Global Extremes:8-29-07 NOAA says human activity to blame for increase in gases and hottest temps on record

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Average anual temp for 1914: 65.92
Average anual temp for 2004: 65.925

Omg you're right, the fastest rate ever = 0 degrees!!!

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

Try not to use facts or logic with dave, it confuses him a lot.

So, the weather is hot and there is a heatwave. That does not prove any conclusive link to global warming, since there is no definite trendline.


The problem with proving a correlation of human effect on the environment is causing global warming is that our measurement set is much smaller than known time. A deviation from the highs of thousands of years ago is not indicative of human influence, but could just be a deviation.

That isn't to say we should restart production of CFCs or build bigger suvs, I hate both and wish we would all go to more efficient vehicles. However, I am not really to get all frothy like Dave.

 

[Isla]

But what kind of average is it?

Is it the mean, the median, or the mode? Just asking. Sorry if I don't have time to go research it myself. I am a very busy lady!

 

[GoPackGo]

I remember hot weather like this growing up.

Its been a few years since we've had it this hot.

 

[ECUHITMAN]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

Try not to use facts or logic with dave, it confuses him a lot.

So, the weather is hot and there is a heatwave. That does not prove any conclusive link to global warming, since there is no definite trendline.


The problem with proving a correlation of human effect on the environment is causing global warming is that our measurement set is much smaller than known time. A deviation from the highs of thousands of years ago is not indicative of human influence, but could just be a deviation.

That isn't to say we should restart production of CFCs or build bigger suvs, I hate both and wish we would all go to more efficient vehicles. However, I am not really to get all frothy like Dave.

Actually there is a trendline, you just can't easily see it unless you chart it. I created a chart in Excel using the temps in January.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b234/wblakenc/TulsaOK.jpg

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: Isla
But what kind of average is it?

Is it the mean, the median, or the mode? Just asking. Sorry if I don't have time to go research it myself. I am a very busy lady!

This is the average like I said...twice.....there are median charts I believe, you can look those up.

Originally posted by: ECUHITMAN

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

Try not to use facts or logic with dave, it confuses him a lot.

So, the weather is hot and there is a heatwave. That does not prove any conclusive link to global warming, since there is no definite trendline.


The problem with proving a correlation of human effect on the environment is causing global warming is that our measurement set is much smaller than known time. A deviation from the highs of thousands of years ago is not indicative of human influence, but could just be a deviation.

That isn't to say we should restart production of CFCs or build bigger suvs, I hate both and wish we would all go to more efficient vehicles. However, I am not really to get all frothy like Dave.

Actually there is a trendline, you just can't easily see it unless you chart it. I created a chart in Excel using the temps in January.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b234/wblakenc/TulsaOK.jpg

Exactly, no global warming.

 

[ECUHITMAN]

Well I would not easily say, NO global warming, but not drastic temp change.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: ECUHITMAN

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

Try not to use facts or logic with dave, it confuses him a lot.

So, the weather is hot and there is a heatwave. That does not prove any conclusive link to global warming, since there is no definite trendline.


The problem with proving a correlation of human effect on the environment is causing global warming is that our measurement set is much smaller than known time. A deviation from the highs of thousands of years ago is not indicative of human influence, but could just be a deviation.

That isn't to say we should restart production of CFCs or build bigger suvs, I hate both and wish we would all go to more efficient vehicles. However, I am not really to get all frothy like Dave.

Actually there is a trendline, you just can't easily see it unless you chart it. I created a chart in Excel using the temps in January.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b234/wblakenc/TulsaOK.jpg

A trendline would show a trend that is definitely going up or going down. Add a linear trendline in there and it's flat, or even decreasing in nature.

My problem with "Global Warming" is that it ignores the cyclical nature of Earth and the actual peak that we are in according to a source, like the Vostok cores. Yes, we are at a higher peak, but the earth is somewhat random. The last highest peak was higher than previous peaks, so did little green men cause that one? Actually, I bet it was the dinosaurs and their massive gas problems, pigs were eating too many buffalo wings.

There was water over large parts of the earth before and now they are trapped in glaciers, does that mean it can never happen again? Does it mean that we caused it?

Not really, just means that Earth continues it's cycles.

