No Global Warming as Temperatures Drop

by What-A-Coincidence 12 Replies latest jw friends

  • What-A-Coincidence
    What-A-Coincidence

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm

    Short Version:

    Global temperatures will drop slightly this year as a result of the cooling effect of the La Nina current in the Pacific, UN meteorologists have said.

    The World Meteorological Organization’s secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.

    This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.

    But experts say we are still clearly in a long-term warming trend - and they forecast a new record high temperature within five years.

    The WMO points out that the decade from 1998 to 2007 was the warmest on record. Since the beginning of the 20th Century, the global average surface temperature has risen by 0.74C.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Global temperatures for 2008 will be slightly cooler than last year as a result of the cold La Nina current in the Pacific, UN meteorologists have said.

    The World Meteorological Organization's secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.

    But this year's temperatures would still be way above the average - and we would soon exceed the record year of 1998 because of global warming induced by greenhouse gases.

    The WMO points out that the decade from 1998 to 2007 was the warmest on record. Since the beginning of the 20th Century, the global average surface temperature has risen by 0.74C.

    While Nasa, the US space agency, cites 2005 as the warmest year, the UK's Hadley Centre lists it as second to 1998.

    Researchers say the uncertainty in the observed value for any particular year is larger than these small temperature differences. What matters, they say, is the long-term upward trend.

    Rises 'stalled'

    altLA NINA KEY FACTS La Nina 2008 Forecast (Source: UK Met Office Hadley Centre) La Nina translates from the Spanish as "The Child Girl" Refers to the extensive cooling of the central and eastern Pacific Increased sea temperatures on the western side of the Pacific mean the atmosphere has more energy and frequency of heavy rain and thunderstorms is increased Typically lasts for up to 12 months and generally less damaging event than the stronger El Nino

    La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world.

    El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.

    It has contributed to torrential rains in Australia and to some of the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China.

    Mr Jarraud told the BBC that the effect was likely to continue into the summer, depressing temperatures globally by a fraction of a degree.

    This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.

    Watching trends

    A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted.

    Animation of El Nino and La Nina effects

    But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 2008 temperatures would still be well above average for the century.

    "When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year," he said. "You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.

    "La Nina is part of what we call 'variability'. There has always been and there will always be cooler and warmer years, but what is important for climate change is that the trend is up; the climate on average is warming even if there is a temporary cooling because of La Nina."

    China suffered from heavy snow in January

    Adam Scaife, lead scientist for Modelling Climate Variability at the Hadley Centre in Exeter, UK, said their best estimate for 2008 was about 0.4C above the 1961-1990 average, and higher than this if you compared it with further back in the 20th Century.

    Mr Scaife told the BBC: "What's happened now is that La Nina has come along and depressed temperatures slightly but these changes are very small compared to the long-term climate change signal, and in a few years time we are confident that the current record temperature of 1998 will be beaten when the La Nina has ended."

  • BrentR
    BrentR

    WAC, you climate heretic you! You just made CNN and Pastor Gore very angry! It's people like you that always ruin a great scam with the facts.

    http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20080313_coolest.html

    Who would have thought that the earth can cool it'self off? Or warm it'self up like it did after the mini ice age in the early 1300's?

  • WTWizard
    WTWizard

    Well, if it is also warming up on Mars, then I can run my computer (and my Christmas lights) without too much worry about preventing a boasting session from being cancelled for snow. There are no computers, Christmas lights, or SUVs on Mars, and it is warming up anyways.

    However, that is still not an excuse to waste energy on totally stupid things. Going out in field circus is still a total waste of energy, and produces absolutely zero value. And so does printing up the littera-trash. Zero value with a high cost of energy makes no sense.

  • potleg
    potleg

    Think of all the hot air and methane emitted by the governing body. If they'd just keep their traps shut the whole world would be better off.

  • Gopher
    Gopher

    Of course, La Nina will occasionally moderate the overall rise in earth's temperature. But the long-term trend is still upwards. To quote from your post:

    The WMO points out that the decade from 1998 to 2007 was the warmest on record. Since the beginning of the 20th Century, the global average surface temperature has risen by 0.74C.

