CNN meteorologist: Man Made Global Warming Argument Arrogant.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: Graham TX
How can you actually Debate Global Warming without even reading the most extensive Scientific report on the topic? Seriously.. 
Please, Do your homework. Then we can talk:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...r4_syr_spm.pdf
Eleven of the last twelve years (1995-2006) rank among
the twelve warmest years in the instrumental record of global
surface temperature (since 1850). The 100-year linear trend
(1906-2005) of 0.74 [0.56 to 0.92]°C1 is larger than the corresponding
trend of 0.6 [0.4 to 0.8]°C (1901-2000) given in
the Third Assessment Report (TAR) (Figure SPM.1). The temperature
increase is widespread over the globe and is greater
at higher northern latitudes. Land regions have warmed faster
than the oceans (Figures SPM.2, SPM.4). {1.1, 1.2}
Rising sea level is consistent with warming (Figure
SPM.1). Global average sea level has risen since 1961 at an
average rate of 1.8 [1.3 to 2.3] mm/yr and since 1993 at 3.1
[2.4 to 3.8] mm/yr, with contributions from thermal expansion,
melting glaciers and ice caps, and the polar ice sheets.
Whether the faster rate for 1993 to 2003 reflects decadal variation
or an increase in the longer-term trend is unclear. {1.1}
Observed decreases in snow and ice extent are also consistent
with warming (Figure SPM.1).
Satellite data since 1978
show that annual average Arctic sea ice extent has shrunk by
2.7 [2.1 to 3.3]% per decade, with larger decreases in summer
of 7.4 [5.0 to 9.8]% per decade. Mountain glaciers and snow
cover on average have declined in both hemispheres. {1.1}
It is very likely that over the past 50 years: cold days, cold
nights and frosts have become less frequent over most land
areas, and hot days and hot nights have become more frequent.
It is likely that: heat waves have become more frequent over
most land areas, the frequency of heavy precipitation events
has increased over most areas, and since 1975 the incidence
of extreme high sea level3 has increased worldwide. {1.1}
Average Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the
second half of the 20th century were very likely higher than
during any other 50-year period in the last 500 years and likely
the highest in at least the past 1300 years. {1.1}
Please, Just click the Link..
Please, Do your homework. Then we can talk:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...r4_syr_spm.pdf
Eleven of the last twelve years (1995-2006) rank among
the twelve warmest years in the instrumental record of global
surface temperature (since 1850). The 100-year linear trend
(1906-2005) of 0.74 [0.56 to 0.92]°C1 is larger than the corresponding
trend of 0.6 [0.4 to 0.8]°C (1901-2000) given in
the Third Assessment Report (TAR) (Figure SPM.1). The temperature
increase is widespread over the globe and is greater
at higher northern latitudes. Land regions have warmed faster
than the oceans (Figures SPM.2, SPM.4). {1.1, 1.2}
Rising sea level is consistent with warming (Figure
SPM.1). Global average sea level has risen since 1961 at an
average rate of 1.8 [1.3 to 2.3] mm/yr and since 1993 at 3.1
[2.4 to 3.8] mm/yr, with contributions from thermal expansion,
melting glaciers and ice caps, and the polar ice sheets.
Whether the faster rate for 1993 to 2003 reflects decadal variation
or an increase in the longer-term trend is unclear. {1.1}
Observed decreases in snow and ice extent are also consistent
with warming (Figure SPM.1).
Satellite data since 1978
show that annual average Arctic sea ice extent has shrunk by
2.7 [2.1 to 3.3]% per decade, with larger decreases in summer
of 7.4 [5.0 to 9.8]% per decade. Mountain glaciers and snow
cover on average have declined in both hemispheres. {1.1}
It is very likely that over the past 50 years: cold days, cold
nights and frosts have become less frequent over most land
areas, and hot days and hot nights have become more frequent.
It is likely that: heat waves have become more frequent over
most land areas, the frequency of heavy precipitation events
has increased over most areas, and since 1975 the incidence
of extreme high sea level3 has increased worldwide. {1.1}
Average Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the
second half of the 20th century were very likely higher than
during any other 50-year period in the last 500 years and likely
the highest in at least the past 1300 years. {1.1}
Please, Just click the Link..