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: ECUHITMAN
Actually there is a trendline, you just can't easily see it unless you chart it. I created a chart in Excel using the temps in January.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b234/wblakenc/TulsaOK.jpg

A trendline would show a trend that is definitely going up or going down. Add a linear trendline in there and it's flat, or even decreasing in nature.

My problem with "Global Warming" is that it ignores the cyclical nature of Earth and the actual peak that we are in according to a source, like the Vostok cores. Yes, we are at a higher peak, but the earth is somewhat random. The last highest peak was higher than previous peaks, so did little green men cause that one? Actually, I bet it was the dinosaurs and their massive gas problems, pigs were eating too many buffalo wings.

There was water over large parts of the earth before and now they are trapped in glaciers, does that mean it can never happen again? Does it mean that we caused it?

Not really, just means that Earth continues it's cycles.

EDIT: Here you go is the trend line
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m213/Lazy8s/TulsaOk.jpg
And wouldn't you know it? A Negative slope.....Does that mean we have global cooling??? OMG AHHHHH!!!!!!!

Whoops, wrong link for a sec

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Lazy8s


EDIT: Here you go is the trend line
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m213/Lazy8s/TulsaOk.jpg
And wouldn't you know it? A Negative slope.....Does that mean we have global cooling??? OMG AHHHHH!!!!!!!

Whoops, wrong link for a sec

Thats what I got, even when I used different months.

When it comes down to it, the impact we have is not conclusive because the measurement period isn't long enough and the cyclical nature of earth is *MUCH* larger than our comprehension.

Now, what I worry about, is the prolonged up cycle that we could be causing with higher peaks because natural events. How long can we extend the peak, will other events that precipitated minor increases during falling times still happen, thus we peak even higher while maintaining the extended "peak"?

It's like a singer holding a very high and loud note for a long time. Natural limitations are placed by lung capacity. However, lets say you insert tubes into the lungs, artificially increasing capacity, how long can the person then sustain the note? In perpetuity?

Is that good for the Earth?

Probably not. While we may not be directly increasing the temps, we could be causing a prolonged high point with smaller spikes above that due to natural events. This is what we must worry about. But we don't know for a while yet.

Again, that isn't to say we shouldn't cut back, significantly, on our greenhouse gas production. I am vehemently anti-suv and gross consumption. I am not a tree-hugger, but a realist.

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Lazy8s


EDIT: Here you go is the trend line
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m213/Lazy8s/TulsaOk.jpg
And wouldn't you know it? A Negative slope.....Does that mean we have global cooling??? OMG AHHHHH!!!!!!!

Whoops, wrong link for a sec

Thats what I got, even when I used different months.

When it comes down to it, the impact we have is not conclusive because the measurement period isn't long enough and the cyclical nature of earth is *MUCH* larger than our comprehension.

Now, what I worry about, is the prolonged up cycle that we could be causing with higher peaks because natural events. How long can we extend the peak, will other events that precipitated minor increases during falling times still happen, thus we peak even higher while maintaining the extended "peak"?

It's like a singer holding a very high and loud note for a long time. Natural limitations are placed by lung capacity. However, lets say you insert tubes into the lungs, artificially increasing capacity, how long can the person then sustain the note? In perpetuity?

Is that good for the Earth?

Probably not. While we may not be directly increasing the temps, we could be causing a prolonged high point with smaller spikes above that due to natural events. This is what we must worry about. But we don't know for a while yet.

Again, that isn't to say we shouldn't cut back, significantly, on our greenhouse gas production. I am vehemently anti-suv and gross consumption. I am not a tree-hugger, but a realist.

Same here. I think we should cut back on it for a myriad of reasons but I don' think global warming is caused by humans. Is it exacerbated? Possibly, but the numbers are so extremely inconclusive the best evidence at this point probably comes from psychics or Nostradomus. It would be impossible to "prove" temps based on soil samples. What they can prove is there have been multiple (if I remember correctly 6 or more) ice ages in history which leads to the conclusion that the heat/cool cycle is natural. Don't forget as polar ice caps melt the ocean rises, cooling the earth off.

I too am anti-suv and I think the environment needs to be protected. I am also pro critical thinking and reasoning. I think the problem here is the media has created a sort of minimal stabdard of crisis in america. If it's not a "crisis" or "urgent information" then they do not report it. So on a slow news day they decide to take a heat wave and call it global warming. I could just as easily take the blizzard we had in Atlanta (in 93 I believe) and call it the beginning of the next ice age.

