this year begins with no cooling....hotest first five months on record

[thereisnospoon]

"We proved positive"?.....What the fuck does that mean? and who is "we"?

The scientists, of course.

Being a denier, I understand why you have no familiarity with the science. You only know what your cult sees fit to tell you.

No./..YOU are the one wetting your panties over this alleged man made climate change thingie. This is YOUR issue. All you are doing is offering lip service. You screech about climate change, yet you are unwilling to do anything about it.. That makes you a hypocrite. You cannot have it both ways.

We're not demanding anyone live in caves. That's only you. All that hysteria comes from you and your side. It's hard to take you seriously, when you're the one screaming that everyone has to give up technology. You don't see anyone here on the rational side screaming such nonsense.

hey, I am all for new energy technology. But under these conditions.
1. it must be as or more efficient that fossil fuels
2. must be as readily available as our current supply..
3. must carry a consumer price no greater than or even less than our current sources.
4. must deliver the same or greater performance.
5. must allow reap the same or greater economic benefit to the users. That would be US.....
Find a source( that you said "we are taking steps to have in place") that meets the above conditions and you have another person on your side.

Some of those standards are senseless feelgood nonsense. What is "deliver the same performance" or "be as efficient" supposed to even mean?

As for the rest of the standards, solar and wind already meet those standards. Which would explain the growth in those sectors.

Your standards also have the flaw of not planning for the future. Intelligent people plan for the future. Fossil fuels are finite, so it is intelligent to plan for the increased cost and decreased availability of fossil fuels. It is also intelligent to take into account the external costs of pollution caused by fossil fuels, as not doing so is essentially subsidizing them.

You exhibit the definition of insanity. You state the same thing over and over expecting someone to believe you...
Performance....As in deliver the same performance as gasoline.....Efficiency..As in deliver the same or better fuel economy as gasoline.
No..Solar and wind do not. The start up costs are such that non one who for example replaces their existing heating/electrical with solar will ever recoup the expense to the point where the energy will be free of out of pocket expense. And you ignore the maintenance costs. If a solar system breaks down, the cost to repair is prohibitive.
As for wind farms...The friggin Kennedy's, the alleged champions of all things left wing were able to stop a wind farm off the coast of Cape Cod....Why? Because the turbines would ruin their "yachting" area....
And finally, find me a mode of transportation that operates on wind or solar power.......
All of this screaming about fossil fuels and not a single viable solution has been developed.
And none of this has a thing to do with the climate....
Look, we can with a few modifications run personal autos on methanol....People fear this. They think it's explosive.
We could use natural gas to power autos. That's not happening for the same reasons. The uninformed, fear it.
Hydrogen is another alternative.....The federal government is not interested. Bio diesel is another fuel we could be using.....Who knows why this is being blocked.
Use of alternative fuels will not be part of some instant gratification process. Sit tight. It's coming. Just not in our lifetimes.

 

[thereisnospoon]

"We proved positive"?.....What the fuck does that mean? and who is "we"?

The scientists, of course.

Being a denier, I understand why you have no familiarity with the science. You only know what your cult sees fit to tell you.

No./..YOU are the one wetting your panties over this alleged man made climate change thingie. This is YOUR issue. All you are doing is offering lip service. You screech about climate change, yet you are unwilling to do anything about it.. That makes you a hypocrite. You cannot have it both ways.

We're not demanding anyone live in caves. That's only you. All that hysteria comes from you and your side. It's hard to take you seriously, when you're the one screaming that everyone has to give up technology. You don't see anyone here on the rational side screaming such nonsense.

hey, I am all for new energy technology. But under these conditions.
1. it must be as or more efficient that fossil fuels
2. must be as readily available as our current supply..
3. must carry a consumer price no greater than or even less than our current sources.
4. must deliver the same or greater performance.
5. must allow reap the same or greater economic benefit to the users. That would be US.....
Find a source( that you said "we are taking steps to have in place") that meets the above conditions and you have another person on your side.

Some of those standards are senseless feelgood nonsense. What is "deliver the same performance" or "be as efficient" supposed to even mean?

As for the rest of the standards, solar and wind already meet those standards. Which would explain the growth in those sectors.

