BBC - Global warming 'dips this year' »
Posted By bobo-in-texas 1 year, 7 months ago in Science & TechnologyGlobal temperatures will drop this year UN meteorologists have said. This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998.
Read Full Story at news.bbc.co.uk »
452 Views Share Story 40 Comments Report
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 120 (view all)
-
Neutral
bobo-in-texas1 year, 7 months ago
-
Neutral
Dionys1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"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. "
You mean the Inconvenient Truth of actually reading the article and understanding that it doesn't support your global-warming-denier stance?
Reply -
-
Neutral
Isoparm1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As usual you are cherry-picking what you want to believe. Of course you wouldn't mention the opposing view in the article about a heating trend now would you?. It is a shifting heat balance that is a result of increased green-house gases. Heat and temperature are NOT the same thing. As to where this heat change will take us, remains to be seen. The easiest indicator of which way the balance trends, is to see whether there is a net gain, or loss of global ice mass. Decrease in ice, more heat. Increase in ice, less heat. The polar cap is shrinking, and nations are plotting new polar water-ways for ships. A large portion of ice in Antarctica is breaking-up. It's in all the news! There is a global net ice loss. Check for yourself. This is not that difficult to understand.
Where did your bias come from? Why do you ignore the obvious things to look at, and just cherry-pick items that fit your view?
If you don't understand the science, you will find others here, willing to help you.
Reply -
Neutral
injest1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let me see if I got this right.
The current down trend in global temps is a "fraction of a degree" due to El Nino. And that "fraction of a degree" is about only 7/10th of 1 degree C.
And this should not be compared to the horrors a .72 degree C. increase in global temperatures could bring.
Did math somehow dramatically chance in the last 20 years?
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
quackpot1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Did you even read the article, Wolfie?
The article says that the current cooling is TEMPORARY, due to the effects of La Nina. the article goes on to say "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."
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA: "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."
Yep, over the "pretty long period" of about 18,000 years the earth has been warming, allowing the rise of civilization and even Al Gore.
http://www.atmos.washington.edu/2000Q4/211/grou...
Reply-
Neutral
Isoparm1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Where in the article did it mention 18,000 years? There has been heating AND cooling since then. The number you mentioned, is meaningless.
Why do deniers insist on mentioning Al Gore? He is not a scientist, he's just a messenger. Why not look at the science of specific, NAMED scientists, and discuss the particulars of their research. Wouldn't this make for a more intelligent discussion on the subject instead of cherry-picking articles? Let's talk physics! The science doesn't care about politics, or labels.
Reply
-
-
newbie0420Comment removed: Hard Banned8 Replies
-
Neutral
quackpot1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Can we please have a bit of honesty in reporting, BoBo?
You "forget" to mention the following information from the article:
--The decade 1998 - 2007 was the warmest on record.
--The current weather is dominated by La Nina (powerful and temporary cooling of the Pacific).
--"best estimate for 2008 [is] about 0.4C above the 1961-1990 average, and higher than this if you compared it with further back in the 20th Century."
Reply-
Neutral
bobo-in-texas1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You need to take up the honesty in reporting with that Neocon Capitalist cabal at the BBC.
The fact is is that despite the models, warnings, the "consensus", the temps haven't risen in over 10 years. Perhaps we should reexamine the issue since the predictions are signifigantly off.
Reply -
-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
quackpot: "Can we please have a bit of honesty in reporting, BoBo?".
"The decade 1998 - 2007 was the warmest on record." Gee whiz, how long is that record? (no proxies please).
"The current weather is dominated by La Nina (powerful and temporary cooling of the Pacific)." Would El Nino be an equally powerful and temporary warming event?
"best estimate for 2008 [is] about 0.4C above the 1961-1990 average, and higher than this if you compared it with further back in the 20th Century." How about if we compared it with 1961 to the present?
Everone likes cherries quackpot.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
Dicax_Maximus1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's all been said before..... For my jury, when the "scientists" can ALL agree (you know, like gravity, speed of light, etc), then I'll be worried. At the moment, this is not the case.
I have no doubt that man is a very negative impact on the planet (in a multitude of ways), but on this one ??? See above....
Reply -
-
Neutral
Commodore11 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I wonder how Al the Bore is handling this inconvenient truth? Too bad the nazi liberals had to make something political out of it just because it's a liberal who dreamed up this crap. It would have been much better if it was just informational.
Reply-
Neutral
bluetexasvalley1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It IS information. And Al Gore did not "dream it up". He is just the messenger for a consensus of scientists from all over the planet who have made a study and come to these conclusions.
And if believing that makes me a "nazi liberal", I guess that makes you a communist conservative. Makes as much sense.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
bluenote15221 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Go back to the mid seventies when Time magazine had many many covers on global cooling. The climate is always warming or cooling. That is called a cycle. A segment of that cycle is being defined as a trend. It is morning and the sun is rising does not mean it will continue to rise. A rooster get's conditioned to think that it creates the sunrise by it's call in the morning. He has no more affect on the sunrise than we have on global warming. Stop paying scientist to give you the results you want and they will become objective. If their next paycheck depends on there being a man made problem that is the conclusion they will try to make.
Reply-
Neutral
riverat1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yeah-the global cooling was supposed to be short and sweet but I think we burned through it. It may be time to bring back the atom bomb tests and put a few islands worth of dust into the atmosphere-That'll cool things down. Or maybe someone can start a big volcano--worth a couple degrees.
Reply -
-
-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
it is funny to me how, when one questions man-made global warming (let alone warming of any stripe), all the believers scoff and try to shout that person down as unwilling to look at any evidence, facts, etc. But, when presented with facts that don't mesh with their conclusions (flat temp trend, no increase in ocean temp), the believers just shout down those facts as bogus.
Which are really the ones that won't let anhy facts interfere with their opinions?
Reply -
-
-
100%
slate1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
But experts say we are still clearly in a long-term warming trend - and they forecast a new record high temperature within five years.
Or ten
Or fifteen
Or twenty
We Know it Will Happen, and when it does all you Deniers will have to eat Crow!
Reply -
-
Neutral
cantfoolme1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So as soon as we have a dip in temperature good old BoBo desperately siezes upon this information to bolster up his rather weak argument. Sorry to disappoint you but the overall trend is definately an increase and we have made a major contribution or do you wish to ignore the vast majority of the scientific world? .... Seems you do.
Perhaps the news that hardly any new ice is forming at the poles is one of those 100% certain facts that he BoBo conveniently ignores.
Reply -
-
Neutral
bluenote15221 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Han,
Who is using the cycle of earth temps politically? Consensus among experts that it is manmade? WRONG. Why have you closed your mind on this? You looked like you might have been alive in the seventies. Remember the scare the other way(cooling)? Why is it not a cycle? I have a degree in Climatology and I am just amazed how this stuff is bought hook, line and sinker. It isn't a crisis. It is a cycle! Personally I prefer global warming to cooling. My heating bill is just outrageous!
Hey does anybody have trouble with propeller being sloooooooooooooooooow?
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
HOUSEMD1 year, 7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Some needs to tell Ted Turner, he thinks in a few years the world will end with a few that survive. Those left according to Turner will be cannibals.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE....
Reply -
More News
Download Squad
Engadget
Korean 3D television broadcasts in Full HD just weeks away
Xbox 360 Elegant Edition shows Microsoft how it's done
Tokyo robosuit could make you the sack lifting champion
Buffalo busts out its first 12x Blu-ray burner, powered by USB 3.0
EU closes antitrust investigation into Qualcomm, doesn't levy fines
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.