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
From the First Sentence in the Only "Credible" source I see listed here:
"....due to warmer air temperatures from greenhouse gas emissions..."
Seriously Stealth, I clicked your link, you click mine...
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in the Kootenays
the twelve warmest years in the instrumental record
This is a real good one. Bet GW really spikes when he fires up that grill
The small item in the center of the picture labeled "MMTS" is the temperature sensor that is used to submit monthly climate reports to NCDC.
Now in case you don't see some of the obvious problems with this location and why its a terrible place to measure temperature, I'll list them one by one:
- Sensor is attached to the building, just mere inches away from brickwork
- Sensor is near windows, which radiate heat from heated interior rooms in winter
- Sensor is directly above effluent grates for waste-water, Waste-water is often warmer than the air many months of the year
- Sensor is between three buildings, restricting wind flow
- Sensor is between three buildings, acting as a corner reflector for infrared
- Several exhaust fans near sensor, even though one is disable, there are two more on the walls (silver domes)
- Air conditioner within 35 feet of sensor, enclosed area will tend to trap the exhaust air near sensor
- Sensor is directly over concrete slab
- Refrigeration unit nearby, exhausts air into the enclosed area
- Shadows of all buildings create a valley effect related to sunlight at certain times
- There are two nearby digester pools, which release heat and humidity in the sensor vicinity
- Heat and humidity plume over the site from digesters is often tens of degrees warmer than the air in the wintertime
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: Graham TX
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Southeastern Virginia
No scientist would take direct readings in the areas photographed and link only that info to any conclusions about global temp change.
Im gonna look into your skewed data and get back.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in the Kootenays
Just look around you when you're out and about and you'll probably see some of those weather stations yourself. There's one at the Customs station on the Idhao border right next to the building. I'll take a pic of it someday, I've just been a bit leary. Not sure what they would think about me taking pictures of their guardhouse. You know with terrorism and all.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Just look around you when you're out and about and you'll probably see some of those weather stations yourself. There's one at the Customs station on the Idhao border right next to the building. I'll take a pic of it someday, I've just been a bit leary. Not sure what they would think about me taking pictures of their guardhouse. You know with terrorism and all.
If you read the report, you'd see they don't even base their findings Solely on Instrument readings:
In terrestrial ecosystems, earlier timing of spring events
and poleward and upward shifts in plant and animal ranges
are with very high confidence linked to recent warming. In
some marine and freshwater systems, shifts in ranges and
changes in algal, plankton and fish abundance are with high
confidence associated with rising water temperatures, as well
as related changes in ice cover, salinity, oxygen levels and
circulation. {1.2}
Of the more than 29,000 observational data series, from
75 studies, that show significant change in many physical and
biological systems, more than 89% are consistent with the
direction of change expected as a response to Global warming
Seriously Larry, Read the report, there's a lot of good info in there. Open your eyes. I know you may not Personally Agree with the results, but Facts are facts. It's time to accept the reality of the situation...
Last edited by BHibbs; Dec 21, 2008 at 05:52 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
From: Ames, IA
Reality: Earth has been getting warmer, except for the US being completely frozen as of now. Average temp where i am from right now is 32* and it is a whopping -5* out with -40* wind chills...
Fact: There is nothing we can do to reverse climate change. Thats like an ant trying to move a bowling ball....
Reality: there are homeless and people in poverty and veterans with no money, then there are people spending money on "green" crap. Hell, if i put a green leaf on my truck, i could then lable it a "green" F150 and sell it for twice what it is worth, just so that someone will think they are saving the environment.
I got to go though, i have to go plant a tree so that i feel better since i drove 20 miles in my truck.....
People are really manipulative, confused, and just plain worried all the time about worthless crap....
Zane
Fact: There is nothing we can do to reverse climate change. Thats like an ant trying to move a bowling ball....
