CDZ Is the Climate changing?

[Flopper]

It is true that the climate has always been changing. It might change a degree or so every thousand years. The problem with manmade climate change is that it is happening quickly. Too quickly. If you will look at the southern border of the U.S., you will see refugees from Central American. They are coming to the border because climate change has brought catastrophic crop failure to their region. Other regions are also affected, generally the more warmer regions, and the colder. Temperate areas, not so much.

You may be a little confused about this. They come to the US because we are a welfare state. We give them free stuff and they like it. Has nothing to do with the climate.

Green card holders only get limited social welfare benefits, and those illegally in the US get nearly nothing. It's a bit farfetched to believe that people embark on a 1500 mile walk through mostly desert country to the US border of which only half make it for only a 20% chance of getting into the US, legally or illegally. The driving forces In Guatemala leading to migration are crime, poverty and political corruption. Crime is the big issue for those living in Guatemala; statistically 84% to 87% of the violence is attributed to gang violence and drug trafficking. Parts of both Mexico and Honduras suffer from the same problem.

 

[turbofish]

I kept hearing about climate change for years via the media and wanted to know for myself using the data collected by the government to see where it is changing. So I downloaded the daily-grids [county level] that contains daily temps [high, low, average] and perc. Granted, this is just for continental US [48 states - Alaska and Hawaii were omitted by the government in this data set]. Didn't really care about the rest of the world when it comes to climate change- I have no power to vote people in or out in places like China, India,...
So I built a nice relational database MS-SQL, imported the data with SSIS, and now I have over 79 million rows of data in the main table. I have also added other data just for fun, things like population changes from 1969-2017, population from the last census, population estimates on a monthly basis from data that I purchase. Heck, just for fun, I used my relational database and turned in into an OLAP. It is how data nerds play.
So, want to see what climate change looks like for the United States?

Top line is the yearly average high temps of all counties in 48 states, middle one is the average daily temps and the lower line is the low temps.
I can produce charts for any county in the US. Some places have changed more than others but as a whole, it is a whole lot of meah
Later on as soon as I have time, I will scrap the last few months of data for 2020 [NOAA changes the data. Often. Sometimes for many, many years of data] and will bring in the first 4 months of this year.
But that is the biggest difference. Most people who are climate alarmist will base their entire point of view from a web site that they found or a spread sheet of other peoples data. They won't look at the millions and millions of rows of data.
I did
After looking at the data, I can't see what the big deal is.

 

[Flash]

It is true that the climate has always been changing. It might change a degree or so every thousand years. The problem with manmade climate change is that it is happening quickly. Too quickly. If you will look at the southern border of the U.S., you will see refugees from Central American. They are coming to the border because climate change has brought catastrophic crop failure to their region. Other regions are also affected, generally the more warmer regions, and the colder. Temperate areas, not so much.

You may be a little confused about this. They come to the US because we are a welfare state. We give them free stuff and they like it. Has nothing to do with the climate.

Green card holders only get limited social welfare benefits, and those illegally in the US get nearly nothing. It's a bit farfetched to believe that people embark on a 1500 mile walk through mostly desert country to the US border of which only half make it for only a 20% chance of getting into the US, legally or illegally. The driving forces In Guatemala leading to migration are crime, poverty and political corruption. Crime is the big issue for those living in Guatemala; statistically 84% to 87% of the violence is attributed to gang violence and drug trafficking. Parts of both Mexico and Honduras suffer from the same problem.

Most of the filthy welfare programs have stipulations that says you can't ask the welfare queens about their citizenship status. You can thank the Democrats for that idiocy.

Remember when the Congressman called the Worthless Negro a liar during a State of the Union address? It was because the Worthless Negro claimed that Illegals were not eligible for subsidies in that disastrous Obamacare. He was right in that the bill said Illegals were not eligible but he was lying because the bill said that citizen status could not be asked.

Anyway we are getting overrun at the border because we are dumb enough to let them in flood in and give them what they were unable to get in their third world shithole. Has nothing to do with climate.

 

[Kilroy2]

Well there was an ice age at one time and the climate changed.

Nobody disagrees that man's actions causes warming as it has to. Industry and the number of people have grown over the centuries and continues to grow. Man would have to have an affect. The amount of trash that has to be disposed of is one area where man affects the environment. Bury it or dump it in the sea.

