Browse By

March Demolishes Previous Heat Records

What global warming?

That’s the question asked by idiots like Scott Baio who have become famous for striking poses and shooting their mouths off.

Yesterday, Al Rojas in Philadelphia asked the same question when he saw some snowflakes. What global warming?

Earlier this week, Tom Toima wrote that “Global warming is a hoax tool for purpose of knifing Capitalism and libertty, ushering in global Communism.” (sic)

While this popular Cold Earther bluster goes on, serious scientists are busy collecting data. Their latest data, just released by the Japanese Meteorological Agency and NASA, show that globally, last month was the hottest March ever recorded.

If this temperature trend continues, 2016 will be the hottest year on record, beating the record set in 2015, which beat the record set in 2014.

What global warming?

That global warming.

10 thoughts on “March Demolishes Previous Heat Records”

  1. Charles Manning says:

    As the records keep piling up, the denial position is shifting from “What?” to “So What?”

  2. Dave says:

    Green Man, I am in the middle of the road on this, as I am not a scientist or meteorologist. I read the article you linked, and it said it’s due to El Nino, and that next year we cannot expect record temps. We used to call it warmer weather. I keep reading online everything from “it’s a hoax” to “it’s a dire emergency” and I do share the skepticism of many that it is more about global redistribution of wealth and less about climate, but also share the concerns of many that we need to keep our earth clean. Middle of the road — that’s where one gets run over.

    I have read some pretty convincing arguments for solar interference, cloud cover, and so forth that would indicate changes to the climate that we can do little about. Also am old enough to remember the fears of global cooling and the coming ice age from the 70’s. Add to the skepticism that ten years ago Al Gore said “we have ten years” as he stood to make billions off of warming credits schemes. I didn’t scare easily then, and I scare less easily now.

    What specifically brought you to the view that climate change can be impacted by humans? Jim Cook also writes on this topic occasionally, but perhaps I haven’t seen what it was that convinced you both of the emergency.

    1. Al Hopfmann says:

      Excellent commentary, Dave. I am also not convinced either way. And how do we explain increasing temperatures on Mars? I don’t think that many people who are being blamed for increasing temperatures on Earth have been doing much on Mars lately. And still, I have not seen any discussion about decaying vegetation — a factor that overwhelms almost anything that earthlings have done.

    2. J Clifford says:

      Dave, the article did NOT say that the current record-breaking month-after-month hot temperatures are “due to El Niño”, as you claim. What the article says is that scientists say that while an El Niño event may be providing some part of the boost in temperature, most of the increase is due to anthropogenic climate change.

      A direct quote of what the article actually says on this subject: “‘While the current spike in global temperatures is getting a boost from El Niño, most of this anomalous warmth is a result of the ongoing human-caused global warming trend,’ said Professor Stefan Rahmstorf, a climate scientist at Potsdam University in Germany.”

      Last year, the relationship was about the same. It was a record-breaking year in terms of temperature, and El Niño was a part of that, but fueled only 8-10 percent of the warming. See:

      El Niño is a bit player compared to anthropogenic climate change.

      And where did we get the idea that climate change is being caused by human beings? Only from the mountain of scientific research compiled by scientific organizations such as NOAA and the IPCC.

      1. Dave says:

        And I could compare a mountain of evidence to the contrary. Any search of “climate change” gives results that provide a mountain of evidence for it, and a search of “climate change hoax” gives it’s own mountain of evidence. Mountains aside, the Left sees a huge problem and the Right sees little to none. IT HAS BEEN POLITICIZED, J. My question to Green Man was specifically addressed to the idea that humans are driving climate change, not simply questioning if the climate has been warming.

        It’s a legitimate question: What specifically convinced you that climate change is produced by humans? Information surrounding AGW seems to be completely politically adulterated these days. does a pretty good job trying to cut through some of this, but I remain unconvinced on either argument.

      2. Charles Manning says:

        J Clifford, as I understand it, El Nino is a redistribution of heat in the ocean from the western part of the Pacific to the east. There’s no change in the heat content of the entire Pacific Ocean when heat is merely redistributed by winds and ocean currents. The temperature of the entire globe is the critical concern, not fluctuating local temperatures due to atmospheric and oceanic conditions. And the scientific consensus is that AGW results in large part from the constantly increasing CO2 levels, caused by the use of fossil fuels, which Dave and Al don’t mention.

        1. Dave says:

          Charles, if it’s the increasing CO2 levels that persuaded you then that’s what I’m asking about. Increasing CO2 levels have not persuaded me as I don’t have any way to link the increase to increased temps. There are no CO2 levels on Mars that I’m aware of. My not mentioning this has nothing to do with withholding information. I posed a sincere question and everybody’s defensive. Sheesh.

          1. Charles Manning says:

            Dave, the link between CO2 and warming appears to be widely accepted by scientists, but to be frank, I haven’t seen — or don’t recall — experimental proof that higher levels of CO2 lead to more absorption or retention of heat, from the sun or from any other sources. Can anyone point to experimental proof of that more CO2 in the atmosphere causes greater retention of heat? J Clifford?

          2. Dave says:

            I’m open to knowing more about it, but am extremely wary of the motives of those on either side of the issue. For example, the scientists at NOAA like their jobs and want to keep them. Their boss in the White House is known for purging departments of those who disagree with him, so perhaps they will say what they’ve got to. Mouths to feed. Chain of command.

          3. J Clifford says:

            Dave, NOAA does a whole lot more than just track global warming. The scientists there have jobs whether the global temperature is rising or falling.

            If you think NOAA scientists are distorting the data because they’re afraid of Barack Obama, how does that explain the global warming data that was accumulated by NOAA under George W. Bush and before?

            Furthermore, how can you explain the collective work of the IPCC, which is not controlled by Barack Obama, but is an international scientific panel?

            What about the data from the equivalents of NOAA in other nations, which show the same temperature trends?

            You have to start to concoct an extremely elaborate international conspiracy… for which there is absolutely no evidence… to support your wariness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!