Reality: there are homeless and people in poverty and veterans with no money, then there are people spending money on "green" crap. Hell, if i put a green leaf on my truck, i could then lable it a "green" F150 and sell it for twice what it is worth, just so that someone will think they are saving the environment.
I got to go though, i have to go plant a tree so that i feel better since i drove 20 miles in my truck.....
People are really manipulative, confused, and just plain worried all the time about worthless crap....
Zane
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Southeastern Virginia
Just look around you when you're out and about and you'll probably see some of those weather stations yourself. There's one at the Customs station on the Idhao border right next to the building. I'll take a pic of it someday, I've just been a bit leary. Not sure what they would think about me taking pictures of their guardhouse. You know with terrorism and all.
You need to always read all the info before you draw conclusions and make assumptions. Nothing wrong with conclusions and assumptions but if you just scan data or just look at photos you may come away with skewed ideas. This is from your own info out of the Climate Reference Network (CRN) Site Information Handbook you failed to read.
The photos you show would all be considered Class 5 sites (the worst and least considered in any study).
What the NCDC following the NOAA does is classify sites 1-5, class 1 being the best and class 5 being the worst. They then rate the info according to class it is taken from.
They plainly state;
2.2 Local Site Representativity Evaluation (Classification Scheme)
The most desirable local surrounding landscape is a relatively large and flat open area with low
local vegetation in order that the sky view is unobstructed in all directions except at the lower
angles of altitude above the horizon. The area occupied by an individual instrument site is
typically about 18 meters × 18 meters (~60 feet × ~60 feet).
Local environmental and nearby terrain factors have an influence on the "quality of a
measurement." The selection of a USCRN instrument site will be the result of a balance
between competing demands, such as those highlighted above and an assessment of the “quality
of measurements” guidelines outlined below.
There will be many sites that are less than ideal. The USCRN will use the classification scheme
below to document the “meteorological measurements representativity” at each site. This
scheme, described by Michel Leroy (1998), is being used by Meteo-France to classify their
network of approximately 550 stations. The classification ranges from 1 to 5 for each measured
parameter. The errors for the different classes are estimated values.
2.2.1 Classification for Temperature/Humidity
Class 1 – Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3
(<19º). Grass/low vegetation ground cover <10 centimeters high. Sensors located at
least 100 meters from artificial heating or reflecting surfaces, such as buildings, concrete
surfaces, and parking lots. Far from large bodies of water, except if it is representative of
the area, and then located at least 100 meters away. No shading when the sun elevation
>3 degrees.
Class 2 – Same as Class 1 with the following differences. Surrounding Vegetation <25
centimeters. Artificial heating sources within 30m. No shading for a sun elevation >5º.
Class 3 (error 1ºC) – Same as Class 2, except no artificial heating sources within 10
meters.
Class 4 (error ≥ 2ºC) – Artificial heating sources <10 meters.
Class 5 (error ≥ 5ºC) – Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating
source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface.
Last edited by Old Dogg™; Dec 22, 2008 at 01:14 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: Graham TX
Larry,
You need to always read all the info before you draw conclusions and make assumptions. Nothing wrong with conclusions and assumptions but if you just scan data or just look at photos you may come away with skewed ideas. This is from your own info out of the Climate Reference Network (CRN) Site Information Handbook you failed to read.
The photos you show would all be considered Class 5 sites (the worst and least considered in any study).
What the NCDC following the NOAA does is classify sites 1-5, class 1 being the best and class 5 being the worst. They then rate the info according to class it is taken from.
They plainly state;
2.2 Local Site Representativity Evaluation (Classification Scheme)
The most desirable local surrounding landscape is a relatively large and flat open area with low
local vegetation in order that the sky view is unobstructed in all directions except at the lower
angles of altitude above the horizon. The area occupied by an individual instrument site is
typically about 18 meters × 18 meters (~60 feet × ~60 feet).
Local environmental and nearby terrain factors have an influence on the "quality of a
measurement." The selection of a USCRN instrument site will be the result of a balance
between competing demands, such as those highlighted above and an assessment of the “quality
of measurements” guidelines outlined below.
