Thread: could use some global warming right now

Originally Posted by JMS

Please enlighten me.

You asked.

Weather | Define Weather at Dictionary.com
Climate | Define Climate at Dictionary.com
NASA - What's the Difference Between Weather and Climate?

2010 was the warmest year recorded over the last 131 years, as of the end of November. I'm sure that once the December data is factored in there won't be much change. Source:
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | November 2010

EDIT: Doh -- Utopian beat me to the NASA link.

I'm not buying that anyone knew what the mean global temperature was 131 years ago or even yesterday without some kind of magic global fever / weather change / climate is all screwy thermometer

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

I'm not buying that anyone knew what the mean global temperature was 131 years ago or even yesterday without some kind of magic global fever / weather change / climate is all screwy thermometer

I'm not buying that whole temperature thing! It's based on statistics and we all know where that ranks in the gradation of lies.
Plus if a thermometer can even measure the temperature of something it's the temperature of itself. Then these scientists want you to take on FAITH that that temperature is somehow the same as the temperature of something else.

As the good book says not one atom looses it's electron without the knowledge and the blessing of the Designer, and even if one particle wandereth away He leaveth the other 10^80 and correcteth the path integral of the lost one, so that all can then rejoice and have a big feast!!!

What do atoms feast on?

Originally Posted by HNSB

What do atoms feast on?

I want to say 'oms', hence their name ate-oms!

Om: Hindu for the absolute, the incomprehensible.

Eating oms... That's quite a feast indeed!

the warmest in 131 years, well, i have to wonder, if you consider that the planet had an ice age many many eons ago, wouldnt it take a considerable amount of time to warm up, and if so, i wouldnt expect that anything we could say or do for that matter would slow that progression, or even stop it, let alone reverse it.

Knowing there are frustrated, liberal, physics students resorting to hoglahoo tactics gives me great pleasure

1,372 climate researchers were analyzed based on their citations and publications.

98% of those in the study support the belief in anthropogenic climate change.

The 2% who didn't support the belief were found to have substantially less expertise in the area than their counterparts.

The study basically says that almost all experts agree, and the few who disagree aren't really experts comparatively. Source, from the National Academy of Sciences:
Expert credibility in climate change -- PNAS

Someone mentioned upthread that there was growing evidence against global warming. I'd sure love to see it.

From the Internet in 1615:
"99% of scientists support the belief in geocentricism. That Galileo guy is less expert than the other experts anyhow."

(or was it Copernicus? I was never good with history)