    Are you suggesting global warming has halted and the science behind it is all wrong?

    If so, why did a large ice sheet (7 times the size of Manhattan) just break off in Antarctica? (See article below) And why are the arctic ice caps melting putting polar bears at risk? I guess you can whistle dixie and pretend everything is good, and that will lead to inaction and leaving the problem for later generations, when it may be too late.

    It's ironic that this post was made less than 2 weeks after the below news came out.

    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2008-03-25-antartica--collapse_N.htm?csp=34

    Large Antarctic ice chunk collapses

    A photo series shows the Wilkins ice shelf as it began to break up in a rapidly warming area of Antarctica. The large image is from March 8, 2008. At right, from top to bottom, are Feb. 28, Feb. 29, and March 6.A photo series shows the Wilkins ice shelf as it began to break up in a rapidly warming area of Antarctica. The large image is from March 8, 2008. At right, from top to bottom, are Feb. 28, Feb. 29, and March 6. WASHINGTON (AP) — A chunk of Antarctic ice about seven times the size of Manhattan suddenly collapsed, putting an even greater portion of glacial ice at risk, scientists said Tuesday.

    Satellite images show the runaway disintegration of a 160-square-mile chunk in western Antarctica, which started Feb. 28. It was the edge of the Wilkins ice shelf and has been there for hundreds, maybe 1,500 years.

    This is the result of global warming, said British Antarctic Survey scientist David Vaughan.

    Because scientists noticed satellite images within hours, they diverted satellite cameras and even flew an airplane over the ongoing collapse for rare pictures and video.

    "It's an event we don't get to see very often," said Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo. "The cracks fill with water and slice off and topple... That gets to be a runaway situation."

    While icebergs naturally break away from the mainland, collapses like this are unusual but are happening more frequently in recent decades, Vaughan said. The collapse is similar to what happens to hardened glass when it is smashed with a hammer, he said.

    The rest of the Wilkins ice shelf, which is about the size of Connecticut, is holding on by a narrow beam of thin ice. Scientists worry that it too may collapse. Larger, more dramatic ice collapses occurred in 2002 and 1995.

    Vaughan had predicted the Wilkins shelf would collapse about 15 years from now. The part that recently gave way makes up about 4% of the overall shelf, but it's an important part that can trigger further collapse.

    There's still a chance the rest of the ice shelf will survive until next year because this is the end of the Antarctic summer and colder weather is setting in, Vaughan said.

    Scientists said they are not concerned about a rise in sea level from the latest event, but say it's a sign of worsening global warming.

    Such occurrences are "more indicative of a tipping point or trigger in the climate system," said Sarah Das, a scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute.

    "These are things that are not re-forming," Das said. "So once they're gone, they're gone."

    Climate in Antarctica is complicated and more isolated from the rest of the world.

    Much of the continent is not warming and some parts are even cooling, Vaughan said. However, the western peninsula, which includes the Wilkins ice shelf, juts out into the ocean and is warming. This is the part of the continent where scientists are most concern about ice-melt triggering sea level rise.

  • Alpaca
    Alpaca

    Hi to everyone interested in this subject,

    The important thing to recoginize about global climate change is the time scale. Weather is what happens on a daily, monthly, annual, or even multi-annual time scale. Climate change is what happens on scales of decades to centuries or millenia. Within the time scales of climate change there is a natural variation in global temperature as it rises and falls, but what is important is the long-term trend. That is precisely what climatologists are pointing out (see the highlighted text below).

    Another important fact, that is generally overlooked in the popular press, is that rapid global climate change (which we are experiencing even as we speak) displaces climate patterns that have been entrenched for centuries or millenia. This causes chaotic (from the human temporal view), difficult to predict, erratic changes in weather patterns. Rapid global climate change also means that there will greater extremes of cold, heat, aridity, and rain that will not be evenly distributed throughout the world. Some areas will suffer from extremes and other areas will suffer little or no change in their climate.

