Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

It's very difficult to attribute local events to a global phenomenon,

It is only difficult because people tend to view phenomena and other things in isolation from the broader networks of causes that contribute to them.

The human mind gets overwhelmed with complexity, so it favors simplified models that seem clearer than the messiness of analyzing reality.

The by-product of simplifying things by modeling them in isolation is that we are enabled to imagine that reality exists as collection of unconnected artifacts, like products in a store or artifacts in a museum.

We find it difficult to think about each artifact/product as being part of a larger supply-chain its connected to.

Hurricanes, tornadoes, and other weather events are the same. We tend to think of them as artifacts that pop into and out of existence from nowhere, but they are just visible manifestations of larger interactions between hot and cold air masses and the water vapor/humidity they carry.

Likewise, hot and cold air masses only exist because air has been heated and cooled in various ways, lifting it up against the force of gravity and then pulling/pushing it down again.

The sun is what heats everything up, but the tilt of the Earth changes the angle of sunlight and the length of the day/night cycle.

Greenhouse gases blanket heat and their presence and behavior is governed by various factors.

It's all very complex to analyze, but the simple fact is that energy is never created or destroyed, so the only question is where it goes and how that affects the functioning of the systems it moves through.

0 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

This statement does not challenge the scientific consensus that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is leading to higher global temperatures.

First I have to remind myself that I am talking with someone who refers to the NOAA as Neanderthals spouting pseudo-science.

Anyway, you say that the scientific consensus is not challenged by the lack of data concerning the issue. Think about that for a moment or two.

Quote:

Premature" conclusions don't rule out subsequent findings which could confirm the original hypothesis — or not.

Sure. As has been stated, the historical Atlantic hurricane frequency record does not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced long-term increase. I guess you're asking me to not rule out that something might come up in the future to help make the case that can't be made today. Sure.

Quote:

This statement does not challenge the scientific consensus that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is leading to higher global temperatures.

In January 2005, NOAA began recording temperatures at its newly built U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN). USCRN includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states. NOAA selected locations that were far away from urban and land-development impacts that might artificially taint temperature readings.

The USCRN has eliminated the need to rely on, and adjust the data from, outdated temperature stations. Strikingly, as shown in the graph below, USCRN temperature stations show no warming since 2005 when the network went online.

Graph can be seen at this link:

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2019/08/23/climate_alarmists_foiled_no_us_warming_since_2005.html

2 Replies

@Glennn,

First I have to remind myself that I am talking with someone who quotes unsourced.

But then I ask again for the source from that quoted (sic!) October 2019 NOAA statement

Glennn wrote:

Just last month, NOAA issued this statement:

“In the Atlantic, it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human activities–and particularly GHGs that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on hurricane activity...In short, the historical Atlantic hurricane frequency record does not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced long-term increase.”

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Updated statement Aug 2019 from NOAA GFDL:

“In the Atlantic, it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human activities–and particularly GHGs that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on hurricane activity”
__________________________________________________________________________

What are you having a problem with?

2 Replies

@Glennn,

Read your cites. They are talking about incidence not intensity.more energy more intensity not necessarily more of tjem. That's mb!lies conteontion. And I might add except for the strongest elections mind on record in 1997 98 the warmest years on record have all been since 2000. With three record setter amongst even those in the last four years. It doesn't go up much year to year or even over @20 years but moved fifty or sixty it's more obvious. And it is going up.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

What are you having a problem with?

Did I write that I had one? I thought, my question was different.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

I guess Glenn's quote is 20 years old or so (IF it is accurately quoted from NOAA, which remains yo be seen). I remember that there was a time when US scientists had not yet managed to prove the connection between GW and huricanes from a statistical pov.

1 Reply

Scientists call for ‘gradually reduced’ population to fight climate change

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

First I have to remind myself that I am talking with someone who refers to the NOAA as Neanderthals spouting pseudo-science.

No, my comment was directed at the AFA:

I wrote:

...some off-the-wall site staffed with Neanderthals spouting an anti-environmental line of pseudo-science...

2 Replies

@hightor,

The Brown to Green Report 2019, now in its fifth year, takes stock of the performance of G20 countries on climate change adaptation and mitigation across key sectors, and in the finance sector.

Some 14 non-governmental groups, thinktanks and research institutes compile the report, funded by the World Bank, the US-based ClimateWorks Foundation and Germany’s environment ministry.

G20 Brown to Green Report 2019

Germany is one of the worst countries:
• according to the current report, Germany causes around 50 percent more CO2 emissions for heating and cooling houses than the EU average. Compared to the other G20 countries, emissions are even twice as high. Although the energy standards for new buildings are good, they must be tightened even further to meet the Paris climate targets.
• the transport sector is also once again attracting negative attention: here too, per capita emissions in Germany are well above the G20 average: 1.99 tonnes of CO2 without aviation compared with 1.13 tonnes.