The disagreement is what is the end result and to shift the phenomenon onto other reasons.

SVS: NASA Study Links 'Smog' to Arctic Warming

NASA did a study that concluded that the Artic is warming due to smog. It is not known what the impact will be but it does show that man can make a difference and causes changes.

The mountain of evidence is building.

 

[Flopper]

I kept hearing about climate change for years via the media and wanted to know for myself using the data collected by the government to see where it is changing. So I downloaded the daily-grids [county level] that contains daily temps [high, low, average] and perc. Granted, this is just for continental US [48 states - Alaska and Hawaii were omitted by the government in this data set]. Didn't really care about the rest of the world when it comes to climate change- I have no power to vote people in or out in places like China, India,...
So I built a nice relational database MS-SQL, imported the data with SSIS, and now I have over 79 million rows of data in the main table. I have also added other data just for fun, things like population changes from 1969-2017, population from the last census, population estimates on a monthly basis from data that I purchase. Heck, just for fun, I used my relational database and turned in into an OLAP. It is how data nerds play.
So, want to see what climate change looks like for the United States?
View attachment 484559
Top line is the yearly average high temps of all counties in 48 states, middle one is the average daily temps and the lower line is the low temps.
I can produce charts for any county in the US. Some places have changed more than others but as a whole, it is a whole lot of meah
Later on as soon as I have time, I will scrap the last few months of data for 2020 [NOAA changes the data. Often. Sometimes for many, many years of data] and will bring in the first 4 months of this year.
But that is the biggest difference. Most people who are climate alarmist will base their entire point of view from a web site that they found or a spread sheet of other peoples data. They won't look at the millions and millions of rows of data.
I did
After looking at the data, I can't see what the big deal is.

The scale on your graph needs to be in tenths of a degree. The average global temperature has risen 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.90 degrees Celsius) since 1951. This small amount of temperature change might not sound like much but to the ecology of the planet it is very significant, particular since the rate of change is increasing. Just a one degree global change can mean 10 degrees or greater changes in some areas.

Several studies have shown that a 2 degree increase by the end of the century will wipe out our tropical coral reefs which provide a food source for many fish we depend on for food. The reefs also protect the shoreline from storms and erosions. Mediterranean areas would see a 9% deficit in fresh water supply. At an increase of 2 C, that water deficit nearly doubles. Just a few degrees of change can have serious impact on bees, butterfly's, and other insects that pollinate various crops. Soy, wheat, and corn production would disappear in some area of the world and increase in others. The IPCC projection for sea water rise even with a significant reduction in global temperature rise is still 10 to 22 inches. Mass migrations of both people as well as wildlife will certain bring on major social changes. Since efforts to reduce CO2 is having only limited success, we should be making long range plans to deal with the results of climate change. Maybe we should complete Trump's wall and maybe build it higher because the increase in migration from central America to the US is only going to increase as crops fail, seas rise, and political corruption increase.

Unless there are very significant changes made, earth in the 22nd century will see even more devastating changes to the environment. I would guess that at some point, the increases in temperature would slow as civilization moves into a dark age.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You "believe" this? ... climatology isn't a faith-based religion ... at it's core, it's based on hard physics ...

First you need to define "change" ... which in turn depends on how we measure climate ... with all other meteorological parameters exactly the same, does an increase in average temperature from 11.8ºC to 12.1ºC constitute "climate change"? ...

You've asked for a link, and not a citation, so here's what Wikipedia offers:

Köppen climate classification - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Do you accept this scheme as our measure of climate? ...

How is it based on "hard physics" when the last experiment anyone can point to was done in 1850?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I kept hearing about climate change for years via the media and wanted to know for myself using the data collected by the government to see where it is changing. So I downloaded the daily-grids [county level] that contains daily temps [high, low, average] and perc. Granted, this is just for continental US [48 states - Alaska and Hawaii were omitted by the government in this data set]. Didn't really care about the rest of the world when it comes to climate change- I have no power to vote people in or out in places like China, India,...
So I built a nice relational database MS-SQL, imported the data with SSIS, and now I have over 79 million rows of data in the main table. I have also added other data just for fun, things like population changes from 1969-2017, population from the last census, population estimates on a monthly basis from data that I purchase. Heck, just for fun, I used my relational database and turned in into an OLAP. It is how data nerds play.
So, want to see what climate change looks like for the United States?
View attachment 484559
Top line is the yearly average high temps of all counties in 48 states, middle one is the average daily temps and the lower line is the low temps.
I can produce charts for any county in the US. Some places have changed more than others but as a whole, it is a whole lot of meah
Later on as soon as I have time, I will scrap the last few months of data for 2020 [NOAA changes the data. Often. Sometimes for many, many years of data] and will bring in the first 4 months of this year.
But that is the biggest difference. Most people who are climate alarmist will base their entire point of view from a web site that they found or a spread sheet of other peoples data. They won't look at the millions and millions of rows of data.
I did
After looking at the data, I can't see what the big deal is.

