|
|
Post by commonsense on Aug 14, 2011 3:23:46 GMT
The reason why 22 international forecasting centers did not forecast ENSO in advance is because of this major problem they have with their modelers and their climate models that assume the Earth's climate is always in equilibrium. Please post any cites that say that the Earth's climate is in equilibrium. I've never heard such garbage in my life. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 14, 2011 23:14:17 GMT
The reason why 22 international forecasting centers did not forecast ENSO in advance is because of this major problem they have with their modelers and their climate models that assume the Earth's climate is always in equilibrium. Please post any cites that say that the Earth's climate is in equilibrium. I've never heard such garbage in my life. The real garbage is that a single member of SC24 forum has to post as new members spilling out the same two-lined "garbage." Who is it this time? Oh, now your annoymous name is "commonsense." Here's some common sense for you kiddo - why don't you get out of your mom's basement with your keyboard and computer and into the real climate? Out here, in the real world, you might just improve your sense of smell on the climate and weather rather than the 'garbaaage' you drag into here - as a 'new member' to the forum that is... for what, like the fifth or sixth time? Get off the AGW train. You're losing more of your marbles every day. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 14, 2011 23:23:02 GMT
I think we can agree, it is not all figured out.Kind of ties into the Anthropocene thread huh? The issue here is now a series of La Ninas is what is causing the variation. But one needs to note that when it was cooling in the 1950's and 60's it was La Nina dominate too. Then it became El Nino dominate. In fact we were told to expect El Nino to become permanent suggesting that the shift from La Ninas to El Ninos was not regional and due to AGW. Now that its going back its now regional. . . .again. . . . huh? Oops! Not again. . . .for the first time! LOL! Good example Icefisher. Again, the major problem is the school of thought among those AGW pushers. The models are flawed with the same thought of equilibrium, because if it were not then they would be able to actually forecast using differential equations. But, they are stuck on the models. It's common among them but with no sense. The problem is that climate modeler scientists always try to explain the indicators away to fit their ideology. That's not science. It never was. Information, even decades and centuries of correlating data, are not enough because all too often people just create all kinds of stories to explain the data away. Cap & Trade along with the entire ideological history of AGW is an excellent example of this foolishness. This is why they cannot forecast seasonal weather, much less the climate to come in decades. |
|
ray
New Member
Posts: 35 
|
Post by ray on Aug 15, 2011 17:18:55 GMT
do you have any forecasts for the southern hemisphere for the upcoming spring and summer namely in australia and brazil/argentina? last yr we had massive rains and flooding in australia and dry/hot conditions in brazil/argentina due to la nina. do you expect more normal conditions this yr?
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 16, 2011 1:01:25 GMT
do you have any forecasts for the southern hemisphere for the upcoming spring and summer namely in australia and brazil/argentina? last yr we had massive rains and flooding in australia and dry/hot conditions in brazil/argentina due to la nina. do you expect more normal conditions this yr? Hi Ray, Yes, last year was a record year of weather in the Southern Hemisphere, glad you came out okay. To answer your question, in my view we are past this historic ENSO, more or less, as we can see continuing effects from La Nina as it wanes to neutral, but I expected this. I can't quantify more 'normal conditions' this year, though spring and then summer will be a bit early to the southern hemisphere as ENSO values slip to neutral. However, saying that, we still have the problem of volcanic activity which impacts the amount of cloud cover and we've had an active volcanic year since mid-2009 - so the extra particulates rotating worldwide would see anomalous cooler-than-average temperatures combining with the aftermath of La Nina. The hot dry conditions on Brazil will continue into this year with worries over spreading drought, which again we can see making more impact throughout regions of the world. |
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Aug 16, 2011 2:48:04 GMT
This is where were we meet the conceptual disconnect. ENSO goes on and on, back and forth. ENSO is not the climate driver.I am good to go on that Tstat. So why is it not warming? Icefisher, you wrote, "So why is it not warming?" It is warming! I guess you missed it. Last year we had the warmest 12 month period ever recorded! (also, the 2000's was the warmest decade ever recorded!) Not warming, huh? What are you smokin' man? Got any more? |
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Aug 16, 2011 3:20:45 GMT
Icefisher,
you wrote, "So why is it not warming?"
It is warming! I guess you missed it. Last year we had the warmest 12 month period ever recorded! (also, the 2000's was the warmest decade ever recorded!)
Not warming, huh? What are you smokin' man? Got any more?
