The code is available here. Papers here. NASA uses station data compiled by NOAA GHCN v3 (meteorological stations), ERSST v4 (ocean areas), and SCAR (Antarctic stations),
I recently downloaded the WinUAE emulator to play Super Frog, Worms, Lemmings, Gauntlet, Silkworm, Battle Squadron, and Populous with my kids. Good fun!
Here's hoping! Maybe we can get something sustainable in my lifetime.
The sooner the better! I have some more bad news on our bet. Last month was the hottest July on record. In fact, every month this year has set a record. Take a look at the current peak compared to the previous one in 2010. We've had about 0.25C warming just over the last 6 years!
You were quite confident that 2016 would be cooler than 2015. Any thoughts on why things are turning out so much different than you had anticipated?
Betting that any given year will be hotter or colder than any other given particular year is stupid, there's too much chance for something else to go wrong
2008 was a La Nina year, so it was already below average. Because of global warming, any year after 2008, regardless of annual variability, was bound to be warmer tan 2008. Even the strong La Nina in 2011 was warmer than 2008.. Pick any La Nina year where the temps are well below average and you'll notice that the temps never fall that low again.
The bet was hedged by a climate scientist who was willing to give 5 to 1 odds that 2015 would not be cooler than 2008. He would have had to be quite confident to give those odds and it is not luck that he won.
if you're really looking to test the climate change bit, would have been something like "The 10 year period starting in January 2008 will be, on average, warmer than the 10 year period starting January 1998
He went to climate scientist James Annan to hedge his bet. Annan was willing to give odds of 5 to 1 against 2015 being cooler than 2008. So while the economist put only his reputation on the line, the scientist was extremely confident, and rightly so.
So what does the scientist know that the advisers to the GWPF don't (but probably ought to considering that the think tank they advise has "global warming" in the title)?
We still have no idea what kind of deal we are going to get when we invoke Article 50, so "Keep Calm and Carry On" seems to be a more sensible approach at this point; freaking out achieve nothing right now because there's nothing concrete to actually freak out about other than some vague thing known as "BrExit" that can't be defined.
The impacts were immediate. Uncertainty is not your friend here. Not for the markets and not for scientists. "While people are debating the options for our departure from the EU over the next few years, British science is already proving itself to be well ahead of the game. We're already being widely excluded from EU grant applications, because no-one sane wants to take the risk of setting up a multi-year collaboration with a UK partner, when this partner may be pulled out at any time (and no-one would fund such a proposal when safer alternatives exist)." - http://julesandjames.blogspot....
it would be fun to watch the CIA fund the opposition in russia to weaken the position of putin.
There is evidence that Russia has been doing something similar in the USA:
In his research from St. Petersburg, Chen discovered that Russian internet trolls — paid by the Kremlin to spread false information on the internet — have been behind a number of "highly coordinated campaigns" to deceive the American public.
"I created this list of Russian trolls when I was researching. And I check on it once in a while, still. And a lot of them have turned into conservative accounts, like fake conservatives. I don't know what's going on, but they're all tweeting about Donald Trump and stuff," he said.
when we get record cold (which some areas got last winter), and "deniers" use that as evidence that global warming is a sham, what do you say to them?
Any recent cold records were records at that particular station. This is a record for the entire eastern hemisphere. It's quite a difference.
Also, if people are using the temperature at one station at one particular time to dismiss the trend over the last few decades they are probably not the brightest bulbs.
Yes, you should be worried about the ability of a thin-skinned person with lots of money to shut down a media outlet. Today Gawker, tomorrow the Washington Post, then the NY Times.
Do you think that a democracy can function if the only news that is published is news that offends no one?
The Post’s executive editor, Martin Baron, called Trump’s action “nothing less than a repudiation of the role of a free and independent press” and pledged that his paper would keep reporting vigorously about the presumptive Republican nominee.
Hey ebv, I have an update on our global mean temperature bet. Last month was the hottest May on record. The year-so-far average global temperature is a whopping 1.15 C, well above the hottest full calendar year we’ve yet seen, 2015’s record-breaking 0.86 C. - https://tamino.wordpress.com/2...
UNESCO had drawn up a list of world heritage sites that were in danger from climate change, and Australia had the reefs removed because it would hurt tourism.
It looks like they spent 400,000 in lobbying efforts to keep the reef off the list. Money well spent? The environment minister recently tweeted: "Under Labor, the Great Barrier Reef was on-track to be listed as 'in danger'. It came off the 'watch list' under us."