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

From the poster that can't follow a link.

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

From the poster that can't follow a link.

From the poster that can't follow a debate.

Note I posted all the relevent information right here for him, not expecting him to spend his work day scouring the link. notice I never asked him to follow the link, I just posted it as proof in case he needed to see I wasn't lying. Way to read what you want and change the meaning as usual.

 

[dahunan]

Why did the Bears in Yellowstone come out of hibernation early?

Why is Spring comine much sooner in many areas

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Why did the Bears in Yellowstone come out of hibernation early?

Why is Spring comine much sooner in many areas

Links?

Why was there water over a large part of the upper midwest, which formed the Great Lakes and the 10,000 lakes in Minnesota and the plains in ND/SD and the sandstone in those same areas?

Why are glaciers on Kilamanjaro not as old as the earth or as old as the rock which formed the mountain?

Why aren't coral deposits are old as the body of water they grow in?

Why do the Vostok cores show cyclical patterns and peaks before man? Did the Dinosaurs drive too many SUVs?

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Why did the Bears in Yellowstone come out of hibernation early?

Why is Spring comine much sooner in many areas

Proof? Links? Has it happened in the past? Earlier than when, last year? The year before? How come my pool opened 2 weeks later due to weather?

That's the problem with global warming. Our records consist of a few hundred years at best. If the bears did wake up earlier perhaps it was increased tourism? Did they put a highway closer to the park? It there increased underground activity by the springs feeding the gysers? did they allow 18-wheelers in the park for the first time? Did some of the wildfires come closer? Did they perhaps go into hibernation earlier effectively hibernating the same ammount of time? Is this the first year this has ever happened?

There are so many factors saying "the bears came out of hibernation earlier" is hardly evidence of anything, if it truly did happen.

EDIT: reading it again maybe this was sarcasm?

 

[dahunan]

Mine wasn't sarcasm.. it did happen in Yellowstone this year

Flowers were blooming early in some of the Northern States this year

Do semi trucks make the flowers bloom early

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Mine wasn't sarcasm.. it did happen in Yellowstone this year

Flowers were blooming early in some of the Northern States this year

Do semi trucks make the flowers bloom early

Hehe told you guys he was only joking. Flowers blooming early! lol! This post needed some humor you're right.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Mine wasn't sarcasm.. it did happen in Yellowstone this year

Flowers were blooming early in some of the Northern States this year

Do semi trucks make the flowers bloom early

This year? Did it happen last, or for the past 5 years?

Will it happen the next 5 years?

 

[Lazy8s]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: dahunan
Mine wasn't sarcasm.. it did happen in Yellowstone this year

Flowers were blooming early in some of the Northern States this year

Do semi trucks make the flowers bloom early

This year? Did it happen last, or for the past 5 years?

Will it happen the next 5 years?

I think he may be refering to this article, it took a while of googling to find it: http://cbs2chicago.com/growyourgarden/local_story_032174132.html
(see? I did the leg work for you) in which there's a comment made about them never seeing a particular flower bloom so early. It however does not state this hasn't actually occured, it makes no reference to this being proof of global warming, and it continues on to say that the weather was cooling off again and they were concerned that the refreeze would kill the flowers. Kind of like the hot streak=global warming argument. Sux for the chicago flower planters though. Better luck next season. Still can't find anything about the bears.

This has actually gotten me interrested in what other unusual events are tied to global warming. I'm looking for an article about teachers in the north taking their kids outside for recess earlier then normal. Then we'll KNOW global warming is real.

Oh crap he may be right. More evidence of global warming...
Albany NY opens 2 public pools early this year:
http://www.albanyny.org/government/mayor/Process.asp?newsid1=303

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

Try not to use facts or logic with dave, it confuses him a lot.

So, the weather is hot and there is a heatwave. That does not prove any conclusive link to global warming, since there is no definite trendline.


The problem with proving a correlation of human effect on the environment is causing global warming is that our measurement set is much smaller than known time. A deviation from the highs of thousands of years ago is not indicative of human influence, but could just be a deviation.

That isn't to say we should restart production of CFCs or build bigger suvs, I hate both and wish we would all go to more efficient vehicles. However, I am not really to get all frothy like Dave.

SUVs are not the fvcking problem. I am sick of people blaming them.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

Try not to use facts or logic with dave, it confuses him a lot.