According to the report, not a single G20 country is on course for the 1.5-degree target. Scientists and environmentalists nevertheless have an optimistic message: around half of the G20, including the EU, are likely to overachieve their own climate targets. This would allow states to present new, more ambitious targets in 2020, as envisaged in the Paris Climate Change Accord.
However, the findings also show how inadequate the previous targets have been: in the Paris Agreement, almost all countries in the world undertook to limit the global rise in temperature to well below two degrees compared with the pre-industrial era, if possible to 1.5 degrees.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

The Paris Agreement is a very soft thing, non biding at the extreme. Each country sets out its own targets for instance, officially called nationally determined contributions. This was done to get the broadest possible agreement, as a more stringent deal would have been rejected by some states.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

They are talking about incidence not intensity.

From your link:

Tropical cyclone intensities globally will likely increase on average (by 1 to 10% according to model projections for a 2 degree Celsius global warming). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size. Storm size responses to anthropogenic warming are uncertain.

The global proportion of tropical cyclones that reach very intense (Category 4 and 5) levels will likely increase due to anthropogenic warming over the 21st century. There is less confidence in future projections of the global number of Category 4 and 5 storms, since most modeling studies project a decrease (or little change) in the global frequency of all tropical cyclones combined.
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Do you understand what "future projections" means?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

I guess Glenn's quote is 20 years old

Global Warming and Hurricanes
An Overview of Current Research Results
Last Revised: Aug. 15, 2019

Tropical cyclone intensities globally will likely increase on average (by 1 to 10% according to model projections for a 2 degree Celsius global warming). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size. Storm size responses to anthropogenic warming are uncertain.

The global proportion of tropical cyclones that reach very intense (Category 4 and 5) levels will likely increase due to anthropogenic warming over the 21st century. There is less confidence in future projections of the global number of Category 4 and 5 storms, since most modeling studies project a decrease (or little change) in the global frequency of all tropical cyclones combined.

3 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

...some off-the-wall site staffed with Neanderthals spouting an anti-environmental line of pseudo-science...

As far as the connection between (mythical) global warming and hurricane frequency and intensity, NOAA says climate change hysterics are out of luck. Just last month, NOAA issued this statement:

“In the Atlantic, it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human activities–and particularly GHGs that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on hurricane activity...In short, the historical Atlantic hurricane frequency record does not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced long-term increase.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

That is what I posted from that site. What is quoted is from the NOAA. You had nothing to say about what was quoted, and so you decided to condemn the messenger.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Quote:

You had nothing to say about what was quoted, and so you decided to condemn the messenger.

You're goddamned right I decided to condemn the messenger. The quoted material from the NOAA is the only worthwhile text in the whole article. The rest of it is just agit-prop and denialism.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
I guess Glenn's quote is 20 years old

Global Warming and Hurricanes
An Overview of Current Research Results
Last Revised: Aug. 15, 2019

Dear Glenn!
That was the link I'd provided AND sourced.
Not yours.

You wrote:

Just last month, NOAA issued this statement: ....

0 Replies

@Glennn,

dp you understand frequency is not intensity?

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Storms or thunderstorms have been poorly observed in many parts of the world. Even in developed countries there are closed data series on extratropical storms only since about 1950 - very little for an interpretation. Research on tropical storms is even more demanding. Because here observation methods - e.g. via satellites - have changed considerably.

But global warming makes storms stronger, more intensive.

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration - Office of Oceanic & Atmospheric Research wrote:

A review of existing studies, including the ones cited above, lead us to conclude that: it is likely that greenhouse warming will cause hurricanes in the coming century to be more intense globally and have higher rainfall rates than present-day hurricanes.

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

Tropical cyclone intensities globally will likely increase on average (by 1 to 10% according to model projections for a 2 degree Celsius global warming). This change would imply an even larger percentage increase in the destructive potential per storm, assuming no reduction in storm size. Storm size responses to anthropogenic warming are uncertain.

All these predictions are speculation based on the valid knowledge that additional heat-energy has no choice but to manifest itself in some way or other as greenhouse gases build up and blanket more heat.

The Earth is very complex, though, so you could have a year where a lot of heat builds up and causes intense weather occurrences, but then the ocean absorbs the heat and warms a tiny fraction, which builds up over time in terms of the base evaporation levels rising off the oceans.

Think about it like a large pot of water and you are heating it by blowing a heat gun at the surface of the water. The heat from the heat gun is going to cause heating of the surface water in the pot and the air above it; and some of that heat is going to conduct down into the larger mass of water in the pot, which is going to warm slower.

If the oceans are gradually warming, they become a huge storehouse for heat-energy, which supports more evaporation of water vapor, which is a greenhouse gas. The oceans may be heating very gradually because of their massive volume, but they are also going to cool equally gradually when we finally commit to reversing the rising CO2/warming trend and restoring natural climate.

0 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

You're goddamned right I decided to condemn the messenger. The quoted material from the NOAA is the only worthwhile text in the whole article. The rest of it is just agit-prop and denialism.

Yeah, and the quote from the NOAA supports the text. You were supposed to respond to the content of the quote, and not to where it was found. You had a bad reaction.

Here's the quote:

“In the Atlantic, it is premature to conclude with high confidence that human activities–and particularly GHGs that cause global warming–have already had a detectable impact on hurricane activity...In short, the historical Atlantic hurricane frequency record does not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced long-term increase.”

1 Reply

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know