Don’t Forget Global Warming: October Temperatures

The UAH satellite based global temperature data is a fun (?) one to watch for a monthly check on what’s going on with global warming. It isn’t necessarily the best data set but it has the rhetorical advantage of being curated by a notable global warming “skeptic”, Dr Roy Spencer and is not derived from ground based weather stations. These factors make it just that bit more absurd when the right pretends that things are not getting warmer.

UAH Global Temperature Update for October 2016: +0.41 deg. C

The latest figures show, unless there is extraordinary cooling in November and December, that 2016 is well on track to become the warmest year in the history of the satellite temperature record.

Which explains why the issue of soaring temperatures has so dominated this US presidential election cycle (!?!)

Advertisements

14 comments

  1. thephantom182

    You mean the peak temp will be back to where it was ~1998? Wow. I guess the Northwest Passage will be open and the polar bears will all be gone real soon. Except for that pesky record ice pack up north the last few years. Ice ain’t cooperating with the warming trend, I guess.

    The one thing about the satellite data that continues to amaze me is that its cobbled together out of experiments and stuff that weren’t primarily designed to measure the Earth’s temperature. You would think that somebody would have flown a bird to give us a gold-standard measurement by now, given the constant uproar over temperatures.

    Nobody cares about global temperatures. They care about taxes. Liberals want to raise them, and global warming is the excuse they’ve chosen. Conservatives want to lower taxes, therefore they have to attack the excuse, lame though it may be.

    Trump is on both sides of the fence simultaneously, he’s like Schrodinger’s fricking cat. We have to wait to see which side the quantum superposition collapses to.

    Personally I’m all for global warming. Canada is a fucking wasteland of swamps, spruce forests, granite and moose shit once you get a couple hundred miles north of the border, and it keeps going that way until you hit ice. Global warming would be AWESOME for Canada. Throw another shrimp on the barbie for me, we need the CO2 up here.

    Like

    • camestrosfelapton

      //You mean the peak temp will be back to where it was ~1998?//

      No, that particular El Nino peak was already surpassed by the 15/2016 El Nino peak. What I’m interested in how the post-El Nino temps are going.

      //Canada is a fucking wasteland of swamps, spruce forests, granite and moose shit once you get a couple hundred miles north of the border//

      Lucky for Canada that it’s politics, economics, population and whole society is in no way connected to the rest of the planet in any fashion and certainly isn’t part of a deeply interconnected world wide network of trade, population movements etc etc. Oh wait…shit, it actually is.

      Liked by 2 people

      • thephantom182

        It’s an ill wind that blows no good, Camestros. Can’t you think of anyplace that would benefit from a nice rise in temperature? There used to be farming in Greenland. Which is now pretty much solid glacier.

        If I remember my history, the rest of the world was not denuded of life when Eric the Red was farming Greenland.

        Longer growing season in the Great White North? Sign me up! I’d love a pecan tree on the front lawn.

        Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        //If I remember my history, the rest of the world was not denuded of life when Eric the Red was farming Greenland.//

        Well by the standard of ‘world not denuded of life’ I agree global warming could be worse.

        Like

  2. thephantom182

    “Well by the standard of ‘world not denuded of life’ I agree global warming could be worse.”

    Please remind me, what vast ecological disaster which destroyed vast tracts of the Earth and killed vast numbers of our ancestors accompanied the Medieval Warm Period?

    Like

    • camestrosfelapton

      Phantom, I really hate to break this to you, but it is already *warmer* than the MWP +and+ the MWP was more localised +and+ we still haven’t reached all the warming we should get from the CO2 we’ve added +AND+ we are still adding MORE CO2.
      Saying that medieval Europe coped with the MWP is like saying we coped with the temperatures of the 1990s (but for a longer period but also with less population pressure and a less complex economy).

      Like

      • thephantom182

        I’ll run right out and buy that farm in Greenland then. Oh wait, drat! Its all still ice. I believe we may need some more coal in the oven, Camestros.

        Not to put too fine a point on it, but I really don’t believe -anything- coming out of the climate “sciences” these days. They’ve been caught with their hand in the cookie jar one too many times. As soon as somebody comes out and says “the science is settled!” and starts going on about “deniers,” my snake-oil alarm starts ringing.

        It is nothing more or less than a moral panic, it will pass just as the Comics Code did, and the Tulip Craze, and other examples of mass stupidity.

        Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        “I’ll run right out and buy that farm in Greenland then. Oh wait, drat! Its all still ice.”

        It was ice in the MWP as well Phantom.

        “but I really don’t believe -anything- coming out of the climate “sciences” these days.”

        Yes, I had noticed that you literally don’t know what you are talking about.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thephantom182

        “Yes, I had noticed that you literally don’t know what you are talking about.”

        That is actually untrue. I do hear what is said, it is just that I have no faith in the truthfulness of the source material. Their credibility is sorely lacking. Even if one tiny thing is true, the rest isn’t, due to prolonged, deliberate lying. Too many NOAA temperature stations set in parking lots, Camestros. So when you trot all this stuff out, it doesn’t matter.

        Kind of like when I talk about guns. No matter what facts get posted, no matter what source material gets quoted, it doesn’t matter. Facts are not at issue. They make no difference.

        Annoying as shit, isn’t it?

        It’s a recurring theme in the Sad Puppies Saga too, and it is why I don’t support opinions with links anymore. I’ve been invariably called a liar despite links, despite actual -video- in fact. Puppy Kickers are not swayed by verifiable facts. Ever.

        For example, we know -exactly- what was said when Truesdale was ejected from WorldCon, there’s a TAPE of it available on the internet. There are still people out there arguing about it, making all manner of claims about how abusive Truesdale was and so forth because their world view requires it.

        Therefore sir, show me a cattle farm in Greenland and Manhattan Island under water. That is the level of proof I need to see before Global Warming is anything other than a fairy tale. Me, and every guy or girl who’s going to vote Trump on the 8th.

        Incidentally, if Hillary loses this election, global warming is dead as a political issue. You’ll never hear it mentioned in a major election again. Just like gun control died with Algore in 2000.

        Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        “Too many NOAA temperature stations set in parking lots, Camestros.”

        Which has zero impact on the satellite temperature record which I posted, but which shows a fair degree of agreement with the weather station based record.

        But to focus on one point of your usual gish-gallop, what happens to the temperature record when station siting issues are accounted for? What if that research is done by a notable global warming denier? I don’t need to speculate because Anthony Watts did a study, trying to prove his point about weather station positioning contaminating the record and…found that the temperature record still showed pretty much the same thing.

        You are just hunting around looking for reasons to pretend facts aren’t facts. That isn’t smart regardless of your politics.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thephantom182

        “Which has zero impact on the satellite temperature record which I posted,…”

        Jesus, man. If they destroyed the ground station network in search of higher temperatures, and they did, I’m supposed to unquestioningly accept satellite data? How many drops of piss spoil the soup, Camestros? The answer is ONE. One drop,

        “You are just hunting around looking for reasons to pretend facts aren’t facts.”

        No. I’m questioning the honesty of the researchers. Climate ‘research” is the Piltdown Man of our time.

        Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        //If they destroyed the ground station network in search of higher temperatures, and they did, //

        No, they didn’t – not even Anthony Watts claims that.

        //I’m supposed to unquestioningly accept satellite data//

        The satellite data curated by a known conservative climate sceptic.

        //No. I’m questioning the honesty of the researchers. //

        To the point of absurdity – to the point in which people who agree with you are apparently in on this giant conspiracy to deceive you.

        Like

  3. Aaron

    Kind of like when I talk about guns. No matter what facts get posted, no matter what source material gets quoted, it doesn’t matter.

    Given that your sources always turn out to be demonstrably wrong, or don’t say what you claim they say, that’s to be expected.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s