What is the difference between Global Warming and Climate Change and Weather?

[ArtRosen]

If our globe is warming, wouldn't that effect our daily temperatures? If enough ice melts, wouldn't that slow the gulf stream and cause an ice age? Wouldn't THAT effect our weather? Why are blizzards happening more frequently than they used to?

I'm not a denier, nor a believer - I'm simply ignorant. Hopefully someone can help me.

[Snow_Miser]

If our globe is warming, wouldn't that effect our daily temperatures? If enough ice melts, wouldn't that slow the gulf stream and cause an ice age? Wouldn't THAT effect our weather? Why are blizzards happening more frequently than they used to?

I'm not a denier, nor a believer - I'm simply ignorant. Hopefully someone can help me.

Hi ArtRosen,

Climate Change is an extremely controversial issue. There are a ton of arguments going on about Weather VS. Climate, but the key, is that hundreds of tiny day to day weathers make up climate.

The daily weather can not be explained by Climate Change, as Climate can not work it's way into weather. It's the other way around.

In the 1970s, An Ice Age was feared. My grandparents told me that these recent blizzards (which were only one event; the year before the Mid Atlantic was snow starved) reminded them of the blizzards back in the 70s.

Snow was blamed on Global Cooling. Now it's the other way around. What could have changed in just a short amount of time?

In fact, one of the climatologists that supported AGW today, appeared here on History's Ice Age show.

DR. STEPHEN SCHNEIDER: Can we do these things? Yes. But will they make things better? I'm not sure. We can't predict with any certainty what's happening to our own climatic future. How can we come along and intervene then in that ignorance? You could melt the icecaps. What would that do to the coastal cities? The cure could be worse than the disease. Would that be better or worse than the risk of an ice age?

There also has been no study to date that shows that Europe will go into an Ice Age due to the slowing of the Gulf Stream. (Which by the way was a fictional theory proposed by Hollywood's Day After Tomorrow).

But I'm not trying to convince you. These are just my opinions. My advice is to go and look at the facts, then once you have looked at the facts, form a conjeture.

Hope this helps.

[Kelvin Wave]

The main differences between climate and weather are time scales. What we call "weather" occurs on time scales of days to weeks -examples: tornadoes (minutes to hours), hurricanes (days to weeks), and everything in between. What we call "climate" occurs on longer time scales, typically on the order of months to years and longer. Examples include El Nino (2-6 year period), Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (~20 year period? If I recall correctly), etc.

Variations that occur with time periods on the order of years are usually referred to as "climate variability". Aside from ENSO and the AMO, the North Atlantic Oscillation (aka. Nothern Annular Mode) and Pacific/North American Pattern, etc. are also examples of climate variability. These particular examples have significant variability at almost all time scales, from days to week to months to years to decades! If you are familiar with spectral analysis, we would say that these have power at nearly all time scales (white noise).

Anything that varies on longer time scales than this is generally lumped together as "paleoclimatology". Examples might include ice ages and longer scale fluctuations of the modes listed above.

It's important to keep in mind that there is no clear cut distinction between climate and weather. Some things (such as tornadoes) are clearly weather and others (such as global warming) are clearly climate. However, there are a lot of phenomena that occur in between these, and we typically refer to this "grey area" as the "climate-weather interface". This has become a huge topic recently... a prime example of this is the Madden Julian Oscillation which occurs with a period of roughly 30-90 days and has demonstrable impacts on weather and climate around the globe.

"Global Warming" and "Climate Change" are essentially the same thing. No one should argue with you that the climate is constantly changing... that's what it does. However, many will argue that the particular change of interest in climate is a warming of the Earth's surface temperature averaged around the globe. This is referred to as global warming. Note that "global warming" refers to the trend of the Earth's average temperature, not the temperature at any one point or at any given moment.

That said, climate can affect weather and weather can affect climate. Meteorologists look at weather as the force that drives climate, and climatologists look at climate as a large scale phenomenon that drives weather. Funny how that works! Neither is right nor wrong, but both have good points that can be applied in different ways.

As far as the answers to your questions:

(1) A warming Earth would affect the daily temperatures on AVERAGE, not on any one particular day. If the average temperature of the Earth increased by 2 degrees Celsius, then one would expect that the average temperature around the entire globe would be higher. This does not mean that in any one particular area temperature would necessarily be higher. Some places might see more cold days and some might see more warm days. The key here is that the average would be warmer than before.

(2) I'm not an expert on ocean currents, but I believe that ice melt would increase the amount of fresh water in the oceans. This means that the salt content (salinity) would decrease. Salty water is more dense so it tends to sink whereas fresh water floats. I do not know the exact predictions for ocean currents in a warmed world, but I guarantee that they are a function of the salinity of the water.

(3) I'll let someone else tackle this one. It's important to remember, though, that a global warming does not mean that every location on Earth will warm. I said this before, and I repeat it because it is so important and so commonly misunderstood. An increase in the average temperature of the Earth does not require any specific places to get warmer. The important part is that if all of the temperatures on the globe were averages together, over time, they would be warmer than, say, 30 years ago.

