All Solar, Et Al, In 12 Years?

[Randolph Kinney]

Don't forget California!

 

[Randolph Kinney]

 

[Meandering]

Those were good.

.

 

[Meandering]

The aerosol maps show average monthly aerosol amounts around the world based on observations from the MODIS sensor on NASA's Terra satellite. Satellite measurements of aerosols, called aerosol optical thickness, are based on the fact that the particles change the way the atmosphere reflects and absorbs visible and infrared light. An optical thickness of less than 0.1 (palest yellow) indicates a crystal clear sky with maximum visibility, whereas a value of 1 (reddish brown) indicates very hazy conditions.

The comparison shows the places and times of year in which fires play a major role in aerosols. For example, fire counts and aerosols increase in tandem across South America from July through September, and taper off in tandem in October. This pattern is due to land clearing and agricultural fires that are widespread across the Amazon Basin and Cerrado regions during the dry season. A similar relationship is apparent in Central America (March-May), central and southern Africa (June-September, and Southeast Asia (January-April).

In other cases, however, aerosol concentrations rise in the absence of significant fire activity. For example, from May through August each year, aerosol amounts rise dramatically around the Arabian Peninsula and nearby oceans, even though there is no significant fire activity in the vicinity. Here, dust storms are the likely source of the aerosols. An arc of elevated aerosol amounts at the foothills of the Himalaya Mountains in northern India in some months when fire activity is minimal (for example, November 2006) is an indication that urban or industrial air pollution is playing a role.

Aerosol Optical Depth

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/GlobalMaps/view.php?d1=MOD14A1_M_FIRE&d2=MODAL2_M_AER_OD


One other thing about those solar panels saving the earth from global warming.

When your solar panels are making electricity, the public utility generation is not being turned off because you are making electricity,

Use theirs or not use theirs, they produce the same amount either way and whatever isn't used is discharged, so there really is no "savings" from homeowner solar panels, even if the utility redirects the little electric you make, they don't shut off what they are making.

.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I am reading a book on weather and climate from 1983, pre-"global warming". Written by a couple of Woods Hole climatologists, they were showing graphs from the 1800s to about 1980 which clearly showed a peak in temperatures in the middle of the century then dropping off to that date Funny that this drop in temperature disappears in the "new" Global warming with such graphs as was created by Dr. M. Mann, aka "The Hockey Stick", and thoroughly repudiated by McIntyre, but embraced as gospel to this day by Warming cheerleaders.

 

[Meandering]

Climate change, pollution, sever weather patterns, are part of the earth's history.

The thing about the social clamoring is you never hear anyone say we should tear up the roads and parking lots so that the rain can soak into the soil and replenish the fresh water supplies. There is very little, if ever, any discussion about over population having an bearing on the environment.

If we get that big solar flare the History Channel is so fond of, and it takes out the grid, there simply isn't enough wildlife in the forests of the world to feed the people of the world. Without electricity and gasoline, commercial food production would come to a halt, the remnants will be scavenged by those local to it, and there would not be enough open land to support subsistence farming for the entire population.

The mini ice age gave us the wood for the worlds best violins.

Triassic extinction event, the "Great Dying", there were no people or asphalt roads, or solar panels or coal fired electrical plants, yet approximately 90% to 96% of marine species and 70% of terrestrial vertebrates became extinct. It is considered the largest mass extinction in the Earth's history. And guess what? All those dead bodies gave off methane, lots and lots of methane.

We are a blip in the history, and need to get over ourselves.

/.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

To add to Terrel's comment, the land based thermometer database has been "tweaked" so much now to show a positive warming that it contradicts satellite measured temperature data.

The reality of temperature is that the rate at which temperature changes varies over time. The most prominent variable is the sun.

Graph 3 shows the rate of warming curves for GISTEMP, NOAA, UAH, and RSS. (Note that the satellite temperature series did not exist before 1979.)

All of the rate of warming curves show good agreement with each other. Peaks and troughs line up, and the numerical values for the rates of warming are similar. Both of the satellite series appear to have a larger change in the rate of warming when compared to the surface series, but both satellite series are in good agreement with each other.

Some points about this method:

1) There is no cherry-picking of start and end times with this method. The entire temperature series is used.

2) The rate of warming curves from different series can be directly compared with each other, no adjustment is needed for the different baseline periods. This is because the rate of warming is based on the change in temperature with time, which is the same regardless of the baseline period.

3) This method can be performed by anybody with a moderate level of skill using a spreadsheet. It only requires the ability to calculate averages, and perform linear regressions.

4) The first and last 5 years of each rate of warming curve has more uncertainty than the rest of the curve. This is due to the lack of data beyond the ends of the curve. It is important to realise that the last 5 years of the curve may change when future temperatures are added.

The rate of warming curves for all 4 major temperature series show that there has been a significant drop in the rate of warming over the last 17 years. In 1998 the rate of warming was between +2.0 and +2.5 °C per century. Now, in 2015, it is between +0.5 and +0.8 °C per century. The rate now is only about 30% of what it was in 1998. Note that these rates of warming were calculated AFTER the so-called “Pause-busting” adjustments were made.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

One constantly hears that last year was the "hottest on record", when in fact, nothing is close to the mid-1930s except possibly 1998. And these figures used, such as for last year, were within the margin of error thus could be a very hot year, but still within the margin of variation. That tells you nothing. And the sudden increase in temperature coincides with the closing of dozens of Siberian weather stations by the Russian government due to cost.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

The basic understanding of how weather patterns work is not understood well enough to make any definitive or accurate forecast. Case in point would be El Nino. NOAA has been forecasting El Nino will occur for the last 4 years yet it hasn't. All that record high temperatures claimed yet the dire hurricane forecasts haven't happened.

Here Is the historical record for El Nino.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

1980 was horribly hot and dry with a very weak El Nino, 83 bitter cold winter w strong El Nino

The current El Nino is finally come after several years when they tried to say it was on its way.