2015 sets new record for warming

[quade 4]

brenthutch

More food, fewer weather related deaths, more polar bears, fewer tornados, fewer hurricanes, are all documented facts not supposition.

Are they?

Can you please show me the global "fewer weather related deaths" evidence. I think you're on especially shaky ground there claiming those might be due to global warming as opposed to say, better methods to deal with disasters.

I'd also like to see the "fewer tornados" and "fewer hurricanes" data.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[brenthutch 444]

billvon

>More food, fewer weather related deaths, more polar bears, fewer tornados, fewer
>hurricanes, are all documented facts not supposition.

Just as more droughts, more disease, rising sea levels and mass extinctions are all facts, not just scary myths you can ignore.

There are no more droughts now than the historical norm, and sea level rise rate is no more than it was 100 years ago. Mass extinctions? Most occurred before humans even existed. More disease? How about less disease.

[billvon 3,107]

>There are no more droughts now than the historical norm


======================
Nature

A drought-induced pervasive increase in tree mortality across Canada's boreal forests

Accepted
24 October 2011

Drought-induced tree mortality is expected to increase worldwide under projected future climate changes . . .. We found that tree mortality rates increased by an overall average of 4.7% yr−1 from 1963 to 2008, with higher mortality rate increases in western regions than in eastern regions (about 4.9 and 1.9% yr−1, respectively). The water stress created by regional drought may be the dominant contributor to these widespread increases in tree mortality rates across tree species, sizes, elevations, longitudes and latitudes. Western Canada seems to have been more sensitive to drought than eastern Canada.
====================
Earth | Science Wire
August 2015

A new study suggests that natural forces are behind California’s drought, but that global warming has contributed 8-27% to the drought’s severity.

With each passing year, human-caused global warming competes with California for more water. Each year, the heat squeezes more moisture from soils and ecosystems.

This is because, as the atmosphere warms, its demand for moisture rises. Just as a puddle evaporates more quickly on a warm day, soils dry out more quickly during warmer years, which are becoming increasingly frequent in most locations globally.

Currently, California is in the grips of a severe drought, which motivated my colleagues and me to conduct a study to determine how much of this drought can be blamed on natural climate variability. And how much can be blamed on the global warming shakedown? Our answer is 8%-27%.

This finding, done using a model built on historical data, sheds light on California’s future and the effect higher temperatures have on the natural forces that drive California’s droughts.

. . .

During most years, when natural climate variations cause wet or near-average conditions, the demands of the increasingly greedy atmosphere are still met with relative ease. During the last few years, however, natural climate variations have caused precipitation totals to be low and temperatures to be high. Human-caused warming, meanwhile, demands additional atmospheric moisture, at a time when water resources for natural and human systems are already in short supply.
==================

> and sea level rise rate is no more than it was 100 years ago.

==================================
Understanding global sea levels: past, present and future
Published online: 1 February 2008

Science
Springer 2008

Abstract

The coastal zone has changed profoundly during
the 20th century and, as a result, society is becoming
increasingly vulnerable to the impact of sea-level rise and
variability. . . . While sea levels have
varied by over 120 m during glacial/interglacial cycles,
there has been little net rise over the past several millennia
until the 19th century and early 20th century, when geological
and tide-gauge data indicate an increase in the rate of sealevel
rise. Sea levels are currently rising at the upper limit
of the projections of the Third Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (TAR IPCC).
======================================

Let me know if you would like more studies.

[brenthutch 444]

I stopped reading at:

"Drought-induced tree mortality is expected to increase worldwide under projected future climate changes"

That is not a study it is a speculation.

"The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world"."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html

Sorry no clicky iPad not cooperating this AM

[jcd11235 0]

brenthutch

I stopped reading at:

"Drought-induced tree mortality is expected to increase worldwide under projected future climate changes"

That is not a study it is a speculation

And that's why you have no credibility when it comes to science.

Do you ignore weather forecasts, too?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[SkyDekker 1,465]

turtlespeed

***>Not that the media is going to publicize it, but for every bad effect that they are trying
>to scare us with, there are benefits they will ignore, at best, or cover up at worst. It
>makes them more money to scare people than it does to make them feel good.

=

What mainstream media outlet made that part of their hourly news report?

What broadcast was interrupted for that breaking news?

How many nightly news organizations made that part of even their smallest of middle of the night broadcast?

So you are harping on climate scientists because the mainstream media isn't reporting all their research?

[brenthutch 444]

jcd11235

***I stopped reading at:

"Drought-induced tree mortality is expected to increase worldwide under projected future climate changes"

That is not a study it is a speculation

And that's why you have no credibility when it comes to science.