EDIT: The ice age that you are thinking is likely this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age. This particular ice age, called the "Little Ice Age" is explained in detail at that link. The theory that I was always taught in my undergraduate meteorology/climatology classes was that the ocean circulation (thermohaline circulation) weakened and that was what pushed Europe and neighbors into their mini ice age. The Wikipedia article lists other possible causes that I am much less familiar with so I won't comment on those.

[aslkahuna]

One of the hypotheses dealing with the LIA is that the sharp decrease in Solar activity during the Spörer and Maunder Minima resulted in the cooling. The MWP was also ascribed to a period of highly increased Solar activity. The slowdown of the thermohaline circulation (which includes the Gulf Stream) is NOT a fictional Hollywood construct but is a viable working scientific hypothesis which seeks to explain, among other things, the sharp cooling of the Younger Dryas 13000 years ago after the last Ice Age began ending. It is believed that a large infusion of fresh melt water slowed the thermohaline leading to the cooling. The fear here is if GW passes a certain level there will be sufficient melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet to do the same which could cause quite an opposite effect from what we are being told would happen by various psuedoscientists like Albert I and Prince Charles and some actual ones who should know better like Hansen.

Steve

[BethesdaWX]

One of the hypotheses dealing with the LIA is that the sharp decrease in Solar activity during the Spörer and Maunder Minima resulted in the cooling. The MWP was also ascribed to a period of highly increased Solar activity. The slowdown of the thermohaline circulation (which includes the Gulf Stream) is NOT a fictional Hollywood construct but is a viable working scientific hypothesis which seeks to explain, among other things, the sharp cooling of the Younger Dryas 13000 years ago after the last Ice Age began ending. It is believed that a large infusion of fresh melt water slowed the thermohaline leading to the cooling. The fear here is if GW passes a certain level there will be sufficient melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet to do the same which could cause quite an opposite effect from what we are being told would happen by various psuedoscientists like Albert I and Prince Charles and some actual ones who should know better like Hansen.

Steve

Exactly.....if Solar can lower the global temp to -0.8C (LIA) & raise it to +0.8C (MWP).......whata makes you think our modern max hasn't done the same?

[aslkahuna]

Exactly.....if Solar can lower the global temp to -0.8C (LIA) & raise it to +0.8C (MWP).......whata makes you think our modern max hasn't done the same?

I don't think the modern max is on the level of the MWP one so its effects are most likely less.

Steve

[NEXtreme]

Global Warming was replaced with Climate change because people caught on to the big scam. Now they are actually looking to change the wording from climate change to something else because well you know the rest.

[BethesdaWX]

I don't think the modern max is on the level of the MWP one so its effects are most likely less.

Steve

They were pretty similar probably, the Medieval Maximum lasted longer though....if this upcoming minimum is legit.

The MWP had glaciers alot smaller than they are today. Trees grew where there is now think ice year round. There is evidence that arctic summers could have been nearly Ice Free on a regular basis.

So, yes it was most likely warmer than today, as there is evidence of a higher treeline than today in the Intermountain US West, Asia, Europe, & in the southern America. CRU's Phil Jones stated "If the MWP was indeed global, then it was most likely as warm or warmer than today".

Given the fact that the RWP was alot warmer than the MWP (armies crossed the alps no problem), there is no reason that our recent maximum didn't cause the warming we've seen. Sure, maybe CO2 had an additional impact, as well as urbanization, deforestation, etc.

We'll see in time.

[beneficii]

Global Warming was replaced with Climate change because people caught on to the big scam. Now they are actually looking to change the wording from climate change to something else because well you know the rest.

LOL.

[WeatherRusty]

Global Warming was replaced with Climate change because people caught on to the big scam. Now they are actually looking to change the wording from climate change to something else because well you know the rest.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (circa 1988)

LOL doubly hard

[BethesdaWX]

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (circa 1988)

LOL doubly hard

Global Warming, Climate Change, Global Climate Disrpution, Climate Challenges....whats next?

[bobbutts]

If our globe is warming, wouldn't that effect our daily temperatures? If enough ice melts, wouldn't that slow the gulf stream and cause an ice age? Wouldn't THAT effect our weather? Why are blizzards happening more frequently than they used to?

I'm not a denier, nor a believer - I'm simply ignorant. Hopefully someone can help me.

Nobody has good answers to your question. The way I see it, co2 has affected the climate by increasing trapped heat, but nobody understands the complex feedbacks that are occurring or will occur in the future. Nobody can predict other factors (sun, volcanoes, etc) with much accuracy, so you end up with a huge range of forecasts. The media and many climate scientists have advertised the most extreme scenarios from these forecasts, which are now busting. The masses are becoming upset and more skeptical about these busted forecasts. Quite a bit of money and political stock is on the line, so there is motivation for many to reach certain conclusions regardless of their validity.