[/quote]
I love a good cigar but I sure am not imbibing that Jim Jones. . . .er. . . .Hansen koolaid your on. According to Hadcrut no 12 month period this year or last even broke into the top 10.
|
|
|
|
Post by thermostat on Aug 16, 2011 3:28:31 GMT
Icefisher,
you wrote, "So why is it not warming?"
It is warming! I guess you missed it. Last year we had the warmest 12 month period ever recorded! (also, the 2000's was the warmest decade ever recorded!)
Not warming, huh? What are you smokin' man? Got any more? I love a good cigar but I sure am not imbibing that Jim Jones. . . .er. . . .Hansen koolaid your on. According to Hadcrut no 12 month period this year or last even broke into the top 10. [/quote] Great to quibble about this or that global temperature record. Understood. Are you also saying that the previous decade was not exceptional? |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Aug 16, 2011 4:39:26 GMT
Thermostat:
I posted an article from Nature......go look at the proxy record...and come back and tell us how hot it is all of a sudden.........
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 16, 2011 4:56:05 GMT
Icefisher,
you wrote, "So why is it not warming?"
It is warming! I guess you missed it. Last year we had the warmest 12 month period ever recorded! (also, the 2000's was the warmest decade ever recorded!)
Not warming, huh? What are you smokin' man? Got any more? I love a good cigar but I sure am not imbibing that Jim Jones. . . .er. . . .Hansen koolaid your on. According to Hadcrut no 12 month period this year or last even broke into the top 10. Great to quibble about this or that global temperature record. Understood. Are you also saying that the previous decade was not exceptional? [/quote] Thermostat, "exceptional" compared to what other decade? There have been many decades of 'exceptional weather,' but what other decade are you comparing this last decade? (2000-2010) |
|
|
|
Post by commonsense on Aug 16, 2011 5:35:50 GMT
Icefisher,
you wrote, "So why is it not warming?"
It is warming! I guess you missed it. Last year we had the warmest 12 month period ever recorded! (also, the 2000's was the warmest decade ever recorded!)
Not warming, huh? What are you smokin' man? Got any more? I love a good cigar but I sure am not imbibing that Jim Jones. . . .er. . . .Hansen koolaid your on. According to Hadcrut no 12 month period this year or last even broke into the top 10. [/quote] I think you're a tad off. Even Steve Goddard's post about 2010 shows it to have been the third warmest year. Much more important, of course, is that the 2000s were warmer than the 1990s, which were warmer than the 1980s, which were warmer than the 1970s. No decade in the instrumental record was as warm as the 2000s. globalwarmingskeptics.info/forums/attachment.php?aid=289 |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 16, 2011 6:44:13 GMT
Icefisher,
you wrote, "So why is it not warming?"
It is warming! I guess you missed it. Last year we had the warmest 12 month period ever recorded! (also, the 2000's was the warmest decade ever recorded!)
Not warming, huh? What are you smokin' man? Got any more? I love a good cigar but I sure am not imbibing that Jim Jones. . . .er. . . .Hansen koolaid your on. According to Hadcrut no 12 month period this year or last even broke into the top 10. I think you're a tad off. Even Steve Goddard's post about 2010 shows it to have been the third warmest year. Much more important, of course, is that the 2000s were warmer than the 1990s, which were warmer than the 1980s, which were warmer than the 1970s. No decade in the instrumental record was as warm as the 2000s. globalwarmingskeptics.info/forums/attachment.php?aid=289[/quote]That's complete balderdash. Totally untrue, not factual and just plain wrong. The 2000s was not the warmest year on record. It may rank was one of the wettest decades on record once all the numbers are in, but certainly the decade of the 2000s was not the warmest. That is just a AGW/IPCC ideological garbage which will never be true no matter how many times you, or anyone else says it. What's this perversion you guys have with climate science and making things up that are untrue? Always trying to squeeze that AGW square through a round hole and you just don't want to open your eyes and give it a rest. Why don't you go play elsewhere rather than mucking up serious science with this seemingly never-ending ideological bullshit? Get a grip. Humanity never was and never will be responsible for global warming. That duty belongs to the Sun, as it always has since the origins of the Earth and our solar system. |
|
|
|
Post by commonsense on Aug 16, 2011 6:49:28 GMT
I love a good cigar but I sure am not imbibing that Jim Jones. . . .er. . . .Hansen koolaid your on. According to Hadcrut no 12 month period this year or last even broke into the top 10. I think you're a tad off. Even Steve Goddard's post about 2010 shows it to have been the third warmest year. Much more important, of course, is that the 2000s were warmer than the 1990s, which were warmer than the 1980s, which were warmer than the 1970s. No decade in the instrumental record was as warm as the 2000s. globalwarmingskeptics.info/forums/attachment.php?aid=289That's complete balderdash. Totally untrue, not factual and just plain wrong. The 2000s was not the warmest year on record. It may rank was one of the wettest decades on record once all the numbers are in, but certainly the decade of the 2000s were not the warmest.[/quote] Perhaps you'd care to cite some evidence for such an extraordinary claim. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Aug 16, 2011 6:52:36 GMT
