Earth just recorded its hottest 12-month streak (November 2022-October 2023). Analysis using Climate

Let's just say I have no idea about that. People who distort things like what others actually post to try and mold them to what they believe are ones I do not read anymore.

 

They can when you hang it 1' over the middle of a parking lot.

 

Also funny how when it's really hot in Australia, it's really cold in Montana.

 

Now you're trying to shoo me away?? hahahahahaha TOO FUNNY!

You cannot even begin to logically justify your physics-denying faith to anyone else, plain and simple, and that truth is the underlying reason as to why you want me gone.

 

And the ozone hole over the Antarctic is starting to close, as the one over the Arctic will soon be growing.

Funny how that works, and happens roughly every 365 days.

 

For example, my immediate point is that a thermometer located somewhere within Huntington WV cannot accurately measure the temperature of somewhere within Martinsburg WV.

There's a bigger point that I have as well, but I'm waiting for WillReadmore to participate in my questioning before unveiling it.

 

There are multiple methods being used to measure temperature, including at various elevations.

And, yes. What I say about physics should NEVER be an issue, especially on this board where there are so few posters and where credentials are unknown.

What matters is what physicists say about physics. And, that goes for other fields, as well.

 

I'm not interested in "justifying" what climate scientists are stating. NOAA and the rest are not depending on ME for "justification".

If you want to falsify what they are saying, you need to talk to them.

 

Sorry to disappoint.

If you want to argue with scientists about whether the various measuring technologies aren't adequate or whether they agree, or whatever, you need to talk to THEM.

 

Wow? The Earth is a source of thermal energy. It has a molten core. Therefore a blanket would raise the temp. of the air surrounding the heat source. And an outside temp source would raise temps more.

 

Also, Earth has another even more significant heat source - the sun.

Thinking of the rock has having no heat source is a bad analogy.

 

Good! We suffered from the release of CFCs for years - now it is Americas turn - enjoy the increase in skin cancer

 

How come so many do not understand basic science? I guess it is the panic to find something, anything other than burning 97,103,871 barrels of oil per day

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...usg=AOvVaw3WyqP3rzVH_ndkLOdJd8EC&opi=89978449

 

You forgot the / sarcasm

 

Who are “they” nd how do you “ignore” published results?

 

This comes under “a little knowledge is dangerous”. Cherry picked data force fed into a conspiracy theory

 

Yes, it is startling.

The down side of burning billions of gallons of oil on our city streets is certainly terrible for climate change, but there are serious known costs in health care, in dependence on world oil price, and other ways.

In the US, economists point to world oil price increases as one of the two major causes of our huge inflation spike.

 

I am betting that those reports were not actually from the IPCC

 

Causing a panic over things like the climate changing is exactly what Chicken Little was about.

The only thing I'm questioning is whose lunch will you be.

 

OMG, and this is the level of scientific understanding we have in here?

Do you even know how ozone is created in the upper atmosphere?

Ultraviolet light striking oxygen molecules (02) in the upper atmosphere, causing it to split into two individual oxygen atoms.

And do you know what the South Pole just finished going through? A period of only a few hours of daylight. What the North Pole is now entering. At this time, the North Pole region is only getting a few hours of daylight per day, and soon it will be in total darkness for about a month.

And you are aware are you not, that when there is no daylight (ultraviolet rays) striking the upper atmosphere, there is no ozone created?

Holy hell, I actually said that mostly in jest, as that was something I was taught in like the third grade. I am absolutely dumbfounded here at the almost total lack of understanding of actual science and the fanatic holding onto what is essentially a religion that denies any science they do not accept.

 

You tell me? How can somebody not comprehend the simple fact that ozone is created in the upper atmosphere by daylight, and without daylight there are always ozone holes seasonally over the poles?

I mean, this is literally basic grade school science here.

 

I reply like to like - I could not see any science backing for your posts so I just threw something on the board - and mine was more accurate than yours

and Ozone is O3 not O2 https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/protection/ozone/ozone-science/ozone-layer

https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics...ng-emissions/current-state-of-the-ozone-layer

 

Uh-huh, once again refusing to deal with anything and spinning in circles.

Here is the amazing thing about hiding behind the IPCC. They actually say damned little. Oh, they make vague claims that never actually happen, then when they do not happen say their models need adjusting. But want an idea how vague they are?

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/...AR6_WGI_Regional_Fact_Sheet_Polar_regions.pdf

Well, guess what? This all falls literally under the "Well no, duh!" category. As I already said, we are still in the early stages of an interglacial, and things are going to continue to get warmer, and the ice sheets will continue to melt. But not like they say "over the 21st century", but likely even into the 31st century and beyond. Quite possibly into even the 41st century before things start to cool again.

We are less than 30,000 years into a cycle that normally covers a time span of between 70,000 and 90,000 years. So why in the hell would anybody expect anything other than it will continue to get warmer?

And the "high confidence" that glaciers will continue to lose mass for several decades is laughably bad "science". They will continue to lose mass for I would expect at least one dozen thousand years, possibly two dozen thousand years. Until the polar ice cap is a thing of vague legend, and nobody then alive could ever imagine there ever being such a thing. About as vague as people today looking at the Great Lakes, and imaging a time not all that long ago where they did not exist but were under a mile of ice. However, there were even larger lakes covering much of Montana and Utah, as well as where Death Valley is today.

 

Wait, so every time I make a post you expect me to have to explain everything behind it, like how the Ozone Layer is created?

As I said, no comprehension of science at all.

 

Says the person who started rabbiting on about oxygen when the topic was ozone

https://specialistaustralia.com.au/...pecially near the,number of skin cancer cases.

Australia has paid the price for the ozone layer hole for years