Do you ignore weather forecasts, too?

When they are more than a week out, yes I ignore them.

[brenthutch 444]

Google "tornado drought"

[jcd11235 0]

brenthutch

******I stopped reading at:

"Drought-induced tree mortality is expected to increase worldwide under projected future climate changes"

That is not a study it is a speculation

And that's why you have no credibility when it comes to science.

Do you ignore weather forecasts, too?

When they are more than a week out, yes I ignore them.

Since climate is much less variable than weather, climatologists can make predictions much further into the future at the same accuracy and level of confidence as meteorologists making short term weather forecasts.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>More food, fewer weather related deaths, more polar bears, fewer tornados, fewer
>hurricanes, are all documented facts not supposition.

Just as more droughts, more disease, rising sea levels and mass extinctions are all facts, not just scary myths you can ignore.

Exactly
But the cause you post should be ignored

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[brenthutch 444]

jcd11235

*********I stopped reading at:

"Drought-induced tree mortality is expected to increase worldwide under projected future climate changes"

That is not a study it is a speculation

And that's why you have no credibility when it comes to science.

Do you ignore weather forecasts, too?

When they are more than a week out, yes I ignore them.

Since climate is much less variable than weather, climatologists can make predictions much further into the future at the same accuracy and level of confidence as meteorologists making short term weather forecasts.

If that is the case, why are current global temps well below what the vast majority climate models predicted?

[billvon 3,107]

>I stopped reading

Of course you did. It disagrees with your preconceptions.

Climate change increasing food supplies? You don't even have to read it! Just post a link to it and - take that, stupid scientists!

Warming increasing land evaporation rates and therefore drought? You just stopped reading right there. That way nothing will mess up your carefully cultivated preconceptions.

[billvon 3,107]

>If that is the case, why are current global temps well below what the vast majority
>climate models predicted?

They are not.

I suspect the reason you think so is that you are listening to deniers. Let's take one example - Nicola Scafetta. In 2010 he claimed that global temps are well below what climate models predicted, and he supported that claim with new predictions that were (according to him) more accurate.

See the attachment for how he did.

If someone hadn't added the actual data from recent years, you might be fooled into thinking that the warming was far lower than IPCC predictions - when in fact it is tracking quite accurately.

[brenthutch 444]

billvon

>I stopped reading

Of course you did. It disagrees with your preconceptions.

Climate change increasing food supplies? You don't even have to read it! Just post a link to it and - take that, stupid scientists!

Warming increasing land evaporation rates and therefore drought? You just stopped reading right there. That way nothing will mess up your carefully cultivated preconceptions.

Read up about the water cycle, evaporation, condensation, then precipitation. It was my daughters first grade science project. the water does not just disappear, it comes back down, and to the extent extra water is freed up more of it comes back down. Warmer world = wetter world; and news flash! Plants like warm, wet and more CO2. As I have said previously, the only things that benefits from more CO2 are plants and everything that depends on them.

[brenthutch 444]

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/20610-computer-models-vs-climate-reality

[quade 4]

brenthutch

Read up about the water cycle, evaporation, condensation, then precipitation. It was my daughters first grade science project.

I'm sure it was quite in-depth.

Quote

Plants like warm, wet and more CO2.

And Brondo. Don't forget how much plants like Brondo. It's got what plants crave. It's got electrolytes.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[brenthutch 444]

Thank you for your insightful contribution.

[gowlerk 2,272]

brenthutch

Thank you for your insightful contribution.

Sigh.......

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 226]

gowlerk

***Thank you for your insightful contribution.

Sigh.......

Incredibly Verbose! Impressive!

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Phil1111 1,168]

"King Coal is dying. Even so, he may perk up on his deathbed from time to time, providing stock-trading opportunities.

The U.S. presidential election's outcome may be one such opportunity. Republican front-runner Donald Trump has promised to come to King Coal's aid, pledging to ease federal regulations on emissions from coal-fired power plants. It's a message that could be key in swing state Pennsylvania vs. presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton....

Peabody Energy, the biggest coal producer, in April filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, following Arch Coal, Alpha Natural Resources, Patriot Coal and others. In most cases, the bankruptcies have not affected production -- about 45% of coal production now comes from bankrupt companies, says IHS...

Coal production in the U.S. peaked in 2008 at 1.17 billion tons, falling to 895 million tons in 2015, says the EIA. The energy agency forecasts that coal production will fall to 746 million tons in 2016 and edge up to 778 million in 2017. IHS' 2016 estimate is lower, at 650 million tons.