So, the weather is hot and there is a heatwave. That does not prove any conclusive link to global warming, since there is no definite trendline.


The problem with proving a correlation of human effect on the environment is causing global warming is that our measurement set is much smaller than known time. A deviation from the highs of thousands of years ago is not indicative of human influence, but could just be a deviation.

That isn't to say we should restart production of CFCs or build bigger suvs, I hate both and wish we would all go to more efficient vehicles. However, I am not really to get all frothy like Dave.

SUVs are not the fvcking problem. I am sick of people blaming them.

They are the symptom of the problem, and the most gregarious one. Find something that exemplifies stupid, rampant, and wasteful consumption, better than an SUV, and I will use it.

 

[Pens1566]

Airforce One trips across the country for a one-hour fundraiser for RNC??????

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Lazy8s

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Isla
Lazy8s, I'm curious...

Are the record temperatures you have listed 'outliers' or are they part of a consecutive run of extreme temperatures?

In otherwords, what is the data regarding more frequent, sustained high/low temperatures? There are always anomalies in every year.... what is becoming the norm? Are the patterns changing? Because the plants really care about that.

Exactly Isla.

He is not posting the annual increase in temp which has been shown to be increasing and the highest and fastest rate evar.

He is guilty of selective Googling and Republicing

You know, I almost didn't even respond to this but since you are aparently too stupid to read the post RIGHT ABOVE YOU I will repost the AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPS for you again so that you can see the OFFICIAL RECORD for Tulsa Ok and see how the AVERAGE TEMP for January has gone down 6 DEGREES since 1914. Seriously wtf are you THAT stupid?

Here it is again, just for you, in plain english, from the official source:
Here's the link: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/tsa/climate/tulyeartemp.html

Some highlights:
DATE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YEAR DATE
1914 44.2 37.7 49.8 58.7 67.8 82.2 85.3 81.3 76.1 61.6 53.9 31.5 61.0 1914
1923 48.0 38.8 48.8 61.0 67.9 79.0 85.1 86.4 75.3 58.5 51.3 44.3 62.2 1923
1933 47.4 39.6 52.5 61.5 70.5 80.2 83.8 79.0 77.8 62.3 52.3 46.4 62.9 1933
1939 44.4 36.2 53.8 59.0 70.0 76.8 83.6 82.5 80.6 66.6 47.4 45.2 62.3 1939
2001 35.3 41.3 47.1 66.4 70.6 78.2 87.4 85.2 71.9 62.0 55.2 43.6 62.1 2001
2004 38.6 39.8 54.8 60.2 71.8 75.1 79.1 77.0 74.8 64.9 51.6 42.4 61.0 2004
2005 38.9 45.8 50.7 61.0 69.2 79.6 82.4 83.0 77.2 63.0 54.3 38.7 62.1 2005

Now when you read this understand I am not making this up. This isn't my personal web site. This is an independant group responsible for the National Weather. Please remember tht 40 is higher than 30 and that 85.3 is higher than 82.4. Like I said in the first post, it is rediculous for me to copy and paste the entire link. If you are too lazy to go and prove yourself wrong do not accuse me of twisting the facts. That is all.

Try not to use facts or logic with dave, it confuses him a lot.

So, the weather is hot and there is a heatwave. That does not prove any conclusive link to global warming, since there is no definite trendline.


The problem with proving a correlation of human effect on the environment is causing global warming is that our measurement set is much smaller than known time. A deviation from the highs of thousands of years ago is not indicative of human influence, but could just be a deviation.

That isn't to say we should restart production of CFCs or build bigger suvs, I hate both and wish we would all go to more efficient vehicles. However, I am not really to get all frothy like Dave.

SUVs are not the fvcking problem. I am sick of people blaming them.

They are the symptom of the problem, and the most gregarious one. Find something that exemplifies stupid, rampant, and wasteful consumption, better than an SUV, and I will use it.

Find me a scientific study that suggests SUVs are a large factor in our overall CO2 emissions. The impact they make is not large enough to make a fuss about, IMO. Until we start using a different energy source altogether, all cars that use gas are a part of the problem.

 

[dahunan]

Bears
http://www.climatechange.com.au/2005/01...rm-winter-stirs-sleepy-estonian-bears/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1391050,00.html
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/1-14-2005-64272.asp



Flowers
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5165527