Is the wild weather these past two years partly the result of climate change?

[WeatherRusty]

Ummm....A. I didn't imply the above (first bold) (strawman). B. I certainly was curious as to why the annual 2004 GISS temp was plopped onto an obviously long timeframed smoothing graph.....and C. Does the "picture of a thousands words" not imply we should be in awe of the 2004 temp vs. the very endpoint of the graph (black line of present)???????

D. ....(second bold)....

I was replying to Rusty.

The graphic was posted so as to demonstrate the general downward trend in temperature over the past 8,000 years or so. This factual observation contradicts those who believe the Earth is still recovering from the last ice age. The peak of the Holocene was about 8,000 years ago. Natural drivers have caused a slow drop to occur since then. The past 2,000 years has averaged quite flat, while the most recent 150 years have risen very sharply.

But you had to take away something else from looking at that graphic. It was presented in one context and you found a way to argue another point evident from in that picture. As a counter to your claim of cherry picking 2004, again out of context to the original intent, the entire instrumental period of record presents a warming trend far more rapid than anything else seen before due to natural causation.

[LakeEffectKing]

The graphic was posted so as to demonstrate the general downward trend in temperature over the past 8,000 years or so. This factual observation contradicts those who believe the Earth is still recovering from the last ice age. The peak of the Holocene was about 8,000 years ago. Natural drivers have caused a slow drop to occur since then. The past 2,000 years has averaged quite flat, while the most recent 150 years have risen very sharply.

But you had to take away something else from looking at that graphic. It was presented in one context and you found a way to argue another point evident from in that picture. As a counter to your claim of cherry picking 2004, again out of context to the original intent, the entire instrumental period of record presents a warming trend far more rapid than anything else seen before due to natural causation.

Why have 2004 (with an arrow) on the graph at all??? I didn't "find a way".....you didn't explain your "intent" very well.... especially with this sentence lead to the graph:

"A picture is worth a thousand words, so for anyone who thinks the world has been naturally warming since the end of the last ice age more than 10,000 yrs ago, I present you with this:

Next time, remove the 2004 (with arrrow) which would keep the potential for mis-interpretation of your points to a lower level...

BTW...over the last 10,000 years the Earth HAS been naturally warming for 99% of that time (even if the AGW hypothesis is correct!)

[WeatherRusty]

Why have 2004 (with an arrow) on the graph at all??? I didn't "find a way".....you didn't explain your "intent" very well.... especially with this sentence lead to the graph:

"A picture is worth a thousand words, so for anyone who thinks the world has been naturally warming since the end of the last ice age more than 10,000 yrs ago, I present you with this:

Next time, remove the 2004 (with arrrow) which would keep the potential for mis-interpretation of your points to a lower level...

BTW...over the last 10,000 years the Earth HAS been naturally warming for 99% of that time (even if the AGW hypothesis is correct!)

You must have vertical dyslexia!

Could you explain how you come to that conclusion?If you want to get picky, I'd say it has cooled about as often as it has warmed, but the cooling has been more pronounced than the warming on average since the peak of the Holocene.

[skierinvermont]

"A picture is worth a thousand words, so for anyone who thinks the world has been naturally warming since the end of the last ice age more than 10,000 yrs ago, I present you with this:

I like how you bolded only part of the statement which completely changes the obvious meaning of the statement as a whole. His clear point to anybody not looking for a fight was a continuation of the point I made in the post before and to which he was responding. The current warming is not a continuation of the end of the ice age. The earth was on a general cooling trend for the last 8000 years.

[LakeEffectKing]

You must have vertical dyslexia!

Could you explain how you come to that conclusion?If you want to get picky, I'd say it has cooled about as often as it has warmed, but the cooling has been more pronounced than the warming on average since the peak of the Holocene.

Sorry, I certainly interpretated your statement wrong. My statement was reffering to the warming (periods) as being natural....all the one's before 150 ago. I thought you were referring to ANY warming during the previous 10,000 yrs.....so my bad there. Lol, no vertical perception issues here!

[LakeEffectKing]

I like how you bolded only part of the statement which completely changes the obvious meaning of the statement as a whole. His clear point to anybody not looking for a fight was a continuation of the point I made in the post before and to which he was responding. The current warming is not a continuation of the end of the ice age. The earth was on a general cooling trend for the last 8000 years.

Yes....I pick fights!

