2016 Will Be the Hottest Year On Record, UN Says (theguardian.com)

2016 will very likely be the hottest year on record and a new high for the third year in a row, according to the UN. It means 16 of the 17 hottest years on record will have been this century. From an article on The Guardian:The scorching temperatures around the world, and the extreme weather they drive, mean the impacts of climate change on people are coming sooner and with more ferocity than expected, according to scientists. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) report, published on Monday at the global climate summit in Morocco, found the global temperature in 2016 is running 1.2C above pre-industrial levels. This is perilously close to to the 1.5C target included as an aim of the Paris climate agreement last December. The El Nino weather phenomenon helped push temperatures even higher in early 2016 but the global warming caused by the greenhouse gas emissions from human activities remains the strongest factor.

Comments

I've seen this before

[blindseer]

A few years ago, about this time of year, I was told by a co-worker about how that year was forecast to be exceedingly warm. I pointed out that the year wasn't over and it is quite possible to have an unusually cold November and December to average it out. When January came around I found a news article on how the last year was merely average. When I presented this to that same hysterical co-worker merely two months later and he denied he had made any hysterical comments before.

Now we see people not even waiting until the year starts to make such predictions. Those that get all worked up over it now will be exceedingly forgetful if the predictions fail and have very very good memories if it does. Here's my tiny tiny little mention of this phenomenon. It will be interesting if someone remembers this post and revisits it a year later to see how well I did in my prediction.

Blaming the Wrong folks, Probably in Trouble.

[foxalopex]

I've always found it fascinating that folks accuse China of generating the most greenhouse gasses and while yes by absolute number of people they probably do that's the worst interpretation of statistics ever. China has a LOT of people, if you believe in equality everyone should have the same chance at the standard of living as everyone else. The problem is that we're a very rich country, so per capita alone we generate per person more emissions than a typical Chinese citizen. We use more resources than a typical counterpart in China. (A lot of the stuff that China produces is sold to us.) and so on. It's like a billionaire asking why they can pay a tax of a 1/2 million dollars as pocket change while that would financially bankrupt the average citizen. As the leading country and the wealthiest we need to contribute a bigger share because it will technically hurt us per person less. If we don't how would we expect someone who might not be able to contribute without literally dying to give up a part of their share?

And it is a problem. Climate change is likely to hit poorer countries first, and when conditions are unsustainable, who's door do you think they'll come knocking on first? If you're the one with all the food and everyone else is starving to death, it doesn't matter if you're armed, you're in deep trouble if you don't share. And it's not like we can't share, we do actually have enough for everyone. It's just, it's hard to give up luxury.

Re:How Many Paid Oil/Gas Industry Trolls Post Here

[quax]

The ultimate irony is that even Saudi Arabia understands that the age of fossil fuels comes to and end, and prepares accordingly But not the US extremist right wing.

If even a backwards kleptocratic monarchy, rooted in a Middle Ages value system, beats you in terms of mental flexibility, you know that you are truly fucked.

Exactly the reverse is true

[ishmaelflood]

Lighting your hair on fire will hurt you today. Too much salt may (16% probability) increase your blood pressure which may be the thing that helps kill you, and will certainly put more stress on your kidneys etc, which again may be the thing that kills you eventually. Pollution (of various types) damages populations NOW, whereas global warming is actually beneficial for the first couple of degrees for humanity as a whole, according to the IPCC even (AR5) . So your example was a mirror image of the actual situation.

Incidentally, the alarmists as ever seem keen to confuse weather and climate. We are in the peak of an El Nino. They are hot. next year you'll see cooler temperatures, and who knows, we might even see another pause. That would be funny. None of this has to with climate, which I agree, is getting a little hotter on a decade by decade, on average. Nonetheless the CO2 based models are still getting it hopelessly wrong.

Re: Exactly the reverse is true

[silentcoder]

Worth noting that - when there were dinosaurs there was also nothing that remotely resembled us - and no such thing could have survived then.

The closest thing was our very, very distant ancestor - a small shrew-like thingy called "Morganocodontis", the first known mammal, it lived in tiny little holes in the ground hiding from a seriously scary world. That it made it past the extinction of the dinosaurs and ended up being the ancestor to the next dominant animal group was not a result of it being in any way superior - it was much more likely a result of dumb fucking luck.

Re:Real Solution

[fiannaFailMan]

Should we do more? that depends on which side of the political spectrum you fall onto.

No it doesn't. The global climate doesn't care what side of the aisle you're on.

Re:Deniers

[h33t l4x0r]

Well, you have to remember that 44% of Americans get their news from Facebook, and it's mostly fake. So you've got 1) Climate change isn't real and 2) It's real but it's too late to do anything about it.

Re:Deniers

[phantomfive]

So......you have two appeals to authority in your post. One is to the European people, and one is to 'the internet.'

I'll be honest, your sources of information are pathetic at best, no better than the people you insult. If you're going to insult people, at least say, "I got my information from NASA" or "according to the IPCC, X is true." Even a lesser source like NYT, WSJ, or BBC would be better than what you have..........

Re:How Many Paid Oil/Gas Industry Trolls Post Here

[z0idberg]

I agree completely, it's sad to see that the puppets are either swamping the moderator controls or worse still, actually influencing real moderators and commentators to the point that anti-AGW appears to be the more popular stance even on slashdot.

Also, I don't believe industry is going to be able to deny AGW forever. I'd bet that industry heads are doing everything they can to kick the can down the road so that by the time the evidence is truly overwhelming they (as individuals) have collected their bonuses and are out of the picture in terms of personal prosecution so that it is their future replacements who are left standing when the music stops.