The scale on your graph needs to be in tenths of a degree. The average global temperature has risen 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.90 degrees Celsius) since 1951. This small amount of temperature change might not sound like much but to the ecology of the planet it is very significant, particular since the rate of change is increasing. Just a one degree global change can mean 10 degrees or greater changes in some areas.

Several studies have shown that a 2 degree increase by the end of the century will wipe out our tropical coral reefs which provide a food source for many fish we depend on for food. The reefs also protect the shoreline from storms and erosions. Mediterranean areas would see a 9% deficit in fresh water supply. At an increase of 2 C, that water deficit nearly doubles. Just a few degrees of change can have serious impact on bees, butterfly's, and other insects that pollinate various crops. Soy, wheat, and corn production would disappear in some area of the world and increase in others. The IPCC projection for sea water rise even with a significant reduction in global temperature rise is still 10 to 22 inches. Mass migrations of both people as well wildlife will certain bring on major social changes. Since efforts to reduce CO2 is having only limited success, we should be making long plans to deal with the results of climate change. Maybe we should complete Trump's wall and maybe build it higher because the increase in migration from central America to US is only going to increase as crops fail, seas rise, and political corrupt increase.

Unless there are very significant changes made, earth in the 22nd century will see devastating changes to the environment.

There's no doubt that mankind's stupidity is doing great damage, but there is still NOTHING resembling science that shows a wisp of CO2 is doing the damage

 

[Flopper]

You "believe" this? ... climatology isn't a faith-based religion ... at it's core, it's based on hard physics ...

First you need to define "change" ... which in turn depends on how we measure climate ... with all other meteorological parameters exactly the same, does an increase in average temperature from 11.8ºC to 12.1ºC constitute "climate change"? ...

You've asked for a link, and not a citation, so here's what Wikipedia offers:

Köppen climate classification - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Do you accept this scheme as our measure of climate? ...

How is it based on "hard physics" when the last experiment anyone can point to was done in 1850?

There're half dozen experiments that are runs in labs that demonstrate the greenhouse effect. There is also plenty of other evidence of Greenhouse Effect in addition to lab experiments which include studies of greenhouse effect in the atmosphere of the planet Venus, Ice core samples, studies of tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You "believe" this? ... climatology isn't a faith-based religion ... at it's core, it's based on hard physics ...

First you need to define "change" ... which in turn depends on how we measure climate ... with all other meteorological parameters exactly the same, does an increase in average temperature from 11.8ºC to 12.1ºC constitute "climate change"? ...

You've asked for a link, and not a citation, so here's what Wikipedia offers:

Köppen climate classification - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Do you accept this scheme as our measure of climate? ...

How is it based on "hard physics" when the last experiment anyone can point to was done in 1850?

There're half dozen experiments that are runs in labs that demonstrate the greenhouse effect. There is also plenty of other evidence of Greenhouse Effect in addition to lab experiments which include studies of greenhouse effect in the atmosphere of the planet Venus, Ice core samples, studies of tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks.

The ice core sample provide a side by side dataset spanning several hundred thousand years showing CO2 LAGGING temperature on both the increase and decrease. Did CO2 undergo some mystical transformation 120 years ago that now causes it to drive temperature?????

 

[badbob85037]

View attachment 482729

The climate is changing all the time it's just that most of the dissenters, such as myself, don't buy into the hysterical dementia of many progressive activists and the policies they want to inflict on everyone.

*****SMILE*****

It all depends on who you are talking to Algore if you talked to him you drowned 11 years ago and the world is under water If you just slapped him around and laughed at him your head is on right.

 

[ReinyDays]

How is it based on "hard physics" when the last experiment anyone can point to was done in 1850?

