Ocean Heat Has Shattered Records for More Than a Year. What’s Happening?

It appears that the consensus of climatologists confirm anthropogenic global warming.

You actually cite a blog contrived by a climate change denier with no scientific credentials that posted an article by a guy who was president of the Pittsburgh Association of Petroleum Geologists four times?

 

I'm actually starting to feel very flattered that so many posters are THIS desperate to find something.... ANTYHING... wrong with what I write.

But they are only harming themselves. Because what I said was

I am having way too much fun with these guys....

 

@Jack Hays has been told time and time again that a "Scientific Consensus" is NOT a consensus of opinions among scientists, but a consensus of SCIENCE: i.e, a consensus of peer-reviewed scientific studies. And even though 97% of studies WOULD be considered a consensus, the fact is that the consensus is that 100% of peer-reviewed papers published in the las 25 years (or so) agree that Global Warming is real, and that it is caused by human activity.

But @Jack Hays believes that if it's published in his science denialist websites, that means it's "peer reviewed"

 

The data are the data. You might want to check the credentials of the author of the 97% paper before you go any further down ghat road.

 

Simply a falsehood. Sad but not a surprise. Your claim has already been refuted several times in previous exchanges.

 

Another falsehood.

 

That's precisely what the consensus of climatologists worldwide tell us - even if your science fiction writers and petroleum geologists don't like it.

 

That’s not really the case. And your attempts to denigrate others (to include false characterizations) do not make your posts more credible.

 

Well, you just claimed that an essay on medical obfuscation from 1969 is a peer-reviewed study about Climate Change.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/ocean-heat-has-shattered-records-for-more-than-a-year-what’s-happening.618851/page-32#post-1074882331

So who is the one with the falsehoods?

 

No, I did not. That’s another falsehood.

 

A vote for Biden is a vote for the president who set the ocean heat record. Do you just hate our globe and everyone on it?

 

It was around 100°F. It's supposed to be 102°F on Monday and Tuesday.

 

Spare me the BS. Neither one of those guys is serious about climate change.

 

Nothing unexpected (except the sun's high activity and the Tonga submarine volcano, of course).

Canada's history does not even extend back to the Little Ice Age, let alone the Medieval Warm Period, let alone the Holocene Optimum, and Lytton had for decades been the town that recorded the highest summertime daily temperature in Canada more often than any other. The Lytton area is also semi-arid, and when enough dry brush accumulates, it burns.

 

There is of course broad consensus among climate scientists on numerous points, and climate realists are generally in agreement with them. The CO2 climate narrative just isn't one of them. The claims that it is have been shown to be fraudulent.

 

Climate change and Global warming are two different things. Climate change occurs over a long period of time due to the earth spinning on its axis while circling the sun. At times the axis 'wobbles' and a different area of the earth is presented facing the sun. this changes the climate in different areas of the globe. It's a natural event. Global warming is caused by various manmade emisions blocking the atmosphere. While the suns rays and heat can penetrate this and warm the earth, the warmth reflected from the earth cannot penetrate back into space. No one country or leader can prevent this. It will take worldwide action. Emmisions thrown up by one country don't remain above that country but are spread by winds and jeststreams around the world. You can only prevent global catastrophe by reducing emmisions. At my age my only concern is for my grandchildren and great grandchildren. That's a simplified explanation.

 

Your opinion is noted. There is also the conclusion of climatologists:

Based on the annual report from NOAA’s Global Monitoring Lab, global average atmospheric carbon dioxide was 419.3 parts per million (“ppm” for short) in 2023, setting a new record high. The increase between 2022 and 2023 was 2.8 ppm—the 12th year in a row where the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased by more than 2 ppm.

Carbon dioxide concentrations are rising mostly because of the fossil fuels that people are burning for energy. Fossil fuels like coal and oil contain carbon that plants pulled out of the atmosphere through photosynthesis over many millions of years; we are returning that carbon to the atmosphere in just a few hundred. Since the middle of the 20th century, annual emissions from burning fossil fuels have increased every decade, from close to 11 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year in the 1960s to an estimated 36.6 billion tons in 2023 according to the Global Carbon Budget 2023.