Breakeven costs for existing projects such as Kearl Phase 1 stand at US$42 per barrel, with Husky’s Lloydminster (US$28), Cenvous’ Christina Lake ($26) and Suncor operations (US$30.3), - http://business.financialpost....
Kearl Phase 1 has been running at a loss since November. WTI was as low as $26 earlier this year.
They are looking at the future of the Canadian oil sands. This is about the federal coffers, not the trees and rivers. Because of emerging technologies - technologies disruptive on the order of the internet - it is very unlikely that the oil sands will find a path back to profitability.
This is not "how do we move Canada away from oil", but "Oh shit. The world is moving away from oil! How can Canada cope with this new reality?"
UNESCO had drawn up a list of world heritage sites that were in danger from climate change, and Australia had the reefs removed because it would hurt tourism.
Slashdot Mirror
There is much to like about the Trump campaign if you are Russian.
Trump has promised to look into lifting the sanctions that the U.S. has imposed against Russia for its military incursions in Ukraine.
The Trump campaign worked behind the scenes to make sure the new Republican platform won’t call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces, contradicting the view of almost all Republican foreign policy leaders in Washington.
He questioned whether the U.S. would defend its NATO allies in the event of a Russian attack and claimed that the alliance is “obsolete.”
An isolationist America would pose less of a threat to Russia’s ambitions in Europe and the Middle East.
On top of this, Putin likely holds a grudge against Clinton for this.
It looks like a Russian operative infiltrated the Trump campaign and "worked behind the scenes to make sure the new Republican platform won’t call for giving weapons to Ukraine to fight Russian and rebel forces".
From the records that we all have access to it's clear CO2 is a symptom and not the cause. You always see an incresae in heat before the CO2 rises.
Wow. It must be getting really hot because atmospheric CO2 levels have shot through the roof ever since the industrial revolution. I wonder why?
Even a high school student, no even an elementary school student can conclude CO2 doesn't cause warming.
Errr. Yes, but radiative physics.
By the way, If every month this year has been the hottest in recorded history then you must be starting to doubt your chances at winning our bet. Earlier this year you had said: "I figured when I pointed out that 2015 was a high water mark, you'd realize it would be very close to a fools bet to bet this year will be warmer than 2015. You either have no clue what you're doing (one might say you drank too much of the cool aid) or I have a feeling you think you know something I don't."
Well, I'm not a big fan of cool aid.
True enough, but some can be run right from the web. Here's a fun resource: http://climatemodels.uchicago....
The problem with James Hansen is he has a history of being right.
The code is available here. Papers here. NASA uses station data compiled by NOAA GHCN v3 (meteorological stations), ERSST v4 (ocean areas), and SCAR (Antarctic stations),
According to the Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies "Anyone can download it, run it for themselves and get the answer before we update our website every month."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ?
I recently downloaded the WinUAE emulator to play Super Frog, Worms, Lemmings, Gauntlet, Silkworm, Battle Squadron, and Populous with my kids. Good fun!
Here's hoping! Maybe we can get something sustainable in my lifetime.
The sooner the better! I have some more bad news on our bet. Last month was the hottest July on record. In fact, every month this year has set a record. Take a look at the current peak compared to the previous one in 2010. We've had about 0.25C warming just over the last 6 years!
You were quite confident that 2016 would be cooler than 2015. Any thoughts on why things are turning out so much different than you had anticipated?
We will see more La Nina years, but as the GP points out, it will never again be as cool as it was in 2008 because.... global warming.
Betting that any given year will be hotter or colder than any other given particular year is stupid, there's too much chance for something else to go wrong
2008 was a La Nina year, so it was already below average. Because of global warming, any year after 2008, regardless of annual variability, was bound to be warmer tan 2008. Even the strong La Nina in 2011 was warmer than 2008.. Pick any La Nina year where the temps are well below average and you'll notice that the temps never fall that low again.
The bet was hedged by a climate scientist who was willing to give 5 to 1 odds that 2015 would not be cooler than 2008. He would have had to be quite confident to give those odds and it is not luck that he won.
if you're really looking to test the climate change bit, would have been something like "The 10 year period starting in January 2008 will be, on average, warmer than the 10 year period starting January 1998
Fair point. That is even more certain to show warming. Here is the 10 year running mean since 1998.
He went to climate scientist James Annan to hedge his bet. Annan was willing to give odds of 5 to 1 against 2015 being cooler than 2008. So while the economist put only his reputation on the line, the scientist was extremely confident, and rightly so.