You're not aware the NWS sends up dozens of weather balloons every day? ... they record hourly reports at thousands of airports across the world? ...

George Stokes received his first professorship in 1851 ... his adaptation of Claude-Louis Navier's work came sometime after that ... it's fair to say the field of Fluid Dynamics came after that time ... perhaps 1850 is the limit to your understanding of physics ... because there's been almost all the experimentation in meteorology since that date ...

Some of the largest computers in the world are solely adapted to experiments with fluids ...

 

[sartre play]

weather is easy to understand, Climate change is not. hence the confusion?

 

[ReinyDays]

The scale on your graph needs to be in tenths of a degree. The average global temperature has risen 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.90 degrees Celsius) since 1951. This small amount of temperature change might not sound like much but to the ecology of the planet it is very significant, particular since the rate of change is increasing. Just a one degree global change can mean 10 degrees or greater changes in some areas.

Several studies have shown that a 2 degree increase by the end of the century will wipe out our tropical coral reefs which provide a food source for many fish we depend on for food. The reefs also protect the shoreline from storms and erosions. Mediterranean areas would see a 9% deficit in fresh water supply. At an increase of 2 C, that water deficit nearly doubles. Just a few degrees of change can have serious impact on bees, butterfly's, and other insects that pollinate various crops. Soy, wheat, and corn production would disappear in some area of the world and increase in others. The IPCC projection for sea water rise even with a significant reduction in global temperature rise is still 10 to 22 inches. Mass migrations of both people as well as wildlife will certain bring on major social changes. Since efforts to reduce CO2 is having only limited success, we should be making long range plans to deal with the results of climate change. Maybe we should complete Trump's wall and maybe build it higher because the increase in migration from central America to the US is only going to increase as crops fail, seas rise, and political corruption increase.

Unless there are very significant changes made, earth in the 22nd century will see even more devastating changes to the environment. I would guess that at some point, the increases in temperature would slow as civilization moves into a dark age.

This is wrong on so many levels ... you need to stop getting your information from the National Inquirer ...

We measure temperatures to the nearest whole degree ... we can calculate an average to a higher precision, but how do we verify? ... I'm sorry, we can "average out" a lot of factors, but not instrumentation errors ... my thermometer says 12ºC, if this goes up 0.2ºC, then my thermometer still says 12ºC ... your claim cannot be measured in the field, and thus is strictly speculative ...

Global warming is a great excuse so we don't have to look at human pollution killing the coral reefs ... divers pissing in the water, oils and pheromones oozing from our skin ... great gyres of plastic, overfishing, the list goes on ...

Warmer means wetter ... c'mon man ... double the water deficit is caused by double the population ... and global warming correlates to population better than CO2 concentrations ...

22 inches of sea level rise? ... that doesn't even endanger Miami International Airport ... it only took us 30 years to build 40,000 miles of interstate freeways, are you saying we can't build 20,000 miles of three foot berm in 100 years? ... try using common sense, and the laws of nature ...

The question is why didn't all these disasters occur back when global temperatures were 4ºC higher at the beginning of the Holocene ... instead we find the agricultural revolution, humans founding permanent settlements, the first beer being brewed and the beginning of civilization ... with much warmer temperatures ... you'd have us cut CO2 emissions in half, which means only half the food can be transported from farm to cities ... why on Earth do you think this is better than a tiny increase in temperatures? ...

 

[ReinyDays]

weather is easy to understand ...

No, weather is NOT easy to understand ... if it was, forecasts would be a hell of a lot better ...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How is it based on "hard physics" when the last experiment anyone can point to was done in 1850?

You're not aware the NWS sends up dozens of weather balloons every day? ... they record hourly reports at thousands of airports across the world? ...

George Stokes received his first professorship in 1851 ... his adaptation of Claude-Louis Navier's work came sometime after that ... it's fair to say the field of Fluid Dynamics came after that time ... perhaps 1850 is the limit to your understanding of physics ... because there's been almost all the experimentation in meteorology since that date ...

Some of the largest computers in the world are solely adapted to experiments with fluids ...

Yawn.

Do you have one single repeatable experiment that shows the temperature increase in Earth-like atmosphere when CO2 is raised from 280PPM to 400? To me, that's science

 

[turbofish]

The scale on your graph needs to be in tenths of a degree. The average global temperature has risen 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.90 degrees Celsius) since 1951. This small amount of temperature change might not sound like much but to the ecology of the planet it is very significant, particular since the rate of change is increasing. Just a one degree global change can mean 10 degrees or greater changes in some areas.

