Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll restate my opinion here since there seems to be a discussion regarding world climate going on. It is my ardent belief that the climate of the world is indeed warming and will continue to warm over the next several centuries (although it will likely be in cycles comprising of periods of temperature stagnation and even slight cooling along with periods of rapid warming) due to the impact of the global phenomena of El Nino, La Nina, AMO, PDO and sun cycles. Furthermore, I subscribe to the belief that climate change is indeed "Man-Made" and is primarily driven by carbon dioxide gas emitted by fossil fuels. The only thing perpetuated by many green activists and the government itself which I disagree with is the rate of warming (Including the warming which has already occurred) I find that it seems far more plausible and in line with historical trends and realistic projections for the future that warming by the end of this century will average around 2-4F with higher (6-8F) increases in the arctic. These figures would be at odds with the alarmist predictions of an apocalyptic rise of 8-10F in global temperatures. Unfortunately we have already seen evidence of the government tampering with global temperature readings as proof of "fabricated" government data has arisen, this data of course shows a worrisome temperature rise over the past 40 years of 1-3F when actual satellite data shows a more modest rise in the neighborhood of 0.5-1F. I hope that it becomes clear to both extremes (Alarmists and Deniers) in the upcoming few decades that while Global Warming is a real and dangerous phenomenon it is not the apocalyptic disaster some say it too be and can be countered by measured action.
I'll restate my opinion here since there seems to be a discussion regarding world climate going on. It is my ardent belief that the climate of the world is indeed warming and will continue to warm over the next several centuries (although it will likely be in cycles comprising of periods of temperature stagnation and even slight cooling along with periods of rapid warming) due to the impact of the global phenomena of El Nino, La Nina, AMO, PDO and sun cycles. Furthermore, I subscribe to the belief that climate change is indeed "Man-Made" and is primarily driven by carbon dioxide gas emitted by fossil fuels. The only thing perpetuated by many green activists and the government itself which I disagree with is the rate of warming (Including the warming which has already occurred) I find that it seems far more plausible and in line with historical trends and realistic projections for the future that warming by the end of this century will average around 2-4F with higher (6-8F) increases in the arctic. These figures would be at odds with the alarmist predictions of an apocalyptic rise of 8-10F in global temperatures. Unfortunately we have already seen evidence of the government tampering with global temperature readings as proof of "fabricated" government data has arisen, this data of course shows a worrisome temperature rise over the past 40 years of 1-3F when actual satellite data shows a more modest rise in the neighborhood of 0.5-1F. I hope that it becomes clear to both extremes (Alarmists and Deniers) in the upcoming few decades that while Global Warming is a real and dangerous phenomenon it is not the apocalyptic disaster some say it too be and can be countered by measured action.
If you're right, why is there barely any perceptible warming in most inhabited temperate zone regions? And why have NYC floating 30 year normal temperatures been reduced, not raised?
First off, high latitudes are more susceptible to warming because they have a lower wetbulb temperature. In other words dry air warms faster than wet air. Secondly, you can't just cherry pick one city or another. Look at the Northeast as a whole and you will see that they have indeed warmed ( not as much as alarmists claim). Third, if you compare the 1971-2000 averages to the 1981-2010 averages for NYC, you will see that there has been some warming
First off, high latitudes are more susceptible to warming because they have a lower wetbulb temperature. In other words dry air warms faster than wet air. Secondly, you can't just cherry pick one city or another. Look at the Northeast as a whole and you will see that they have indeed warmed ( not as much as alarmists claim). Third, if you compare the 1971-2000 averages to the 1981-2010 averages for NYC, you will see that there has been some warming
As far as cherry-picking one city, I will absolutely not take any scientist's word on "world temperatures," which can be considerably fudged or manipulated. I think that higher latitude temperatures over time are not well-measured. Proxy data is prone to manipulation. As far as NYC goes 1931-1960 temperatures are generally above 1981-2010.
I would love someone to come up with a way to use 50 or 60 year moving averages since even 30 year averages allow some cherry-picking. The 1930's and 1950's were very warm decades in New York City and the 1940's only slightly less so. The 1970's and the first two-thirds of the 1980's were quite cool. So I'll admit tot he same cherry picking you may be doing.
Yeah the alarmists are kind of insane sometimes honestly. I saw a graphic once that claimed New Hampshire will have the same climate as Virginia/NC in like 50 years. Wtf?! Warming usually happens by degrees, fractions of degrees even. New Hampshire is not going to turn into ****ing Raleigh overnight, or even over many nights. Let's assume that Binghamton New York becomes ten degrees Fahrenheit warmer, which is like a huge ****ing jump and will probably take at least a century. Do you know what climate it would have then. It would be the same as...New York New York. Wow! So scary!
It's barely 2 degrees over the past 70 years, the climate is changing but it's changing at the speed of molasses as opposed to the "omg there will palm trees in Alaska by 2020!!!" sort of change you hear about
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