Your standards also have the flaw of not planning for the future. Intelligent people plan for the future. Fossil fuels are finite, so it is intelligent to plan for the increased cost and decreased availability of fossil fuels. It is also intelligent to take into account the external costs of pollution caused by fossil fuels, as not doing so is essentially subsidizing them.

Oh...You can keep hugging the trees all you like. Label those who dare to oppose your point of view.
Its not going to change a thing,

 

[Kaleokualoha]

The year 2015 is set to be a record-breaker, according to NASA’s latest global temperature data. This year’s temperature is 0.71°C (1.3°F) above the long-term average, and the first five months have been the hottest ever recorded.

NASA’s annual temperatures show a slight variation, where some years are cooler than others, but as John Abraham for The Guardian reports, “2015 is so far this year, simply off the chart.” Abraham suggests that the recent record-breaking temperatures put global warming critics in a difficult position—the evidence is simply not on their side. Temperatures for the last 12 months are at record levels. The idea that the rate of global warming is slowing down or ‘paused’ has been thoroughly refuted. Abraham points out that when surface temperatures and ocean heat content are combined, there is a clear pattern of warming increasing.

First Five Months Of 2015 Were The Hottest Ever Recorded IFLScience

What was the average temperture for the year 1223? 1146? 1083? 503? 202? 1368? The earth is not 130 years old, you crazy guy.

2014 was the hottest year ON RECORD, which means since records began. Temperatures from previous centuries were not reliably recorded.

2015 has already started off with record temperatures: " NASAreportedWednesday that this was the hottest four-month start (January to April) of any year on record. This was also the second-warmest April on record in NASA’s dataset." - You Just Lived Through The Earth s Hottest January-April Since We Started Keeping Records ThinkProgress

2014 was officially the warmest year on record worldwide, although not for the United States itself:

"Of the large inhabited land areas, only the eastern half of the United States recorded below-average temperatures in 2014, a sort of mirror image of the unusual heat in the West. Some experts think the stuck-in-place weather pattern that produced those extremes in the United States is itself an indirect consequence of the release of greenhouse gases, though that is not proven."

-------

The contiguous United States set its temperature record in 2012. But, mainly because of the unusual chill in the East last year, 2014 was only the 34th warmest year on record for the lower 48 states.
[END QUOTE http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/17/science/earth/2014-was-hottest-year-on-record-surpassing-2010.html ]

 

[EverCurious]

"Incidentally, the Sporer, Maunder, and Dalton minima coincide with the colder periods of the Little Ice Age, which lasted from about 1450 to 1820. More recently it was discovered that the sunspot number during 1861-1989 shows a remarkable parallelism with the simultaneous variation in northern hemisphere mean temperatures (2). There is an even better correlation with the length of the solar cycle, between years of the highest numbers of sunspots. For example, the temperature anomaly was - 0.4 K in 1890 when the cycle was 11.7 years, but + 0.25 K in 1989 when the cycle was 9.8 years. Some critics of the theory of man-induced global warming have seized on this discovery to criticize the greenhouse gas theory.

All this evokes the important question of how sunspots affect the Earth's climate. To answer this question, we need to know how total solar irradiance received by the Earth is affected by sunspot activity.

Intuitively one may assume the that total solar irradiance would decrease as the number of (optically dark) sunspots increased. However direct satellite measurements of irradiance have shown just the opposite to be the case. This means that more sunspots deliver more energy to the atmosphere, so that global temperatures should rise.

According to current theory, sunspots occur in pairs as magnetic disturbances in the convective plasma near the Sun's surface. Magnetic field lines emerge from one sunspot and re-enter at the other spot. Also, there are more sunspots during periods of increased magnetic activity. At that time more highly charged particles are emitted from the solar surface, and the Sun emits more UV and visible radiation. Direct measurements are uncertain, but estimates are that the Sun's radiant energy varies by up to 0.2% between the extremes of a sunspot cycle. Polar auroras are magnificent in years with numerous sunspots, and the �aurora activity� (AA) index varies in phase with the number of sunspots. Auroras are faint and rare when the Sun is magnetically quiescent, as during the Maunder minimum.

The periodicity of the sunspot number, and hence that of the circulation in the solar plasma, relates to the rotation of the Sun about the centre of gravity of whole solar system, taking 11.1 years on average. Sometimes the Sun is up to a million kilometres from that centre, and sometimes it more or less coincides, leading to different conditions of turbulence within the photosphere. The transition from one condition to the other affects the number of sunspots.