You have been told that the average global temperature has risen 1.62 F since 1951. You didn't do the research, you didn't pull in millions and millions rows of data and analyze it yourself.
You just took someone's word for it.
Granted, by me downloading it from NOAA, I in a way am taking someone's word for it but the results for the continental US don't show the same story that you are being feed and do not question. I question
Facts = 2019 we were perfectly average from 1951-2019. 2020 was slightly above average and I will imagine that 2021 will be slightly below average thanks to a much colder start to the year.

I do have the entire world of data stored in a database but to be honest, that is some really, really messy data and it started to remind me too much of work. Weather stations that would report crazy numbers, close up, open without any info like location, skip years for one location and then pop up again. The most weather stations in the world are located in the US.

I guess the question that I had those many years ago "Just where is this 'global' warming actually happening" is still a question but as long as the country that I live in isn't reporting this wacky global warming, I really can't care about it. Why worry about something that is happening in some unknown part of the world that I don't have the ability to vote my will?

Here is what 'climate change' looks like for my county [Benton county AR] from 1951 - 2020.

And here is a PowerBI that I made out of it last year - this way you can play with the results as well

 

[2aguy]

I for one believe that it is. I've believed this for a long time, but I found that a documentary called "An Inconvenient Truth", which features for Vice President Al Gore prominently, was very persuasive. I know there are those who believe that the Climate isn't changing as well, including some people like James Corbett, who I respect immensely for his work on other subjects, but we simply don't agree when it comes to climate. Recently, a poster in another thread of mine expressed his belief that the climate isn't changing so I thought it might be good to create this thread and see where it goes. I ask that people support any assertions that haven't already been made by another poster with at least one link.

The climate changes all the time...where I am sitting there used to be mile high glaciers, and man had nothing to do with melting them......

The man made climate change hoax is nothing more than a power grab.....

 

[San Souci]

I for one believe that it is. I've believed this for a long time, but I found that a documentary called "An Inconvenient Truth", which features for Vice President Al Gore prominently, was very persuasive. I know there are those who believe that the Climate isn't changing as well, including some people like James Corbett, who I respect immensely for his work on other subjects, but we simply don't agree when it comes to climate. Recently, a poster in another thread of mine expressed his belief that the climate isn't changing so I thought it might be good to create this thread and see where it goes. I ask that people support any assertions that haven't already been made by another poster with at least one link.

Yes, the climate is changing and there's a ton of evidence to support the claim. Controversy is not about it changing but what if anything can be done given the huge impact of the needed changes on world economies and people's live. One can argue that doing nothing will have much greater impact in the long run. However, humans react to long term disasters, not by preventive measures and planning but rather adapting as disaster occur.

Ever heard of Bikini Atoll?

 

[ReinyDays]

Do you have one single repeatable experiment that shows the temperature increase in Earth-like atmosphere when CO2 is raised from 280PPM to 400? To me, that's science

Ah ... you're talking about a specific experiment ... your post #46 implies all of climatology ... "How is it based on "hard physics" when the last experiment anyone can point to was done in 1850?" ... and strictly speaking, your refinement here is an experiment in radiative physics ... there's a thread pinned to the top of this forum that explains why radiative physics is "hard physics" ... you might want to review those posts before you claim physics isn't physics ...

Otherwise ... enjoy:
Seim, Olsen; "The Influence of IR Absorption and Backscatter Radiation from CO2 on Air Temperature during Heating in a Simulated Earth/Atmosphere Experiment"; Atmosphere and Climate Science; 2020

 

[Stryder50]

I for one believe that it is. I've believed this for a long time, but I found that a documentary called "An Inconvenient Truth", which features for Vice President Al Gore prominently, was very persuasive. I know there are those who believe that the Climate isn't changing as well, including some people like James Corbett, who I respect immensely for his work on other subjects, but we simply don't agree when it comes to climate. Recently, a poster in another thread of mine expressed his belief that the climate isn't changing so I thought it might be good to create this thread and see where it goes. I ask that people support any assertions that haven't already been made by another poster with at least one link.

Not by people.It has been changing for 5 Billion years.

Actually, more closer to about 4-4.5 billion years.
But hey, who's counting or trying to be near precise ???