

· Poorly sited station trends are adjusted sharply upward, and well sited stations are adjusted upward to match the already-adjusted poor stations.

· Well sited rural stations show a warming nearly three times greater after NOAA adjustment is applied.

· Urban sites warm more rapidly than semi-urban sites, which in turn warm more rapidly than rural sites.

· The raw data Tmean trend for well sited stations is 0.15°C per decade lower than adjusted Tmean trend for poorly sited stations.

· Airport USHCN stations show a significant differences in trends than other USHCN stations, and due to equipment issues and other problems, may not be representative stations for monitoring climate.

They're fudging the data to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.

That's not science.

 

[testarosa]

The warmers want to talk about 100 years.

100 years in the life of Mother Earth.



Ohhhh the ego of it.

 

[DarkLion]

I'm sure it comforts you to pretend that, but it's not much comfort to the trapped sailors who are trapped, perhaps, because they believed the AGW cult's claims that the ice is disappearing.

And that addresses my post how?

 

[edthecynic]

More evidence of the deck-stacking, although the cultists will not accept it, seeing as it contradicts their dogma:

New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial | Watts Up With That?

Using Leroy 2010 methods, the Watts et al 2012 paper, which studies several aspects of USHCN siting issues and data adjustments, concludes that:

These factors, combined with station siting issues, have led to a spurious doubling of U.S. mean temperature trends in the 30 year data period covered by the study from 1979 – 2008.

Other findings include, but are not limited to:

· Statistically significant differences between compliant and non-compliant stations exist, as well as urban and rural stations.

· Poorly sited station trends are adjusted sharply upward, and well sited stations are adjusted upward to match the already-adjusted poor stations.

· Well sited rural stations show a warming nearly three times greater after NOAA adjustment is applied.

· Urban sites warm more rapidly than semi-urban sites, which in turn warm more rapidly than rural sites.

· The raw data Tmean trend for well sited stations is 0.15°C per decade lower than adjusted Tmean trend for poorly sited stations.

· Airport USHCN stations show a significant differences in trends than other USHCN stations, and due to equipment issues and other problems, may not be representative stations for monitoring climate.

They're fudging the data to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.

That's not science.

Watts has been thoroughly discredited. Satellites, which have no "siting" problems, confirm the accuracy of the ground station data. Deniers have no data, ground or satellite, to support their false claims so all they can do is try to discredit the data in hopes some fools will swallow the deniers' bullshit.

 

[jon_berzerk]

The warmers want to talk about 100 years.

100 years in the life of Mother Earth.



Ohhhh the ego of it.

it has not been getting warmer the last two hundred months

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

 

[testarosa]

The warmers want to talk about 100 years.

100 years in the life of Mother Earth.



Ohhhh the ego of it.

it has not been getting warmer the last two hundred months

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

The Earth began 100 years ago and it's flat.

Didn't you get the memo?

 

[edthecynic]

The warmers want to talk about 100 years.

100 years in the life of Mother Earth.



Ohhhh the ego of it.

it has not been getting warmer the last two hundred months

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

Not according to the satellite data.

Here is the latest satellite data for July 2013:

Global Temperature Report: July 2013

Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.14 C per decade
July temperatures (preliminary)
Global composite temp.: +0.17 C (about 0.31 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for July.
Northern Hemisphere: +0.13 C (about 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for July.
Southern Hemisphere: +0.22 C (about 0.40 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for July.
Tropics: +0.08 C (about 0.14 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for July.
​

 

[daveman]

I'm sure it comforts you to pretend that, but it's not much comfort to the trapped sailors who are trapped, perhaps, because they believed the AGW cult's claims that the ice is disappearing.

And that addresses my post how?

I thought it was fairly obvious.

 

[daveman]

More evidence of the deck-stacking, although the cultists will not accept it, seeing as it contradicts their dogma:

New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial | Watts Up With That?

Using Leroy 2010 methods, the Watts et al 2012 paper, which studies several aspects of USHCN siting issues and data adjustments, concludes that:

These factors, combined with station siting issues, have led to a spurious doubling of U.S. mean temperature trends in the 30 year data period covered by the study from 1979 – 2008.

Other findings include, but are not limited to:

· Statistically significant differences between compliant and non-compliant stations exist, as well as urban and rural stations.

· Poorly sited station trends are adjusted sharply upward, and well sited stations are adjusted upward to match the already-adjusted poor stations.

· Well sited rural stations show a warming nearly three times greater after NOAA adjustment is applied.

· Urban sites warm more rapidly than semi-urban sites, which in turn warm more rapidly than rural sites.

· The raw data Tmean trend for well sited stations is 0.15°C per decade lower than adjusted Tmean trend for poorly sited stations.

· Airport USHCN stations show a significant differences in trends than other USHCN stations, and due to equipment issues and other problems, may not be representative stations for monitoring climate.

They're fudging the data to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.

That's not science.

Watts has been thoroughly discredited. Satellites, which have no "siting" problems, confirm the accuracy of the ground station data. Deniers have no data, ground or satellite, to support their false claims so all they can do is try to discredit the data in hopes some fools will swallow the deniers' bullshit.

Yawn.

 

[edthecynic]

More evidence of the deck-stacking, although the cultists will not accept it, seeing as it contradicts their dogma:

New study shows half of the global warming in the USA is artificial | Watts Up With That?

They're fudging the data to arrive at a predetermined conclusion.

That's not science.

Watts has been thoroughly discredited. Satellites, which have no "siting" problems, confirm the accuracy of the ground station data. Deniers have no data, ground or satellite, to support their false claims so all they can do is try to discredit the data in hopes some fools will swallow the deniers' bullshit.

Yawn.

Facts are boring to deniers who have no data!
Thank You.

 

[testarosa]

Pretty much.

Let's ring up the dinosaurs on the Obamaphone and see what they have to say.