    One thing that is certain, is that global sea level is rising, and it won't take much of a rise to displace hundreds of millions of coastal dwellers around the world ( 75% of the earth's population lives within 60 kilometers of a coast). Any way you slice it, the human family is in for one hell of a rough ride in the near foreseeable future. Anyone who is under the age of 50 is going to see unbelievable climate induced changes to the world in their lifetimes.

    When you guys read reports that tend to downplay the seriousness of the issue, try to look critically at the reports and understand the nuances of the language.

    Gopher's comments (thanks, great post) are also well taken into consideration.

    Cheers to all,

    Alex (I am a geologist)

    Researchers say the uncertainty in the observed value for any particular year is larger than these small temperature differences. What matters, they say, is the long-term upward trend.

    Rises 'stalled'

    alt

    La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world.

    El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.

    It has contributed to torrential rains in Australia and to some of the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China.

    Mr Jarraud told the BBC that the effect was likely to continue into the summer, depressing temperatures globally by a fraction of a degree.

    This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.

    Watching trends

    A minority of scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted.

    Animation of El Nino and La Nina effects

    But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 2008 temperatures would still be well above average for the century.

    "When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year," he said. "You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.

  • BrentR
    BrentR

    The Early Twentieth-Century Warming in the Arctic—A Possible Mechanism

    Lennart Bengtsson

    Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany, and Environmental Systems Science Centre, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

    Vladimir A. Semenov

    Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany, and Obukhov Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Moscow, Russia

    Ola M. Johannessen

    Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center/Geophysical Institute, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

    (Manuscript received 7 April 2003, in final form 23 February 2004)

    DOI: 10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<4045:TETWIT>2.0.CO;2

    ABSTRACT

    The huge warming of the Arctic that started in the early 1920s and lasted for almost two decades is one of the most spectacular climate events of the twentieth century. During the peak period 1930–40, the annually averaged temperature anomaly for the area 60°–90°N amounted to some 1.7°C. Whether this event is an example of an internal climate mode or is externally forced, such as by enhanced solar effects, is presently under debate. This study suggests that natural variability is a likely cause, with reduced sea ice cover being crucial for the warming. A robust sea ice–air temperature relationship was demonstrated by a set of four simulations with the atmospheric ECHAM model forced with observed SST and sea ice concentrations. An analysis of the spatial characteristics of the observed early twentieth-century surface air temperature anomaly revealed that it was associated with similar sea ice variations. Further investigation of the variability of Arctic surface temperature and sea ice cover was performed by analyzing data from a coupled ocean–atmosphere model. By analyzing climate anomalies in the model that are similar to those that occurred in the early twentieth century, it was found that the simulated temperature increase in the Arctic was related to enhanced wind-driven oceanic inflow into the Barents Sea with an associated sea ice retreat. The magnitude of the inflow is linked to the strength of westerlies into the Barents Sea. This study proposes a mechanism sustaining the enhanced westerly winds by a cyclonic atmospheric circulation in the Barents Sea region created by a strong surface heat flux over the ice-free areas. Observational data suggest a similar series of events during the early twentieth-century Arctic warming, including increasing westerly winds between Spitsbergen and Norway, reduced sea ice, and enhanced cyclonic circulation over the Barents Sea. At the same time, the North Atlantic Oscillation was weakening.

  • funkyderek
    funkyderek

    Well that proves it. Unless every square millimetre of the planet is increasing in temperature every single second, then it's obvious that global warming must be a lie made up by Al Gore.

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine

    lol @ funky. The global warming deniers group is a real brain trust, ain't dey?

  • Qcmbr
    Qcmbr

    Who cares if any ice shelf collapses??

    I listen to climate change worriers when they propose an exciting life enhancing attitude (i.e. let's look at how we farm, eat less meat but of a higher quality, let's create less rubbish with innovative thinking etc..)

    I switch off when the answers are: increase taxation, hold back developing nations and crap in a bucket for the rest of your life.

    At any moment in time this planet is warming and cooling, glaciers are expanding or retreating, CO2 is increasing or decreasing and so on - change is the fundamental state of the universe - fear seems to be the fundamental desired state by the worlds institutions and tax makers.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit