Gray Lady finally finds proof of global warming
posted at 7:30 pm on July 20, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
In what is becoming a regular summer ritual in America, nearly as certain and predictable as 4th of July parades, the New York Times has finally nailed down the proof of anthropogenic global warming. The evidence? Dude… it’s really, really hot outside in the middle of July!
Every 10 years, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration recalculates what it calls climate “normals,” 30-year averages of temperature and precipitation for about 7,500 locations across the United States. The latest numbers, released earlier this month, show that the climate of the last 10 years was about 1.5 degrees warmer than the climate of the 1970s, and the warmest since the first decade of the last century. Temperatures were, on average, 0.5 degrees warmer from 1981 to 2010 than they were from 1971 to 2000, and the average annual temperatures for all of the lower 48 states have gone up.
So rather than looking at patterns over geologic time scales or the past few millenia or even centuries, we’re now going to extrapolate data about the past and future of the planet based on data collected since I was in the Navy? Over at National Review, Denis Boyles is, ummm… skeptical.
Do “climate scientists” measure global warming by looking at ten-year cycles? Maybe, but it makes you wonder about “the first decade of the last century,” when I suppose it must have been really hot. Before things cooled down during that dust-bowl episode and those world-war events and all that napalm we used to warm the mornings of southeast Asia. We’re still not back up to 1910 levels, apparently.
This is going to happen every year so we should just get used to it. While I’ve said this before, it’s worth repeating. I absolutely think the climate of this planet is changing. I think it’s been changing since it first congealed into its current shape. We have some fairly reliable hints that it has, at times, been much, much hotter than it is now. (Particularly when the dinosaurs were stomping around.) And at least once it’s frozen over to the point where life hung on by a thread.
And we interact with the planet’s biosphere so we probably have some effect on it, but how that plays into other factors, including the unpredictable orbit of the planet around the sun make this a vastly complex formula. To date, nobody has convinced me that we’ve developed the capacity to fully model it.
But I will make a deal with you. When you get to the point where you can reliably… let’s say for forty weeks in a row… tell me on Monday whether or not I’ll need an umbrella when I go out to run errands on Friday, maybe we’ll talk about what the weather will be like in 200 years.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Of course… because every weather event is evidence for AGW.
This is what happens when you start with the conclusion.
mankai on July 20, 2011 at 7:33 PM
This is just an attempt to sweep under the rug the inconvenient fact that temperatures have plateaued over the last 10 years. Want to ignore the fact that temperatures haven’t actually risen in the last decade? Just compare this decade to one that was cooler. Problem solved.
Caiwyn on July 20, 2011 at 7:36 PM
What would we do without those News Scoopers at the NYT?
Oh wait we could look it up ourselves…..
http://www.google.com/m/search?q=the+coming+ice+age%2C+newsweek%2C+time&mshr=17&msbs=&mscq=&mscm=&popt=1&pbx=1&aq=&oq=the+coming+ice+age%2C+newsweek%2C+time&aqi=&fkt=1305&fsdt=24596&cqt=23070&rst=16315&htf=&his=&maction=&csll=&action=<oken=acf4f102
PappyD61 on July 20, 2011 at 7:36 PM
And come this winter it will snow a lot, and people will say a ha! Thus proves there’s no global warming!”
It’s an equally stupid point to make.
YYZ on July 20, 2011 at 7:39 PM
Oh wait, that link shows that the same rags were preaching something completely different 35 years ago!
Does that mean the exalted media doesn’t know shinola?
PappyD61 on July 20, 2011 at 7:39 PM
The proof of AGW is that it gives government the reason to take control over vast swathes of American lives.
That is the only proof proponents will ever need.
Aquateen Hungerforce on July 20, 2011 at 7:40 PM
In case you weren’t paying attention, the AGW hysterics have claimed that snow would be a thing of the past come… oh… around 2010.
So, yeah, when it does snow, it is proof that AGW is false.
Aquateen Hungerforce on July 20, 2011 at 7:41 PM
Actually, I think their position is that the coming Ice Age is caused by “global warming,” too.
Lourdes on July 20, 2011 at 7:42 PM
Weather is not climate, and vice versa.
Tee hee!
jjrakman on July 20, 2011 at 7:44 PM
OMG, it’s like, 116 Human Feeling Degreez!!11!1!
John the Libertarian on July 20, 2011 at 7:44 PM
Oh, and have those 7500 locations stayed exactly the same during that time frame? For example, I know that Denver drastically changed when we moved from Stapleton airport, which was within the city, to DIA, which in on the eastern plains. A record temp from Stapleton has no correlation to a record temp at DIA. DIA gets less moisture, more wind, more hail, etc. than the Stapleton location. Additionally, Stapleton was in the middle of nowhere when it was built, but the city grew up around it, adding the heat island effect into the mix.
I’m guessing that many of those other locations have had similar changes. The Watt’s Up With That? blog has also shown that most weather stations are improperly sited.
Any kind of so-called average or global temp is completely bogus.
Common Sense on July 20, 2011 at 7:45 PM
So it was warmer 100 years ago.
The earth is 4 billion years old.
Rod on July 20, 2011 at 7:46 PM
Please everyone! It’s not global warming anymore. We now use “CLIMATE CHANGE.” Didn’t you get the TPS memo?
VikingGoneWild on July 20, 2011 at 7:47 PM
If only I could afford to put in a full-page spread in the NY Times that reads: GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX.
KillerKane on July 20, 2011 at 7:47 PM
Sorry but wasn’t there a big time global warming guy that complained about sledding and no more snow and he waited and waited for snow to show up, but the evil global warming meant his kid would never see snow?
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/news/http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/news/rfk-jr-15-months-ago-global-warming-means-no-snow-or-cold-dc
Johnnyreb on July 20, 2011 at 7:47 PM
Its been hotter than normal in Seattle according to the official temperature record. The temperature has not been hotter, just the official temperature recording.
AndrewsDad on July 20, 2011 at 7:47 PM
Oh please, they can’t tell you if you will need the umbrella on Monday.
Cindy Munford on July 20, 2011 at 7:53 PM
Well they now have some competition .. CERN is expected tomorrow to announce the tie-in between earth’s climate and the sun … Stay tuned.
And then there is the team of Mexican scientists who have disapproved the whole concept of global warming … It boils down to no roof, no greenhouse effect. Simple.
tarpon on July 20, 2011 at 7:53 PM
You deniers better convert and start paying your tithe before we start a crusade to purge the unbelievers.
Scrappy on July 20, 2011 at 7:53 PM
And I’m sure the NYT’s answer to this, is REGULATION!!! Yeah! You know! Like they’re doing in Texas. Where in Texas we’ll just have to suffer months of 3 digit heat without any relief, even from a fan, so that everything is better, and global warming goes away. Because shame on us for not wanting to die from heat stroke.
capejasmine on July 20, 2011 at 7:55 PM
Kudos for recognizing that 6.5 gigahumans have “some effect on it (the biosphere). Methinks Mr. Shaw’s view may be evolving.
Now, if he could recognize that minds far more analytically developed than his (or mine) are in the process of refining models even as we write. They have also managed to predict the present warming trend some thirty years in advance.
And, even though weather and climate, though related, aren’t the same concept, weather forecasting (which uses much of the same modelling techniques as those used in climate work) have gotten far, far more efficacious over the last three decades.
oakland on July 20, 2011 at 7:59 PM
Guys, today was warmer than yesterday. Obviously global warming is real.
Rambotito on July 20, 2011 at 8:01 PM
No pressure.
thebrokenrattle on July 20, 2011 at 8:04 PM
Remember: When it’s really cold in January, that’s just weather.
Kafir on July 20, 2011 at 8:05 PM
indeed
Scrappy on July 20, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Finding ‘the truth’ is easy when inconvenient research is buried.
Or hidden away.
CPT. Charles on July 20, 2011 at 8:07 PM
If I remember right, it was the AGWers who were saying that lots of snow proves global warming.
So does heat,
and rain,
and drought,
and storms,
and no storms,
and puppies,
and cottage cheese,
and I believe cinder blocks too…
yes, cinder blocks prove AGW.
miConsevative on July 20, 2011 at 8:09 PM
Run that (1.5 degrees/30 years) trend backwards and you can conclude that it was 100 degrees cooler 2000 years ago.
You can prove any trend you want depending on the end points of the sample data you select.
ZenDraken on July 20, 2011 at 8:11 PM
Well, this is hilarious. We don’t even have a century’s worth of comprehensive instrumental readings, and NOAA is ready to pronounce on a singular seminal trend?
Origin of earth – 1978 (4-5 billion years): no satellite-borne instrumented temperature readings. Final 150 or so years of this period: scattered/non-systematic/non-comprehensive temperature readings from very limited portions of the earth’s surface or low atmosphere, obtained with instruments of widely varying quality deployed without any consistent policy on placement or local distorting effects.
1978-2011 (33 years): satellite-borne instrumented temperature readings available.
Yeah, right. We know for sure how much warmer the earth is, on average, today, as opposed to 100 years ago.
J.E. Dyer on July 20, 2011 at 8:11 PM
So when it’s cold and snowy outside, that was proof of global warming, because weather and climate are two separate things.
And when it’s hot and humid outside, that’s also proof of global warming, because weather and climate are the same thing.
And both of these circumstances are also collectively proof of global warming, because weather will get more erratic (ie cold in the winter and hot in the summer) as the world gets hotter.
I’m beginning to think your presuppositions drive your evidence finding with regards to global warming.
Sgt Steve on July 20, 2011 at 8:13 PM
Call me naive, but it seems to me that the fact that it gets really, really hot in the summer is proof that global warming is caused by the sun. Just sayin’ . . .
smellthecoffee on July 20, 2011 at 8:15 PM
Nothing like an AGW thread to motivate you to crawl from under your rock. Pretty hilarious. You’re such a bore.
CW on July 20, 2011 at 8:15 PM
Oh please! When I was a kid, the eco-liberals were busy trying to scare us with predictions of the coming Ice Age.
I’ve learned not to listen to liberals.
wren on July 20, 2011 at 8:16 PM
Weird last summer in the midwest the temperatures were actually pretty moderate and rarely went over 90 degrees. The warming band of the AGW clan was pretty quiet about that truth.
CW on July 20, 2011 at 8:17 PM
Ah, yes, oakland, the AGW troll.
I’m not an expert on climatology, but I _am_ an expert working on his Ph.D. in modeling and simulation.
It would be nice if the people in climatology knew how their models work. Trust me, they don’t. They would NEVER try to make the claims that they do if they understood their models.
Based on personal experience (thus, anecdotal evidence), I have no confidence that these climatologists have ANY grasp of empirical science at all.
Scott H on July 20, 2011 at 8:19 PM
They told us 10 years ago that snow would become rare… their evidence was that we had little snow that winter. This past winter we had record snow and they told us that was also evidence for AGW. Why should I trust their models?
Huh? The forecasting makes the weather come to pass?
mankai on July 20, 2011 at 8:20 PM
Well except that it really has not been warming over the last 15 years. Nice try.
CW on July 20, 2011 at 8:21 PM
Oakland is like those cultists who believe that the world’s end is always around the corner. He like them finds meaning in such grossly exaggerated predictions.
CW on July 20, 2011 at 8:22 PM
You deniers are idiots because you did not believe the propaganda over the actual evidence. hehehe
Grunt on July 20, 2011 at 8:25 PM
The science is settled. There is a consensus.
Kini on July 20, 2011 at 8:27 PM
Yes, and there is a reason the global warming fraudsters always want to compare the 1970s. We were in a four decade cooling trend until the mid 1970s.
Why doesn’t the NYT compare temperatures to the mid 1930s? Because the temperature trend line would be completely flat and plainly show their lies.
