Not in the myopic world of the crazed Libertarians. Science must only be viewed through the lens of their naive ideology.
no, I'm not sure there is much man can do to make any difference. If July was the hottest month and I didn't notice it, what difference does it make?
Well, the last time we had a food crisis we got Arab Spring. And that's not over yet, seven years running. The more uncertainty there is about how much role CO2 vs., for example, sunspots plays in our recent rapid warming, the more reason we have to be cautious. When your passenger shouts, "look out", you instinctively move your foot to the brakes first, look again, and see what they're talking about--you err, if err it is, on the cautious side.
The United States was one of the few spots that didn't see the extreme heat, along with portions of western Asia. The USA did have a slightly warmer-than-average July, but no states set a record high, according to NOAA. Much of western and central Europe was extremely hot. Austria sweltered to its hottest month ever recorded in the country's 249-year period of records. Spain had its hottest month on record, while France had its third-warmest month. Germany and the United Kingdom both broke all-time July heat records. One city in Iran, Bandar Mahshahr, set one the most extreme heat records ever measured in the world on July 31. According to media reports, the air temperature of 115, combined with a dew point of 90 degrees, created a heat index of 165, NOAA said. In Africa, July's average temperature was the second highest, behind only July 2002, NOAA said. ********************** That's what difference it makes. And since it is man that is causing the warming there certainly is something man can do about it.
who said that? Water vapor and clouds seem to be important. I am just asking you guys to provide peer reviewed science showing man made co2 causes warming. Why can't you show that a gas that lags the change in ocean and air warming and cooling causes ocean and air warming and cooling?
fc Seems to me we oops you are spending lotsa time worrying about a very small mass critically affecting an extremely large mass using what no doubt is questionable data. The mere observation of common melting of old decayed vegetation continuing the rotting process belies the observation(faulty) that the co2 happens first. Earths changes from hot to cold to hot are positive feedback systems that always overshoot the expected change. If you have confidence in the incredible amount of observed,guessed at,expected and extrapolated data I believe you are being led by your biases down the daisy trail. The past does not resemble future or present except superficially. To apply long term changes in the past to short term expected changes in the near future is an action not supported by probabilities. You can flip a coin (a true coin) a hundred straight times and get heads but it doesn't affect the next flip.IMHO
The reported temperatures are NOT controlled laboratory measurements. Hell we don't have accurate temperature measurements here in this country. When compared to past measurements in the same location because the local conditions have changed.Also Don't for example use heat index temperatures I believe the calculations have changed over time. All this from a retired engineer who has a failing mind trapped in a failing body at 89.
Global warming could lead to deadly temperatures for humans in coming centuries, according to research findings from Purdue University and the University of New South Wales, Australia. Researchers for the first time have calculated the highest tolerable "wet-bulb" temperature and found that this temperature could be exceeded for the first time in human history in future climate scenarios if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate. Wet-bulb temperature is equivalent to what is felt when wet skin is exposed to moving air. It includes temperature and atmospheric humidity and is measured by covering a standard thermometer bulb with a wetted cloth and fully ventilating it. The researchers calculated that humans and most mammals, which have internal body temperatures near 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, will experience a potentially lethal level of heat stress at wet-bulb temperature above 95 degrees sustained for six hours or more, said Matthew Huber, the Purdue professor of earth and atmospheric sciences who co-authored the paper that will be published in Thursday's (May 6) issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "Although areas of the world regularly see temperatures above 100 degrees, really high wet-bulb temperatures are rare," Huber said. "This is because the hottest areas normally have low humidity, like the 'dry heat' referred to in Arizona. When it is dry, we are able to cool our bodies through perspiration and can remain fairly comfortable. The highest wet-bulb temperatures ever recorded were in places like Saudi Arabia near the coast where winds occasionally bring extremely hot, humid ocean air over hot land leading to unbearably stifling conditions, which fortunately are short-lived today." http://phys.org/news/2010-05-future-temperatures-livable-limits.html So what this means is that someone could be naked, in front of a strong fan and still die from the heat if the wet bulb temp exceeds 95 degrees for six hours
thanks for pointing that out... if you are honest about the science of greenhouse gases and warming you eqivocate.