30 years ago this week, NASA announced global warming was being observed. Are we listening yet?

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
47,583
On June 23th 1988, a conservative-looking and clean-cut NASA climate scientist named James Hansen dropped a bombshell in a Senate hearing - he informed the committee that not only was global warming a possibility, it was being observed in the averaged global temperature record. Earth's temperature (measured by the global average) was steadily increasing, and the most probable cause was greenhouse gases deposited in the atmosphere by the human race itself.


The transcript is here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/260149292/Transcript-of-pivotal-climate-change-hearing-1988
There is a video online somewhere.


The last paragraph is interesting because you can rewrite all of them:

Global temperatures were the highest ever recorded in 2016.
The rate of global warming is higher now than in 1988.
The Top 10 warmest years have all been since (and including) 1998.

Here is the temperature record provided by the Japanese Meteorological Agency.


Here is a discussion of the scientific implications. Some scientists raised their eyebrows at the time, deniers denied (as they do), but 30 years later with the President of the United States denying scientific facts established by one of the US' premier scientific agencies (one that has sent missions to every planet in the Solar System), how much farther have we got?

[video=youtube;UVz67cwmxTM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVz67cwmxTM[/video]

 


The Herren

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
4,792
On June 23th 1988, a conservative-looking and clean-cut NASA climate scientist named James Hansen dropped a bombshell in a Senate hearing - he informed the committee that not only was global warming a possibility, it was being observed in the averaged global temperature record. Earth's temperature (measured by the global average) was steadily increasing, and the most probable cause was greenhouse gases deposited in the atmosphere by the human race itself.


The transcript is here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/260149292/Transcript-of-pivotal-climate-change-hearing-1988
There is a video online somewhere.


The last paragraph is interesting because you can rewrite all of them:

Global temperatures were the highest ever recorded in 2016.
The rate of global warming is higher now than in 1988.
The Top 10 warmest years have all been since (and including) 1998.

Here is the temperature record provided by the Japanese Meteorological Agency.


Here is a discussion of the scientific implications. Some scientists raised their eyebrows at the time, deniers denied (as they do), but 30 years later with the President of the United States denying scientific facts established by one of the US' premier scientific agencies (one that has sent missions to every planet in the Solar System), how much farther have we got?

[video=youtube;UVz67cwmxTM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVz67cwmxTM[/video]

And after all that we have the President of of country creating most of the planet's pollution denying there is even such concept as global warming.

Maybe the penny will drop before another 30 years have passed - I have my doubts.
 

Trainwreck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
26,416
The best part of this story was how they arranged to turn off the air conditioning and opened the windows to let in the hot air.

And the planned to do it in Summer.


So funny. Politicians are so stupid.


30 years later no material warming. Certainly not enough to distinguish it from normal, natural, historical changes.

But tens of billions of dollars wasted. And our economies being trashed.
 

Notachipanoaktree

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
8,137
Fuc*k all they and you can do about it except get used to it and get rich off of it. So fu*ck off and stop bugging me for money, i haven't got any.

and what's more I don't give a sh*it.
 
Last edited:

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
47,583
Fuc*k all they and you can do about it except get used to it and get rich off of it. So fu*ck off and stop bugging me for money, i haven't got any.

and what's more I don't give a sh*it.
Riiiiggghhhhttt.

Sober up and post in the morning.
 

Trainwreck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
26,416
This one is the best:



[/IMG]




This is the "evidence" he was flogging - and it still isn't any better, even though they have gone back and changed the historical data - yep, just changed it.





See the rising temperature prior to 1920. The represents most of the increase he was selling as "humancaused".


But of course - IT COMES BEFORE HUMAN CO2 EFFECTS HAD BECOME MATERIAL.

It COULDN'T have bene caused by human CO2 emissions. Simply impossible. And those Alarmists still haven't been able to explain that.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
47,583
And after all that we have the President of of country creating most of the planet's pollution denying there is even such concept as global warming.

Maybe the penny will drop before another 30 years have passed - I have my doubts.
A stumbling and hesitant start has been made. An energy revolution is happening, but is it happening fast enough?

If Donald Trump did everything else right (and he has done very little right), I think his historical reputation will for ever by execrated and held in the deepest contempt for the cheap and cavalier way he dropped the ball on climate change. Much like the reputations of Buchanan, Pierce and Fillmore, the three ineffectual Presidents who held office before the Civil War, but even worse.

I think global warming will be devastating in its consequences by mid-century, but the human-race will muddle through somehow.
 

Trainwreck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
26,416
I think global warming will be devastating in its consequences by mid-century, but the human-race will muddle through somehow.
You're going to be attributing everything down to a ingrowing toenails to "Global Warming" in order to justify that. We know.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
47,583



NYT front page from 1988, and nearly 28 years later.
 