RJL on July 20, 2011 at 8:37 PM
Still no eastern hurricanes…hmmm.
Kissmygrits on July 20, 2011 at 8:45 PM
I’m fairly convinced that, generally speaking, it’s more or less warmer in the Summer than it is in the Winter.
But, if we hang around long enough, that will probably change, too.
And, if I should hang around that long, I promise to be the crabbiest 5,000 year old pain in the a** you’ve ever seen.
IndieDogg on July 20, 2011 at 8:50 PM
Still no eastern hurricanes…hmmm.
Kissmygrits on July 20, 2011 at 8:45 PM
To be fair hurricans prior to the last week of July our pretty rare in the Atlantic . Still though you would think if the fear mongers were correct we would have had one by now.
CW on July 20, 2011 at 8:52 PM
Tonight: dark, followed by widely scattered light tomorrow.
…and AGW is true!
mankai on July 20, 2011 at 8:55 PM
I love the NOAA hurricane forecasts:
This year we will have anywhere from 5 to 25 hurricanes.
/
They do though in reality leave themselves a lot of room for error.
CW on July 20, 2011 at 8:58 PM
Y
Molon labe, baby. Molon labe.
chimney sweep on July 20, 2011 at 9:01 PM
Many of us have always believed this. This is exactly why many of us are sickened to see real environmental/conservation efforts being subjugated to the CAGW hoax. It’s a darned shame to watch such resources being diverted to unnecessary efforts.
Kudos for recognizing that 6.5 gigahumans have “some effect on it (the biosphere). Methinks Mr. Shaw’s view may be evolving.
Now, if he could recognize that minds far more analytically developed than his (or mine) are in the process of refining models even as we write. They have also managed to predict the present warming trend some thirty years in advance.
Meaningless paragraph.
1. Climate models don’t work until they work – regardless of weather modeling improvements.
2. Weather isn’t climate. Current outlier weather events aren’t evidence of climate change.
Kudos for recognizing that 6.5 gigahumans have “some effect on it (the biosphere). Methinks Mr. Shaw’s view may be evolving.
Let us know when the models are completed or sufficiently refined. Then release the source code and raw data. We’ve been waiting.
No, they haven’t.
blink on July 20, 2011 at 9:01 PM
I guess they didn’t notice the recent snow in China.
iurockhead on July 20, 2011 at 9:03 PM
Real damage has been done to legitimate efforts to control pollution by the ridiculous assertion that CO2 = pollution. The first thing a Republican administration should do is reverse that silly declaration.
slickwillie2001 on July 20, 2011 at 9:04 PM
AGW…..ain’t nothin’ it can’t do.
Have you seen the economy lately?
AGW!
GarandFan on July 20, 2011 at 9:17 PM
Good piece, Jazz. Nobody has ever produced a reliable and predictable climate model. There are so many variables that just tinkering with one or 2 can give you the results that fits your political end. However, in the southern tier of New York, I can accurately predict Friday’s weather until it snows. It’ll be overcast with a chance of rain. :)
simkeith on July 20, 2011 at 9:22 PM
[Semi-O/T]
Some prep for algore’s September climate stunt.
CPT. Charles on July 20, 2011 at 10:14 PM
Oh no!! You mean, tomorrow is going to be 1.5 degrees warmer than last year? What will I do. I remember distinctly how hot I was last July 21st and now this year I am going to be even HOTTER! How will I stand it.
Evidently, none of the newscasters in my area remember because they keep making a big deal out of how hot it is right now! People, did you forget how to handle heat from July 2010 to July 2011? Is there some memory loss from year to year that prevents most people from recalling that they had to take precautions when out in the heat of summer last year? It’s as if it is totally “unexpected” that this summer will be hot.
chrisknits on July 20, 2011 at 10:59 PM
George, I thought you were dead.