Because we put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than natural sinks can remove, the total amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases every year...

The more we overshoot what natural processes can remove in a given year, the faster the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide rises. In the 1960s, the global growth rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide was roughly 0.8± 0.1 ppm per year. Over the next half century, the annual growth rate tripled, reaching 2.4 ppm per year during the 2010s. The annual rate of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide over the past 60 years is about 100 times faster than previous natural increases, such as those that occurred at the end of the last ice age 11,000-17,000 years ago.

https://www.climate.gov/news-featur...ate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide​

 

You may not have very many friends with that opinion. Here what the U.N. says (from here):

Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. Such shifts can be natural, due to changes in the sun’s activity or large volcanic eruptions. But since the 1800s, human activities have been the main driver of climate change, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas... ...The average temperature of the Earth’s surface is now about 1.2°C warmer than it was in the late 1800s (before the industrial revolution) and warmer than at any time in the last 100,000 years. The last decade (2011-2020) was the warmest on record, and each of the last four decades has been warmer than any previous decade since 1850.​

iow, climate change is basically global warming because that's why CO2 causes it. Something else that's interesting is that they're not saying 1.5C anymore, it got cooled to 1.2C. Maybe next year it'll be 0.9C.

All that is good for a rally to drum up emotions. My thinking is that while emotions are required for motivating action, a realistic vision is necessary too. We need more hard numbers, but imho the reason advocates for AGW avoid numbers is because they simply don't support the rhetoric.

 

As I said. It was a simplified explanation. https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/what-is-climate-change/

Global warming is the long-term heating of Earth’s surface observed since the pre-industrial period (between 1850 and 1900) due to human activities, primarily fossil fuel burning, which increases heat-trapping greenhouse gas levels in Earth’s atmosphere. This term is not interchangeable with the term "climate change."

Since the pre-industrial period, human activities are estimated to have increased Earth’s global average temperature by about 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), a number that is currently increasing by more than 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.36 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade. The current warming trend is unequivocally the result of human activity since the 1950s and is proceeding at an unprecedented rate over millennia.

Climate, on the other hand, refers to the long-term (usually at least 30 years) regional or even global average of temperature, humidity, and rainfall patterns over seasons, years, or decades.

 

Biden set the record as worst ever.

 

You will find no claim of mine that Crichton published on climate in the peer-reviewed literature. My claim has always been that Crichton published peer-reviewed research. You seem to have missed that in your rush to post another falsehood.

Michael Crichton’s multiple-discriminant analysis of Egyptian crania, carried out on an IBM 7090 computer at Harvard, was published in the Papers of the Peabody Museum in 1966

 

Science is a liberal construct. The bible tells us all we need to know about the universe.

 

You don't accept what NOAA says? They say the temperature rises has been one single degree C since 1860. I follow the science. You, unfortunately have fallen for the politics.

 

Your ideological dogma aside, you do realize that an average global rise of 1 ° C has enormous consequences?

Given the tremendous size and heat capacity of the global oceans, it takes a massive amount of added heat energy to raise Earth’s average yearly surface temperature even a small amount. The roughly 2-degree Fahrenheit (1 degrees Celsius) increase in global average surface temperature that has occurred since the pre-industrial era (1850-1900 in NOAA's record) might seem small, but it means a significant increase in accumulated heat.

That extra heat is driving regional and seasonal temperature extremes, reducing snow cover and sea ice, intensifying heavy rainfall, and changing habitat ranges for plants and animals—expanding some and shrinking others. As the map below shows, most land areas have warmed faster than most ocean areas, and the Arctic is warming faster than most other regions. In addition, it's clear that the rate of warming over the past few decades is much faster than the average rate since the start of the 20th century...

https://www.climate.gov/news-featur...ns a significant increase in accumulated heat.​

 

And this is what the climate change deniers rely on....a general scientific illiteracy.

The climate is a system in equilibrium. It is an extremely delicate balance between ins and outs to maintain a relatively stable climate.

Humans have, for the last 100 years, upset that delicate balance.

The addition of CO2 into the atmosphere does not need to be measured in amounts that sound like a lot...but ANY addition that is not part of the natural process is going to upset that balance.