Not only does the increased brightness of the Sun tend to warm the Earth, but also the solar wind (a stream of highly energetic charged particles) shields the atmosphere from cosmic rays, which produce 14C. So there is more 14C when the Sun is magnetically quiescent. This explains why 14C samples from independently dated material are used as a way of inferring the Sun's magnetic history.

Recent research (3) indicates that the combined effects of sunspot-induced changes in solar irradiance and increases in atmospheric greenhouse gases offer the best explanation yet for the observed rise in average global temperature over the last century. Using a global climate model based on energy conservation, Lane et al (3) constructed a profile of atmospheric climate "forcing" due to combined changes in solar irradiance and emissions of greenhouse gases between 1880 and 1993. They found that the temperature variations predicted by their model accounted for up to 92% of the temperature changes actually observed over the period -- an excellent match for that period. Their results also suggest that the sensitivity of climate to the effects of solar irradiance is about 27% higher than its sensitivity to forcing by greenhouse gases." ~ Sunspots and climate

+

"2014 : maximum year for solar cycle 24

Now that we completed the definitive sunspot numbers for 2014, we can conclude that the maximum of solar cycle 24 was reached in April 2014, with a maximum of the 13-month smoothed sunspot number at 81.8. Since then, solar activity has steadily declined (monthly mean sunspot number now around 40), but remained above 70 over many months, probably indicating that the annual mean for 2014 will also mark a yearly maximum at 78.9. Those values exceed the first peak of activity in cycle 24, which occurred in February 2012 but was short and only reached 66.9.

Therefore, cycle 24 proves to be 30% weaker than the previous solar cycle, which reached 119.7 in July 2000, and thus belongs to the category of moderate cycles, like cycles 12 to 15, which were the norm in the late 19th and early 20th century. Compared to strong cycles, such cycles typically feature a broader maximum, with a 3-year plateau on top of which two or more surges of activity can produce sharp peaks of similar height (see graphic).

In cycle 24, we indeed observed such a scenario, with two peaks separated by a particularly long plateau, lasting 18 months from early 2012 to mid-2013 (see graphic). Looking at the hemispheric numbers, we can see that the first peak was actually due to a maximum in the Northern hemisphere in November 2011, while the broader 2014 peak was due to the combination of a maximum in the Southern hemisphere in early 2014 and a slight reversal of the activity decline in the Northern hemisphere. The Southern hemisphere has thus been lagging the Southern hemisphere by about 26 months. This lag isn't new and was already present since cycle 20, i.e. over the last 45 years (see graphic).

As this late maximum comes more than 5 years after the preceding minimum in December 2008, cycle 24 must have now entered its long declining phase, as none of the past observed cycles had longer delays between minimum and maximum. Therefore, the average solar activity should progressively decrease towards a minimum around 2020. However, over the next 2 or 3 years, we can still expect other strong but brief peaks of activity caused by the appearance of a few big complex groups, a typical feature of the late phase of solar cycles.

Cycle 24 did not say its last word !" ~ 2014 maximum year for solar cycle 24 SILSO

==

"--Speaking of 2014, the year has pulled into a 3-way tie with 1998 and 2010 for warmest on record through September despite a cooler start. Both 1998 and 2010 experienced a decreasing trend in global (land/ocean) temperature anomalies during the final three months of those years as La Nina conditions were getting underway. As we have stated, this year we are likely trending toward El Nino for the last two months of the year, which would argue against a significant decrease in temperature anomalies for Oct, Nov and Dec 2014 and favor a new annual record warmest year." ~2014 Global Temperatures in Perspective - Climate Change Weather Blog

 

[Wyatt earp]

The year 2015 is set to be a record-breaker, according to NASA’s latest global temperature data. This year’s temperature is 0.71°C (1.3°F) above the long-term average, and the first five months have been the hottest ever recorded.

NASA’s annual temperatures show a slight variation, where some years are cooler than others, but as John Abraham for The Guardian reports, “2015 is so far this year, simply off the chart.” Abraham suggests that the recent record-breaking temperatures put global warming critics in a difficult position—the evidence is simply not on their side. Temperatures for the last 12 months are at record levels. The idea that the rate of global warming is slowing down or ‘paused’ has been thoroughly refuted. Abraham points out that when surface temperatures and ocean heat content are combined, there is a clear pattern of warming increasing.