“And the temperature at the airport is 68 degrees, which is stupid, because I don’t know anybody who lives at the airport, man!” ~ The Hippy Dippy Weather Man
Freelancer on July 20, 2011 at 11:30 PM
My faith informs that God has his plan and has provided a place for it to unfold which contains sufficient resources to sustain the objects of his plan through its necessary time.
Meanwhile, practicing a little self-imposed planetary stewardship while producing and consuming, without going all end-of-the-world wacko, is simply part of being a good neighbor. (BTW, environmental wackos practice more faith and are more apocalyptic than most practicing Christians.)
exdeadhead on July 20, 2011 at 11:50 PM
Yes, humankind affects global temperatures.
So do the d__ned frogs, egrets, forests, salmon, volcanoes, indigenous peoples, turtles, insects, orchids, polar bears, and you name it. Everything affects it. And everything affects everything else. This, to you clueless doom-sayers, is call a dynamic system. Ever hear of it?
The AGW folks and their science buddies cannot determine how the climate has been affected, except for the very gross(ly disputable) claim that things are “warmer”. And we are supposed to believe that they have extracted and isolated out of this mind-numbingly complex, indescribable, complex web of interactivity among all species and objects and forces the single thread attributable solely to humankind. What a crock.
ss396 on July 20, 2011 at 11:59 PM
The basic premise of AGW can be stated as “We are doomed, doomed I say, so give me unlimited amounts of money and control over your life.”
Fred 2 on July 21, 2011 at 1:23 AM
Really? The IPCC wasn’t around then and we’re well below the “nothing is done about CO2″ global temperature line of Hansen’s 1988 Congressional briefing. Plus parts of Manhattan aren’t underwater as he predicted would happen by now. Nor is it under any threat, as the 1.8 mm sea rise per year has reduced even further in recent years.
Leftists still can’t adjust to the idea that it’s easy to pull up old assertions on the internet. The climate rapture never came, Oakland. Hansen’s crew have screamed that the seas will flood us all for a long, long time now. After 30 years of hearing cries of “Wolf” and seeing neither hide nor hair, I need to see water lapping at my lawn before I’ll pay attention.
We still can’t grow wheat in Greenland as the Vikings did. Wake me up when we can grow grapes there.
theCork on July 21, 2011 at 4:33 AM
Yes, a grifter’s scheme as old as doomsaying itself. In the Old Testament, when false prophets made bold predictions that didn’t come true, the people stoned them. Smart people.
theCork on July 21, 2011 at 4:37 AM
If only you people would convert to the religion of Marxism we could eliminate the heat island effect plaguing our growing cities!
Or something.
MNHawk on July 21, 2011 at 7:19 AM
An inconvenient suggestion: require every public funded climate forecast computer model to use only the scant data they have prior to 1990 and predict the last 20 years of climate.
Laurence on July 21, 2011 at 7:51 AM
Really? Back in 1980, when they were still claiming we were entering an ice age (including one of the foremost AGWers – Hansen), they were also predicting a warming trend?
Good lord are you dishonest.
Monkeytoe on July 21, 2011 at 8:38 AM
So, weather forecasting to predict weather up to 5 days in advance, which is wrong roughly 50% of the time, uses the same models as the climate geniuses who are trying to claim they can predict 100 years or so into the future? That is your big claim? I’m sure the modeling has improved. But it is hardly the same thing as claiming that it is accurate or science.
The difference between weather forcecasting and “climate science” is that in forecasting they have radar and other tools to make reasonable guesses and put data into the model based on facts. In “climate science” they won’t tell us what data they input to get their conclusions, but I suspect that they are based more on the biases of the person doing the inputting then on any facts.
You can use a computer model to get whatever result you want. That is not science.
Monkeytoe on July 21, 2011 at 8:44 AM
If you want to know whether a problem is real or not, ask about the possible solutions to it. If the solution is giving up freedom and money so that someone else can use it for some amorphous greater good, then it’s probably a hoax.
Example: Are we REALLY worried about oceans rising? Because if we are, I have a solution for you – levees. But Al Gore never talks about building levees, does he?
hawksruleva on July 21, 2011 at 10:07 AM