I just took you off my ignore list, on a trial basis...so I really haven't kept up on you posts.

Leaving the 2004 year on the graph was "interesting", especially knowing that Rusty is a stickler for accuracy, and certainly scrutinizes posts in a far more tedious manner. I think Rusty would agree, the 2004 date on the graph is irrelevant not only to his post but to anyone seeing the highly biased message implied with the date included.

[skierinvermont]

Yes....I pick fights!

I just took you off my ignore list, on a trial basis...so I really haven't kept up on you posts.

Leaving the 2004 year on the graph was "interesting", especially knowing that Rusty is a stickler for accuracy, and certainly scrutinizes posts in a far more tedious manner. I think Rusty would agree, the 2004 date on the graph is irrelevant not only to his post but to anyone seeing the highly biased message implied with the date included.

That's how the graph comes. And it's not biased, it just requires proper interpretation by a reader that is not mentally challenged. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the graph is smoothed.

[LakeEffectKing]

That's how the graph comes. And it's not biased, it just requires proper interpretation by a reader that is not mentally challenged. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the graph is smoothed.

Man that was a quick trial period.....try less personal attacks.

[skierinvermont]

Man that was a quick trial period.....try less personal attacks.

what personal attack? try reading what I said again.

[JBG]

The situation faced by Noah in the Old Testament was the result of climate change.

[Isotherm]

The situation faced by Noah in the Old Testament was the result of climate change.

It was all those animals farting so damn much, that's why Noah had to get rid of all of them except 2 pair of every kind. Noah: "God says your farts are causing global warming. So you're going to die. Thanks."

[JBG]

It was all those animals farting so damn much, that's why Noah had to get rid of all of them except 2 pair of every kind. Noah: "God says your farts are causing global warming. So you're going to die. Thanks."

No it was tailpipe and industrial emissions.

[Ottawa Blizzard]

Regardless of what is causing the warming, I still find it interesting that January in Ottawa has warmed a few degrees over the past 30 years. The global warming crowd has always claimed that the further north one goes, the greater the effect of warming.

This being said, the UK is 5-15 degrees of latitude further north than Ottawa, and they have experienced colder winters for the past three years.

By the way, I'll be in Toronto for this winter, so regardless of how cold it gets this winter it'll seem like a warming compared to Ottawa!

[WeatherRusty]

Regardless of what is causing the warming, I still find it interesting that January in Ottawa has warmed a few degrees over the past 30 years. The global warming crowd has always claimed that the further north one goes, the greater the effect of warming.

This being said, the UK is 5-15 degrees of latitude further north than Ottawa, and they have experienced colder winters for the past three years.

By the way, I'll be in Toronto for this winter, so regardless of how cold it gets this winter it'll seem like a warming compared to Ottawa!

Is that like the Big Bang/singularity crowd and the evolution crowd? The black hole crowd? The dark matter/dark energy crowds?

Just as physics and observations dictate the above theories, so is the general case that the further north in the NH the more rapid the warming.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Ottawa is only 45N.

[Ottawa Blizzard]

Ottawa is only 45N.

exactly. The UK lies between 50-60N. 5-15 degrees further north than Ottawa

[dabize]

Is that like the Big Bang/singularity crowd and the evolution crowd? The black hole crowd? The dark matter/dark energy crowds?

Just as physics and observations dictate the above theories, so is the general case that the further north in the NH the more rapid the warming.

Maximum effect of CO2 will be when/where there is the greatest temp differential change between CO2+ and CO2- situations (i.e. nighttime, winter and high latitude). Not too hard http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm#SEI

Easier principle to demo than evolution, even.

[TerryM]

Possibly off topic - but is there another "ice hurricane" about to strike - this time in the Northern Netherlands?

Been off line all day but haven't heard a thing about this.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Possibly off topic - but is there another "ice hurricane" about to strike - this time in the Northern Netherlands?

Been off line all day but haven't heard a thing about this.

Not surprising.

Upwards of 40-50F temp anomalies heading towards the NP. The warm air is coming off the North Atlantic and western Europe. I will check the models now.

Sub 950mb on that map. No wonder the arctic is torching.

It looks like it maxed out in the mid to upper 940s.

[donsutherland1]

NYC has seen five snow events with 10"+ the past two winters--my personal totals for the five are 24" for 12/26/10, 20" for 1/26/11, 20" for 2/26/10, and 10" for both 12/19/09 and 2/11/10.

