Global Warming

[Henry Hawk]

I believe the high for this date was recorded around 100yrs ago and was 79.

Boston, 4-18-1976, the temp was 94 degrees.

http://weather.yahoo.com/climo/USMA0046_f.html?woeid=2367105

[Exterminator]

Boston, 4-18-1976, the temp was 94 degrees.

http://weather.yahoo.com/climo/USMA0046_f.html?woeid=2367105

Today is the 16th.

[me]

Today is the 16th.

2 days big deal.  If it were a month it would make a difference but not 2 days for petes sake.

[Henry Hawk]

Today is the 16th.

okay.....and your point is?

[Exterminator]

okay.....and your point is?

That there is apparently a new record for the 16th.  I know that you think that global warming is soundly refuted by every snowflake that falls but you do understand that we're talking about long-term changes; don't you?

[me]

Daily temperature and precipitation extremes for Apr at  BOSTON WSFO AP         
* indicates also in previous year(s)

Date High Max   Low Min     Low Max  High Min     High Pcpn   High Snow
  1   76 1918   13 1923     33 1923   52 1948     2.02 1962   22.4 1997 
  2   75 1967*  19 1919     35 1911*  57 1945     1.83 1970    3.0 1924 
  3   77 1892   21 1954     34 1898   53 1892     2.30 1990    5.0 1915 
  4   75 1950   17 1954     30 1879   53 1981*    2.61 1876    1.1 1915 
  5   84 1928   11 1874     31 1995   52 1981     2.52 1987    3.0 1911 
  6   82 1928   20 1881     27 1881   55 1991     1.60 1987*  10.8 1982 
  7   86 1991   16 1982     25 1982   54 1928     1.24 1901    4.0 1893 
  8   85 1991   21 1888     34 1894   52 1962     1.18 1894    4.6 1894 
  9   85 1991   24 1888*    34 1997   52 1970*    1.72 1935    9.1 1917 
10   85 1922   26 1997*    36 1885   52 1887     2.08 1983    5.4 1996 
11   78 1955   25 1909     36 1918*  54 1915     1.22 1958    2.1 1958 
12   85 1977*  20 1874     32 1874   55 1947     1.44 1894    3.6 1918 
13   86 1977   20 1874     36 1929   61 1945     1.76 1953    5.0 1933 
14   81 1945   26 1940     38 1929   56 1909     1.63 1895    0.7 1916 
15   82 1896   28 1943     40 1893*  57 1955     2.05 1903    0.1 1916 
16   82 1976   28 1943*    38 1967*  62 1976     2.50 1929    1.0 1992 
17   93 2002   26 1908     39 1880   65 1976     2.47 1954    0.6 1935 
18   94 1976   26 1887*    35 1887   66 1976     1.90 1879    1.6 1965 
19   87 1914   22 1875     35 1879   60 1891     1.65 1877    0.1 1961 
20   89 1976*  21 1897     37 1875   61 1976*    0.87 1874    1.0 1904 
21   88 1957   21 1875     38 1947   65 1923     3.32 1991    0.2 1947*
22   88 1977   26 1875     39 1940   58 1977*    1.89 1937    1.3 1940 
23   85 1908   29 1933     39 1911*  56 1973     1.14 1998    0.1 1956 
24   84 2001   28 1882     42 1883   54 1890     1.95 1983    0.6 1967 
25   83 1982   27 1892     38 1919   58 1913     2.10 1901     T  2002*
26   85 1872   28 1919     40 1874   60 1925*    1.60 1931    0.1 1993 
27   92 1990   33 1993*    41 1882   57 1935     1.50 1882    2.1 1993 
28   90 1990   30 1947     40 1987*  58 1969     2.97 1904    3.2 1987 
29   85 1974   31 1909     40 1874   60 1911     1.52 1923    0.9 1987 
30   86 1942   31 1874     40 1909   60 1903     1.44 1921    0.0       

http://www.erh.noaa.gov/box/climate/bosapr.shtml

[dan foster]

That there is apparently a new record for the 16th.  I know that you think that global warming is soundly refuted by every snowflake that falls but you do understand that we're talking about long-term changes; don't you?

No, Hank is just one of the NASCAR crowd that reads Conservapedia instead of Wikipedia.  Left-lane driving, right-wing nutjobs like Hank only know what the anti-science crowd tells him  Doesn't have an original thought in his head, nor any fundamental understanding of science.  If jesus doesn't wave his magic wand and make it happen, then it doesn't exist.  These stupid fucks even dispute the Theory of Special - General Relativity, even though our modern space systems prove it all true.  Might as well be sitting around the campfire (still) and have the Shaman (Billy, Pat, Earnest, Joel, et al) throw a few bones in the dirt.  Only difference between the Bronz-Age and now: http://hirr.hartsem.edu/megachurch/database.html

Just like NASCAR moving from back-woods hick racing to $3B a year on fucking NASCAR ballcaps and M.Jackson Jackets, alone, these dumb hicks spend $B's more giving their money away to any slick charlatan that just talks like a fucking hick.  Praise Jesus!  Hallelujah, Mutha Fuckaaaaaaaaaa!     