There will be many sites that are less than ideal. The USCRN will use the classification scheme
below to document the “meteorological measurements representativity” at each site. This
scheme, described by Michel Leroy (1998), is being used by Meteo-France to classify their
network of approximately 550 stations. The classification ranges from 1 to 5 for each measured
parameter. The errors for the different classes are estimated values.
2.2.1 Classification for Temperature/Humidity
Class 1 – Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3
(<19ş). Grass/low vegetation ground cover <10 centimeters high. Sensors located at
least 100 meters from artificial heating or reflecting surfaces, such as buildings, concrete
surfaces, and parking lots. Far from large bodies of water, except if it is representative of
the area, and then located at least 100 meters away. No shading when the sun elevation
>3 degrees.
Class 2 – Same as Class 1 with the following differences. Surrounding Vegetation <25
centimeters. Artificial heating sources within 30m. No shading for a sun elevation >5ş.
Class 3 (error 1şC) – Same as Class 2, except no artificial heating sources within 10
meters.
Class 4 (error ≥ 2şC) – Artificial heating sources <10 meters.
Class 5 (error ≥ 5şC) – Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating
source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface.
You need to always read all the info before you draw conclusions and make assumptions. Nothing wrong with conclusions and assumptions but if you just scan data or just look at photos you may come away with skewed ideas. This is from your own info out of the Climate Reference Network (CRN) Site Information Handbook you failed to read.
The photos you show would all be considered Class 5 sites (the worst and least considered in any study).
What the NCDC following the NOAA does is classify sites 1-5, class 1 being the best and class 5 being the worst. They then rate the info according to class it is taken from.
They plainly state;
2.2 Local Site Representativity Evaluation (Classification Scheme)
The most desirable local surrounding landscape is a relatively large and flat open area with low
local vegetation in order that the sky view is unobstructed in all directions except at the lower
angles of altitude above the horizon. The area occupied by an individual instrument site is
typically about 18 meters × 18 meters (~60 feet × ~60 feet).
Local environmental and nearby terrain factors have an influence on the "quality of a
measurement." The selection of a USCRN instrument site will be the result of a balance
between competing demands, such as those highlighted above and an assessment of the “quality
of measurements” guidelines outlined below.
There will be many sites that are less than ideal. The USCRN will use the classification scheme
below to document the “meteorological measurements representativity” at each site. This
scheme, described by Michel Leroy (1998), is being used by Meteo-France to classify their
network of approximately 550 stations. The classification ranges from 1 to 5 for each measured
parameter. The errors for the different classes are estimated values.
2.2.1 Classification for Temperature/Humidity
Class 1 – Flat and horizontal ground surrounded by a clear surface with a slope below 1/3
(<19ş). Grass/low vegetation ground cover <10 centimeters high. Sensors located at
least 100 meters from artificial heating or reflecting surfaces, such as buildings, concrete
surfaces, and parking lots. Far from large bodies of water, except if it is representative of
the area, and then located at least 100 meters away. No shading when the sun elevation
>3 degrees.
Class 2 – Same as Class 1 with the following differences. Surrounding Vegetation <25
centimeters. Artificial heating sources within 30m. No shading for a sun elevation >5ş.
Class 3 (error 1şC) – Same as Class 2, except no artificial heating sources within 10
meters.
Class 4 (error ≥ 2şC) – Artificial heating sources <10 meters.
Class 5 (error ≥ 5şC) – Temperature sensor located next to/above an artificial heating
source, such a building, roof top, parking lot, or concrete surface.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Southeastern Virginia
Science is simple.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Southeastern Virginia
Most of the sensors pictured would always trend high because of location. They automatically give them a 5°C error. Over time there will be average readings. If average temps increase over years, they increase everywhere.
People keep looking at extremes not averages.
You do Aquariums yes?
It's a semi closed system (semi because of water changes). If you take temp readings all over the tank and average them that is the average. If someone sees you taking 1 reading from near the lights at the top of the tank and says your averages are off, they would be wrong yes?
Now in your aquarium you put 1 drop of bleach daily in 100 gallons of water and do no water changes. Over years will this have an effect?
Our planet is a closed system.