Catalpast

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
25,564
Global Warming has been going on since the end of the last Ice Age

- and it will continue to happen

We can help a bit by cutting back on Greenhouse Gas emissions etc

But Environmentalists are sadly mistaken if they think we can stop it in its tracks
 

Trainwreck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
26,416



NYT front page from 1988, and nearly 28 years later.


Thanks Owed.


Can everyone see how all of a sudden it is warmer back in 1880?


How about that? Amazing. The natural - pre-CO2 warming just magically disappeared.


Of course that is heartening, because it means the warming they have "adjusted" into the more recent dat could also disappear in the same way....
 

PC Principle

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
4,828
If somebody did a study of the average temperature of a house/earth and didn’t include the activity of the boiler/sun i’d p!ss myself laughing at how lame and lacking in credibility the report was.

Just like all these ludicrous ‘global warming’ hoax studies.

Never includes the suns activity.

Complete toilet paper, each and all.
 

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,291
An interesting take on this in today's Wall St Journal, incidentally the most read story of the day. Make of it what you will.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thirty-years-on-how-well-do-global-warming-predictions-stand-up-1529623442

Mr. Hansen’s testimony described three possible scenarios for the future of carbon dioxide emissions. He called Scenario A “business as usual,” as it maintained the accelerating emissions growth typical of the 1970s and ’80s. This scenario predicted the earth would warm 1 degree Celsius by 2018. Scenario B set emissions lower, rising at the same rate today as in 1988. Mr. Hansen called this outcome the “most plausible,” and predicted it would lead to about 0.7 degree of warming by this year. He added a final projection, Scenario C, which he deemed highly unlikely: constant emissions beginning in 2000. In that forecast, temperatures would rise a few tenths of a degree before flatlining after 2000.
Thirty years of data have been collected since Mr. Hansen outlined his scenarios—enough to determine which was closest to reality. And the winner is Scenario C. Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16.
 

valamhic

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
19,481
This thread in in breach of the rules. There is already 2 threads on global warming running. Administration have deleted similar posts of mine, why are they allowing this one remain. NASA was set up for space exploration, why have they changed to earth exploration? Access to the temperature records of all north polar weather stations is denied to the public. Same with southern polar weather stations.

Cape Norris Jesop in Northern Greenland is the most northerly weather station and it publishes temperature records for 2005 and published current temperature. It is therefore possible to note a day in 2005 and compare with to-day or tomorrow. There is no evidence of any warming. This is on the climate change thread abandoned by Owde after I published this discovery. Weather archive in Cape Morris Jesup

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The predictions failed to materialize which in the OP's view is proof of the opposite.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/06/thirty_years_and_were_still_waiting_for_global_warming_predictions_to_come_true.html
 
Last edited:

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
11,790
An interesting take on this in today's Wall St Journal, incidentally the most read story of the day. Make of it what you will.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thirty-years-on-how-well-do-global-warming-predictions-stand-up-1529623442
Thirty years of data have been collected since Mr. Hansen outlined his scenarios—enough to determine which was closest to reality. And the winner is Scenario C. Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16.
I'm somewhat neutral on the whole question, but that sounds like ignoring evidence that just doesn't fit the hypothesis.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
47,583
If somebody did a study of the average temperature of a house/earth and didn’t include the activity of the boiler/sun i’d p!ss myself laughing at how lame and lacking in credibility the report was.

Just like all these ludicrous ‘global warming’ hoax studies.

Never includes the suns activity.

Complete toilet paper, each and all.
Wow.

Here is someone who read something on a bullshyte right-wing website, and decided he was an instant expert on climate change.

We get them all the time.

Not really in any hope of a rational answer, can you show us where climate scientists have denied that the sun heats the earth, or that solar activity has no influence?



https://skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
47,583
An interesting take on this in today's Wall St Journal, incidentally the most read story of the day. Make of it what you will.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/thirty-years-on-how-well-do-global-warming-predictions-stand-up-1529623442
Not really an interesting take, just the same boring old shyte that WSJ has been disseminating for the last three decades in its op-ed columns. Pat Michaels, by the way, works for a think tank funded by fossil fuel money, and does no scientific research at all. He is not a neutral or good-faith debater, and has proved that more than once.

As Orbit accurately points out, ignoring recent warming, and then saying "no warming" is just a lie. http://www.politics.ie/forum/environment/264775-30-years-ago-week-nasa-announced-global-warming-being-observed-we-listening-yet-2.html#post12189887

If you take the massive El Nino's of 1998 AND 2016 into account, the record shows warming.
If you ignore the massive El Nino's of 1998 AND 2016, the record still shows warming.

Ignore both, or include both, just excluding one of them is cherry-picking your data.



Chart is from data taken by Berkeley Earth, an independently funded temperature monitor.
 

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,291
I'm somewhat neutral on the whole question, but that sounds like ignoring evidence that just doesn't fit the hypothesis.
The article was just offering a different perspective and there is much more to it than what I posted.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top