Global warming? Global temps have not risen since 1998!

T

Taylor

Guest
Global warming 'dips this year'

By Roger Harrabin
BBC News environment analyst

La Nina caused some of the coldest temperatures in memory in China

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.

Rises 'stalled'

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.

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."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm
 
"Taylor" <Taylor@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:-oydnd0m5LQitmvanZ2dnUVZ_viunZ2d@comcast.com...
> Global warming 'dips this year'
>
> By Roger Harrabin
> BBC News environment analyst
>
> La Nina caused some of the coldest temperatures in memory in China
>
> 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.
>
> Rises 'stalled'
>
> 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.
>
> 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."
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm






Still, we better carve 30% out of the global economy to fight global warming


just in case
 
> Global warming 'dips this year'
> 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."


So if temperatures go down it proves "global warming" and if
temperatures go up it proves "global warming" ... And that sound right
to you "global warming" wackos?
 
On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 10:21:42 -0700 (PDT), neoconis_ignoramus
<bellamacina@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Apr 4, 9:59
 
Warmest in recorded history?

Recorded history goes back....100 years?

How about 100 million years of climate history. NOT!
 
On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 18:04:53 -0500, "Taylor" <Taylor@nospam.com> wrote:

>Warmest in recorded history?
>
>Recorded history goes back....100 years?
>
>How about 100 million years of climate history. NOT!
>

You don't need a thermometer to tell all temperatures.
Tree rings tell us a lot, ice core samples and rock and soil samples.
Core samples from the ocean bottom tell us much about past history.
 
>>Warmest in recorded history?
>>Recorded history goes back....100 years?
>>How about 100 million years of climate history. NOT!


> You don't need a thermometer to tell all temperatures.
> Tree rings tell us a lot,


Tea leaves tell you even more!

> ice core samples and rock and soil samples.


This stuff is perfect because it is so open to your nutty
interpretations.

> Core samples from the ocean bottom tell us much about
> past history.


Who is this "us"? Do you have Chicken Little in your pocket?
 
On 06 Apr 2008 15:58:45 GMT, Bert Byfield <bertbyfield@nospam.not>
wrote:

>>>Warmest in recorded history?
>>>Recorded history goes back....100 years?
>>>How about 100 million years of climate history. NOT!

>
>> You don't need a thermometer to tell all temperatures.
>> Tree rings tell us a lot,

>
>Tea leaves tell you even more!
>
>> ice core samples and rock and soil samples.

>
>This stuff is perfect because it is so open to your nutty
>interpretations.
>
>> Core samples from the ocean bottom tell us much about
>> past history.

>
>Who is this "us"? Do you have Chicken Little in your pocket?
>
>
>

The general public is "us" . If you spent more time reading
scientific american, national geographic, and other science reports
instead of watching Bevis and Butthead on TV. Try reading some
historical documents. Their is a huge amount of information available
to anyone who wants to look at it.
I suppose it is easier for a cretin like you to just call people
names and make smart remarks. I don't normally bother with your posts
because you are nothing but a troll.
If I had a turd in my pocket it would be you I was calling "us"
 
>>> Core samples from the ocean bottom tell us much about
>>> past history.


>>Who is this "us"? Do you have Chicken Little in your pocket?


> The general public is "us" .


In your dreams, commie.

> If you spent more time reading
> scientific american, national geographic, and other science
> reports instead of watching Bevis and Butthead on TV.


Everyone not fooled by you is stupid, is that it?

> Try reading some
> historical documents. Their is a huge amount of information
> available to anyone who wants to look at it.


Some real, some not. Your crap is not.

> I suppose it is easier for a cretin like you to just call
> people
> names and make smart remarks. I don't normally bother with your
> posts because you are nothing but a troll.


Sure, when your fake logic fails you, get rude. That is supposed to
prove you are smart? It doesn't work.

> If I had a turd in my pocket it would be you I was calling "us"


A commie's idea of wit... pathetic.
 
Back
Top