So what does the scientist know that the advisers to the GWPF don't (but probably ought to considering that the think tank they advise has "global warming" in the title)?
We still have no idea what kind of deal we are going to get when we invoke Article 50, so "Keep Calm and Carry On" seems to be a more sensible approach at this point; freaking out achieve nothing right now because there's nothing concrete to actually freak out about other than some vague thing known as "BrExit" that can't be defined.
The impacts were immediate. Uncertainty is not your friend here. Not for the markets and not for scientists. "While people are debating the options for our departure from the EU over the next few years, British science is already proving itself to be well ahead of the game. We're already being widely excluded from EU grant applications, because no-one sane wants to take the risk of setting up a multi-year collaboration with a UK partner, when this partner may be pulled out at any time (and no-one would fund such a proposal when safer alternatives exist)." - http://julesandjames.blogspot....
By coincidence, I see a lot of spammers....
Says AC...
it would be fun to watch the CIA fund the opposition in russia to weaken the position of putin.
There is evidence that Russia has been doing something similar in the USA:
In his research from St. Petersburg, Chen discovered that Russian internet trolls — paid by the Kremlin to spread false information on the internet — have been behind a number of "highly coordinated campaigns" to deceive the American public.
"I created this list of Russian trolls when I was researching. And I check on it once in a while, still. And a lot of them have turned into conservative accounts, like fake conservatives. I don't know what's going on, but they're all tweeting about Donald Trump and stuff,"
"I created this list of Russian trolls when I was researching. And I check on it once in a while, still. And a lot of them have turned into conservative accounts, like fake conservatives. I don't know what's going on, but they're all tweeting about Donald Trump and stuff," he said.
when we get record cold (which some areas got last winter), and "deniers" use that as evidence that global warming is a sham, what do you say to them?
Any recent cold records were records at that particular station. This is a record for the entire eastern hemisphere. It's quite a difference.
Also, if people are using the temperature at one station at one particular time to dismiss the trend over the last few decades they are probably not the brightest bulbs.
"No way... That's great! We landed on the moon!" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
As a black or hispanic person I need to follow those rules to the letter or, like Philando Castile, my odds of getting shot will sky-rocket.
It may not matter what you do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKGZnB41_e4
Yes, you should be worried about the ability of a thin-skinned person with lots of money to shut down a media outlet. Today Gawker, tomorrow the Washington Post, then the NY Times.
Do you think that a democracy can function if the only news that is published is news that offends no one?
Speaking of which, Donald Trump is pulling The Washington Post’s press credentials to cover his events because he is upset with the newspaper’s coverage of his campaign.
He also promises to ‘open up’ libel laws to make suing the media easier.
The Post’s executive editor, Martin Baron, called Trump’s action “nothing less than a repudiation of the role of a free and independent press” and pledged that his paper would keep reporting vigorously about the presumptive Republican nominee.
Hey ebv, I have an update on our global mean temperature bet. Last month was the hottest May on record. The year-so-far average global temperature is a whopping 1.15 C, well above the hottest full calendar year we’ve yet seen, 2015’s record-breaking 0.86 C. - https://tamino.wordpress.com/2...
UNESCO had drawn up a list of world heritage sites that were in danger from climate change, and Australia had the reefs removed because it would hurt tourism.
It looks like they spent 400,000 in lobbying efforts to keep the reef off the list. Money well spent? The environment minister recently tweeted: "Under Labor, the Great Barrier Reef was on-track to be listed as 'in danger'. It came off the 'watch list' under us."
Responses were on the order of "are you fucking high mate?" - The https://www.buzzfeed.com/robst...
Breakeven costs for existing projects such as Kearl Phase 1 stand at US$42 per barrel, with Husky’s Lloydminster (US$28), Cenvous’ Christina Lake ($26) and Suncor operations (US$30.3), - http://business.financialpost....
Kearl Phase 1 has been running at a loss since November. WTI was as low as $26 earlier this year.
They are looking at the future of the Canadian oil sands. This is about the federal coffers, not the trees and rivers. Because of emerging technologies - technologies disruptive on the order of the internet - it is very unlikely that the oil sands will find a path back to profitability.
This is not "how do we move Canada away from oil", but "Oh shit. The world is moving away from oil! How can Canada cope with this new reality?"
UNESCO had drawn up a list of world heritage sites that were in danger from climate change, and Australia had the reefs removed because it would hurt tourism.
To top it off, Australia has just gutted the research arm that studies this.
See no evil. Hear no evil.