[The Troll]

No, Hank is just one of the NASCAR crowd that reads Conservapedia instead of Wikipedia.  Left-lane driving, right-wing nutjobs like Hank only know what the anti-science crowd tells him  Doesn't have an original thought in his head, nor any fundamental understanding of science.  If jesus doesn't wave his magic wand and make it happen, then it doesn't exist.  These stupid fucks even dispute the Theory of Special - General Relativity, even though our modern space systems prove it all true.  Might as well be sitting around the campfire (still) and have the Shaman (Billy, Pat, Earnest, Joel, et al) throw a few bones in the dirt.  Only difference between the Bronz-Age and now: http://hirr.hartsem.edu/megachurch/database.html

Just like NASCAR moving from back-woods hick racing to $3B a year on fucking NASCAR ballcaps and M.Jackson Jackets, alone, these dumb hicks spend $B's more giving their money away to any slick charlatan that just talks like a fucking hick.  Praise Jesus!  Hallelujah, Mutha Fuckaaaaaaaaaa!   

  I lost all my interest in NASCAR when they went to the same bulit cars.  All of them the same.  No more expertimenting, no more new ideas, just boring.  Just the same old thing.  It was more interesting when a Ford was a Ford, a Chevy was a Chevy and a Chrysler product was a Chrysler was a Chrysler.  NASCAR sponsored by Honda. 

[Palehorse]

This figure is a simplified, schematic representation of the flows of energy between space, the atmosphere, and the Earth's surface, and shows how these flows combine to trap heat near the surface and create the greenhouse effect. Energy exchanges are expressed in watts per square meter (W/m2) and derived from Kiehl & Trenberth (1997).
The sun is responsible for virtually all energy that reaches the Earth's surface. Direct overhead sunlight at the top of the atmosphere provides 1366 W/m2; however, geometric effects and reflective surfaces limit the light which is absorbed at the typical location to an annual average of ~235 W/m2. If this were the total heat received at the surface, then, neglecting changes in albedo, the Earth's surface would be expected to have an average temperature of -18 °C (Lashof 1989). Instead, the Earth's atmosphere recycles heat coming from the surface and delivers an additional 324 W/m2, which results in an average surface temperature of roughly +14 °C .
Of the surface heat captured by the atmosphere, more than 75% can be attributed to the action of greenhouse gases that absorb thermal radiation emitted by the Earth's surface. The atmosphere in turn transfers the energy it receives both into space (38%) and back to the Earth's surface (62%), where the amount transferred in each direction depends on the thermal and density structure of the atmosphere.
This process by which energy is recycled in the atmosphere to warm the Earth's surface is known as the greenhouse effect and is an essential piece of Earth's climate. Under stable conditions, the total amount of energy entering the system from solar radiation will exactly balance the amount being radiated into space, thus allowing the Earth to maintain a constant average temperature over time. However, recent measurements indicate that the Earth is presently absorbing 0.85 ± 0.15 W/m2 more than it emits into space (Hansen et al. 2005). An overwhelming majority of climate scientists believe that this asymmetry in the flow of energy has been significantly increased by human emissions of greenhouse gases



This figure shows the average rate of thickness change in mountain glaciers around the world. This information, known as the glaciological mass balance, is found by measuring the annual snow accumulation and subtracting surface ablation driven by melting, sublimation, or wind erosion. These measurements do not account for thinning associated with iceberg calving, flow related thinning, or subglacial erosion. All values are corrected for variations in snow and firn density and expressed in meters of water equivalent (Dyurgerov 2002).
Measurements are shown as both the annual average thickness change and the accumulated change during the fifty years of measurements presented. Years with a net increase in glacier thickness are plotted upwards and in red; years with a net decrease in glacier thickness (i.e. positive thinning) are plotted downward and in blue. Only three years in the last 50 have experienced thickening in the average.
Systematic measurements of glacier thinning began in the 1940s, but fewer than 15 sites had been measured each year until the late 1950s. Since then more than 100 sites have contributed to the average in some years (Dyurgerov 2002, Dyurgerov and Meier 2005). Error bars indicate the standard error in the mean.
Other observations, based on glacier length records, suggest that glacier retreat has occurred nearly continuously since the early 1800s and the end of the little ice age, but variations in rate have occurred, including a significant acceleration during the twentieth century that is believed to have been a response to global warming (Oerlemans 2005).
[edit]





This figure shows the history of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations as directly measured at Mauna Loa, Hawaii. This curve is known as the Keeling curve, and is an essential piece of evidence of the man-made increases in greenhouse gases that some believe to be the cause of global warming. The longest such record exists at Mauna Loa, but these measurements have been independently confirmed at many other sites around the world .
The annual fluctuation in carbon dioxide is caused by seasonal variations in carbon dioxide uptake by land plants. Since many more forests are concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere, more carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere during Northern Hemisphere summer than Southern Hemisphere summer. This annual cycle is shown in the inset figure by taking the average concentration for each month across all measured years.

The grey curve shows the average monthly concentrations, and red curve is a moving 12 month average.

[followsthewolf]

You're wasting your time.

[Palehorse]

You're wasting your time.

Perhaps. But there is a chance this forum could obtain a new member or two sometime, and in that case I wouldn't want them to think the membership here all have their heads buried in the sand. 

[me]

Perhaps. But there is a chance this forum could obtain a new member or two sometime, and in that case I wouldn't want them to think the membership here all have their heads buried in the sand. 

Ya, there's at least two or three of us who don't.   

[Henry Hawk]

You're wasting your time.

YES he IS, thanks ftw.

[Palehorse]

YES he IS, thanks ftw.

Enough said then. I shall endeavor to do so no further. (Until the next time you post unabashed bullshit as fact).

[Henry Hawk]

Enough said then. I shall endeavor to do so no further. (Until the next time you post unabashed bullshit as fact).

you have yet to prove me wrong in the first place.

do what makes you feel better.

I do.