I think you're a tad off. Even Steve Goddard's post about 2010 shows it to have been the third warmest year. Much more important, of course, is that the 2000s were warmer than the 1990s, which were warmer than the 1980s, which were warmer than the 1970s. No decade in the instrumental record was as warm as the 2000s. globalwarmingskeptics.info/forums/attachment.php?aid=289That's complete balderdash. Totally untrue, not factual and just plain wrong. The 2000s was not the warmest year on record. It may rank was one of the wettest decades on record once all the numbers are in, but certainly the decade of the 2000s were not the warmest. Perhaps you'd care to cite some evidence for such an extraordinary claim. [/quote] Look it up yourself commonsense. This isn't some ivory tower where we all sit around as AGW modeler/careerists and 'cite' papers as "evidence." Too many people throw around scientific papers and more than half the time haven't read them simply because it doesn't subscribe to their pre-selected ideology. Science is about observation and discovery, not playing the paper chase. Open your eyes and learn to read data. Smell the climate, feel the weather. Keep your eyes on the skies and what's happening in space because that is where the Earth actually lives you know - in space. I forecast in advance so I have better things to do than to repeat to you what I've written extensively about on astronomic forecasting, global warming, the Earth's climate and space weather. The evidence is in the real world data - check out the 1930s and tell me just how warm it was compared to this last decade of the 2000s. There's no comparison. The 1930s wins hands down, at least in North America. There were more cold records set than warm ones in the decade of the 2000s. And record precipitation records as well. The numbers from the recent ENSO I forecasted are still coming in and by next year we should have a decent accounting of the record precipitation, in temperatures, precipitation and snowfall - from this recent ENSO. The facts are there. There isn't a need for you, or anyone else to come along and twist real world data into an ideological mudball. The 2000s was not the warmest and the year 2010 was not the hottest year on record, so please, don't insult our intelligence. And while you are at it, please, get both your oars in the water and all 52 cards in your deck if you want to be taken seriously here when it comes to knowledge about the climate. |
|
|
|
Post by commonsense on Aug 16, 2011 7:30:18 GMT
That's complete balderdash. Totally untrue, not factual and just plain wrong. The 2000s was not the warmest year on record. It may rank was one of the wettest decades on record once all the numbers are in, but certainly the decade of the 2000s were not the warmest. Perhaps you'd care to cite some evidence for such an extraordinary claim. Look it up yourself commonsense. This isn't some ivory tower where we all sit around as AGW modeler/careerists and 'cite' papers as "evidence." Too many people throw around scientific papers and more than half the time haven't read them simply because it doesn't subscribe to their pre-selected ideology. Science is about observation and discovery, not playing the paper chase. Open your eyes and learn to read data. Smell the climate, feel the weather. Keep your eyes on the skies and what's happening in space because that is where the Earth actually lives you know - in space. I forecast in advance so I have better things to do than to repeat to you what I've written extensively about on astronomic forecasting, global warming, the Earth's climate and space weather. The evidence is in the real world data - check out the 1930s and tell me just how warm it was compared to this last decade of the 2000s. There's no comparison. The 1930s wins hands down, at least in North America. There were more cold records set than warm ones in the decade of the 2000s. And record precipitation records as well. The numbers from the recent ENSO I forecasted are still coming in and by next year we should have a decent accounting of the record precipitation, in temperatures, precipitation and snowfall - from this recent ENSO. The facts are there. There isn't a need for you, or anyone else to come along and twist real world data into an ideological mudball. The 2000s was not the warmest and the year 2010 was not the hottest year on record, so please, don't insult our intelligence. And while you are at it, please, get both your oars in the water and all 52 cards in your deck if you want to be taken seriously here when it comes to knowledge about the climate.[/quote] You seem to be conflating the USA with the entire world. 1934 just barely beat out 1998 for warmest in the USA, but that is irrelevant. We are talking about global temperatures, and there is no doubt in the data. The 1930s were relatively cool, and certainly very much cooler than the 2000s. Again, the 2000s were the warmest decade of the instrumental record. |
|