This is extremely anomalous--we have been seeing noticeably more large snow events since the 1990s--and I certainly think climate change is part of the explanation... in addition to the other various cycles (long term NAO, etc) we go through.

NYC's climate has become notably wetter since the early 1970s. Years with 50" or more precipitation were infrequent. For now, they're the norm. A wetter climate has almost certainly contributed to more snowfall opportunities, even as overall winter temperatures have continued a slow rise in recent decades. Whether the wetter climate is part of a natural cycle, climate change, or some combination remains to be seen (my guess is some combination). FWIW, the climate models have forecast increased precipitation and also increased frequency of intense precipitation events for the region that includes NYC.

[TerryM]

AO at highest # since mid 1990's

[The_Global_Warmer]

AO at highest # since mid 1990's

Not surprising of the wide area of +20 to +30C temp anomalies in the kara and Laptev.

[CoastalWx]

Well of course GW is blamed for this year's wild weather. Why not. I love how they throw in "freak chance" too.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/12/08/billion-dollar-weather-disasters-smash-us-record.html

Nobody would even care if tornadoes did not strike large pop centers. It was a matter of time before it happened...and it did. Of course this adds to the "freak year" the some meteorologists talk about.

"Hayes, a meteorologist since 1970, said he has never seen a year for extreme weather like this, calling it “the deadly, destructive and relentless 2011."

I'm sure statements like this were a result of seeing the devastation of large pop centers being hit. It magnifies the scope of the event, but would we be reporting this if an EF5 went through the Ozarks, or miles of cornfields and inpacting a town of 200 people in Kansas? Probably not. People are impacted by the images they see on TV. Humans can't help but feel compelled and moved by these images, but I think we need to realize that we had a real unfortunate set of circumstances here. We finally got the scenario many were talking about...a deadly tornado impacting large metro areas. It's a matter of time before some sort of sporting event or concert is next. We got a taste of that by the sad incident in Indiana this year.

As far as Irene..well the thing was barely a cane...but a cane that impacted the East Coast. Again, how is this related to climate change. You had massive flooding in the hill country of NJ up into VT. Well, no kidding. Shoving tropical air over a front in mountainous locations will do that.

[SVT450R]

Well of course GW is blamed for this year's wild weather. Why not. I love how they throw in "freak chance" too.

http://www.dawn.com/...-us-record.html

Nobody would even care if tornadoes did not strike large pop centers. It was a matter of time before it happened...and it did. Of course this adds to the "freak year" the some meteorologists talk about.

"Hayes, a meteorologist since 1970, said he has never seen a year for extreme weather like this, calling it “the deadly, destructive and relentless 2011."

I'm sure statements like this were a result of seeing the devastation of large pop centers being hit. It magnifies the scope of the event, but would we be reporting this if an EF5 went through the Ozarks, or miles of cornfields and inpacting a town of 200 people in Kansas? Probably not. People are impacted by the images they see on TV. Humans can't help but feel compelled and moved by these images, but I think we need to realize that we had a real unfortunate set of circumstances here. We finally got the scenario many were talking about...a deadly tornado impacting large metro areas. It's a matter of time before some sort of sporting event or concert is next. We got a taste of that by the sad incident in Indiana this year.

As far as Irene..well the thing was barely a cane...but a cane that impacted the East Coast. Again, how is this related to climate change. You had massive flooding in the hill country of NJ up into VT. Well, no kidding. Shoving tropical air over a front in mountainous locations will do that.

Agreed on all points. To add about Irene to many people live in flood prone areas not sure why they were ever allowed to be developed in the first place.

[superjames1992]

Do people here think the wild weather (bitter cold and snow in western Europe and US, warmth in northeast Canada) these past couple of years is partly the result of climate change? The climate change theory (and I believe it is just a theory) states that clime zones will shift. Let's face it, it's not supposed to be snowier in Paris and Washington than in Montreal or Ottawa. I realize the negative AO played a big role in this, but Brett Anderson of accuweather has mentioned a theory (not his) that the lack of sea ice helped to cause the extremely negative AO which in turn pushed the below normal temperatures south. In 2009-2010, and early January 2011 it was often almost as cold in DC as it was in Quebec city and Labrador!

Maybe. Maybe not. Time will tell, though!

I hope so, though, because it means exciting weather for us weather weenies! If we have to endure AGW and the problems associated with it, we might as well get some fun out of it.