"We are seeing the industry work through stockpiles rapidly even though demand is weak," said Stevenson. "We should have a market back to balance in 12 months or potentially earlier."

It's no wonder that coal producers aim to alter their asset portfolios. There's growing pressure on institutional investors to ditch fossil fuel stocks because of global climate change. California will require two state pension funds to divest by mid-2017 from companies that receive at least half of revenues from coal mining.

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Trump, meanwhile, says he'll undo Obama administration environmental regulations. Obama has put a moratorium on selling new public land leases to the coal industry.

Trump has also pledged to reopen coal mines in Appalachia.

Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/how-to-make-money-from-king-coals-long-slow-demise-cm633725#ixzz4BN591JgK

[billvon 3,107]

Quote

King Coal is dying. Even so, he may perk up on his deathbed from time to time, providing stock-trading opportunities.

The U.S. presidential election's outcome may be one such opportunity. Republican front-runner Donald Trump has promised to come to King Coal's aid, pledging to ease federal regulations on emissions from coal-fired power plants. It's a message that could be key in swing state Pennsylvania vs. presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton....

Peabody Energy, the biggest coal producer, in April filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, following Arch Coal, Alpha Natural Resources, Patriot Coal and others.

Good point. No one - and I mean NO ONE - profits from bankruptcies like Donald Trump.

[Guest]

billvon

2015 was the warmest year on record by a wide margin. 2014, the previous warmest year on record, was .29F above average. 2015 was 1.62F above average.

I suspect we will hear less nonsense about the "pause" now. On the other hand, this will give some people the chance to say "there's only one problem with global warming - it ended in 2015!" in a few years.

I don't know why this topic is even open for discussion/disagreement anymore. The time for talk is long past. it's time for action.

There is so much man-made carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that fully 50% cannot be absorbed by the environment (trees, oceans).

That means it just stays there, warming the planet, melting the major ice sheets and causing mean sea levels to rise, among other things (like wiping out the Great Barrier Reef off Australia).

Clue: the overwhelming majority of human populations live adjacent to coastlines because 3/4 of the Earth is oceans, folks. This is bad.

Even if the science was wrong (and it isn't), what's wrong with reducing the amount of pollution getting into the environment?

This is so nuts.

I used to be a skeptic, but that was because I'm a scientist. I demand proof. Well, the proof is there. It isn't just theory or speculation. It's the real deal. The whole frickin' planet is in jeopardy. Don't take my word for it - go look at the science, and set aside wishful, magical thinking.

mh
.

ps - by scientist, I do not mean I have a degree in science (unlike Pope Francis, who when called out about his position on Global Heating [which is truly what it is] by Rick Santorum, replied with his MA in Chemistry). I mean that I don't believe that illness is caused by unfavorable auguries. Science, logic and reason (and undeniable proof) are there.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[kallend 2,146]

billvon

Quote

King Coal is dying. Even so, he may perk up on his deathbed from time to time, providing stock-trading opportunities.

The U.S. presidential election's outcome may be one such opportunity. Republican front-runner Donald Trump has promised to come to King Coal's aid, pledging to ease federal regulations on emissions from coal-fired power plants. It's a message that could be key in swing state Pennsylvania vs. presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton....

Peabody Energy, the biggest coal producer, in April filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, following Arch Coal, Alpha Natural Resources, Patriot Coal and others.

Good point. No one - and I mean NO ONE - profits from bankruptcies like Donald Trump.

And they're GREAT, GREAT bankruptcies. Really GREAT.

"The point is, you can never be too greedy."

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 226]

kallend

***

Quote

King Coal is dying. Even so, he may perk up on his deathbed from time to time, providing stock-trading opportunities.

The U.S. presidential election's outcome may be one such opportunity. Republican front-runner Donald Trump has promised to come to King Coal's aid, pledging to ease federal regulations on emissions from coal-fired power plants. It's a message that could be key in swing state Pennsylvania vs. presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton....

Peabody Energy, the biggest coal producer, in April filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, following Arch Coal, Alpha Natural Resources, Patriot Coal and others.

Good point. No one - and I mean NO ONE - profits from bankruptcies like Donald Trump.

And they're GREAT, GREAT bankruptcies. Really GREAT.

"The point is, you can never be too greedy."

Sure you can.
Why do you think Bernie isn't the front runner?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kallend 2,146]

No comment needed:

www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/13/peabody-energy-coal-mining-climate-change-denial-funding

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.