First Five Months Of 2015 Were The Hottest Ever Recorded IFLScience

What was the average temperture for the year 1223? 1146? 1083? 503? 202? 1368? The earth is not 130 years old, you crazy guy.

2014 was the hottest year ON RECORD, which means since records began. Temperatures from previous centuries were not reliably recorded.

2015 has already started off with record temperatures: " NASAreportedWednesday that this was the hottest four-month start (January to April) of any year on record. This was also the second-warmest April on record in NASA’s dataset." - You Just Lived Through The Earth s Hottest January-April Since We Started Keeping Records ThinkProgress

2014 was officially the warmest year on record worldwide, although not for the United States itself:

"Of the large inhabited land areas, only the eastern half of the United States recorded below-average temperatures in 2014, a sort of mirror image of the unusual heat in the West. Some experts think the stuck-in-place weather pattern that produced those extremes in the United States is itself an indirect consequence of the release of greenhouse gases, though that is not proven."

-------

The contiguous United States set its temperature record in 2012. But, mainly because of the unusual chill in the East last year, 2014 was only the 34th warmest year on record for the lower 48 states.
[END QUOTE http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/17/science/earth/2014-was-hottest-year-on-record-surpassing-2010.html ]

hyperbole, trying to confuse the ignorant folks, that's the game you are trying to play.

Sorry pal the 130 year old earth don't work on here, go play on a gym set or something.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The year 2015 is set to be a record-breaker, according to NASA’s latest global temperature data. This year’s temperature is 0.71°C (1.3°F) above the long-term average, and the first five months have been the hottest ever recorded.

NASA’s annual temperatures show a slight variation, where some years are cooler than others, but as John Abraham for The Guardian reports, “2015 is so far this year, simply off the chart.” Abraham suggests that the recent record-breaking temperatures put global warming critics in a difficult position—the evidence is simply not on their side. Temperatures for the last 12 months are at record levels. The idea that the rate of global warming is slowing down or ‘paused’ has been thoroughly refuted. Abraham points out that when surface temperatures and ocean heat content are combined, there is a clear pattern of warming increasing.

First Five Months Of 2015 Were The Hottest Ever Recorded IFLScience

What was the average temperture for the year 1223? 1146? 1083? 503? 202? 1368? The earth is not 130 years old, you crazy guy.

2014 was the hottest year ON RECORD, which means since records began. Temperatures from previous centuries were not reliably recorded.

2015 has already started off with record temperatures: " NASAreportedWednesday that this was the hottest four-month start (January to April) of any year on record. This was also the second-warmest April on record in NASA’s dataset." - You Just Lived Through The Earth s Hottest January-April Since We Started Keeping Records ThinkProgress

2014 was officially the warmest year on record worldwide, although not for the United States itself:

"Of the large inhabited land areas, only the eastern half of the United States recorded below-average temperatures in 2014, a sort of mirror image of the unusual heat in the West. Some experts think the stuck-in-place weather pattern that produced those extremes in the United States is itself an indirect consequence of the release of greenhouse gases, though that is not proven."

-------

The contiguous United States set its temperature record in 2012. But, mainly because of the unusual chill in the East last year, 2014 was only the 34th warmest year on record for the lower 48 states.
[END QUOTE http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/17/science/earth/2014-was-hottest-year-on-record-surpassing-2010.html ]

Your point?

 

[Uncensored2008]

2014 was the hottest year ON RECORD, which means since records began. Temperatures from previous centuries were not reliably recorded.

2015 has already started off with record temperatures: " NASAreportedWednesday that this was the hottest four-month start (January to April) of any year on record. This was also the second-warmest April on record in NASA’s dataset." - You Just Lived Through The Earth s Hottest January-April Since We Started Keeping Records ThinkProgress

2014 was officially the warmest year on record worldwide, although not for the United States itself:

Hottest year evah Evah EVAH..

Funny how fabricating past temperatures does that.

Your cult is based on fraud - and peddled to the stupid, those desperate to be engaged in the end of the world. Your cult is just Jonestown pt. 2.