Yet more proof.

[BeElBeeBub]

A question just occurred to me, bearing in mind we are at almost the farthest point from an ice age, do you think we are going to keep on heating or head back to another ice age?

The answer is, we would have to look at the models (that you don't believe in) to see.
Whatever the trend would be (and it could conceivably be cooling) it would have been much slower that the current warming.

The big problem with the current climate change is the speed that it is happening. If the changes occured over 1,000 years or more then human civilization would adapt.


If glaciers advance and winters become colder we would move slowly south and our infrastructure and farming and housing etc would change to adapt. Like wise the warming. 

But thousands of years of change happening in 100 years has huge impacts on our civilization.

[BeElBeeBub]

You're clutching at straws now. You have not shown any evidence of anything, it's all CO2 has risen, temperature has risen the CO2 has caused it. Show the evidence 🤦.
Your sudden rise is 1 degree in 140 years, show me that this enormous 1 degree change has not occurred before.

Why must I show you that an abrupt rise in temp has not happened before but you don't have to show me that CO2 leading temperature has not happened before?

Very double standard.

The rise in temperature has been predicted for over 100 years.  The first calculations were crude and the neglected many other factors.

But the calculations got better and by the 70's (when global warming was a relatively unknown theory) and before the really steep rise took off, there were good predictions on the magnitude and timing of the rise.

Summary of all global warming projections reported by ExxonMobil scientists in internal documents between 1977 and 2003 (gray lines), superimposed on historically observed temperature change (red). Solid gray lines indicate global warming projections modeled by ExxonMobil scientists themselves; dashed gray lines indicate projections internally reproduced by ExxonMobil scientists from third-party sources. Shades of gray scale with model start dates, from earliest (1977: lightest) to latest (2003: darkest).

So, if the science is simply (and erroneously) correlating rising co2 and rising temperatures how come they were so accurate? How come no model that neglects human co2 gets close to then observed rise?

[BeElBeeBub]

How do you know they were accurate 150 years ago? Unless you can compare them to modern technology you cannot possibly know. Please tell me how you know they were accurate, bearing in mind the readings are different now.

That is a good question and the answer is calibration 

Scientists (and engineers) are fanatical about calibration.

There are huge multi million £ organisations like the NPL in the UK or NIST in the US whose job it is to make sure that when someone measures 20C in the UK in 2024 that figure can be compared to a measurement made in Germany in 1924 and how much the uncertainty is between the measurements.

[BeElBeeBub]

This Met Office warm May was where? In the U.K. or worldwide?

I have NEVER mentioned anything about feeling cold in May, you need to sort your targets out. 

You were sceptical that May was the warmest ever.

I have now provided proof from two separate expert institutions that May was the hottest (recorded) both in the UK and worldwide.

But you are right you didn't specifically say May was cold.

Weather has very little to do with climate

On this we agree

[Nick]

So let's get this straight

You show a temperature record then say:

Because we cannot see X occuring we can say X has not occured

Because we cannot see Y occuring we cannot say Y has not occured

X being co2 leading temperature
Y being a rise in comparable to today

You seem to make up your rules as you go along to fit your situation.

Trace gasses can simultaneously have a great effect on the climate and no effect on the climate apparently.

Do you not see your own selectivity? You ask for evidence then refuse to accept any evidence contrary to your preconceived notions. You say you cannot use theories and models, then invoke theories and models to argue it isn't co2.
And all the above happens in a slow gradual and predictable fashion. The fact you were able to quite those figures is proof we know about the cycles and we can detect any unexpected changes in real time. Say a black hole swung past our system and shifted out orbits. We would see that. We would know how much we had moved.

Can you point to a change in the earths orbit or the sun's output that can account for the sudden rise in temperature - far outpacing any we have seen despite 400,000 years being a blink of an eye in the 600m.year records we have.

You're clutching at straws now. You have not shown any evidence of anything, it's all CO2 has risen, temperature has risen the CO2 has caused it. Show the evidence 🤦. 
Your sudden rise is 1 degree in 140 years, show me that this enormous 1 degree change has not occurred before. 

[Nick]

Whilst it is true measurements have got more accurate they were pretty accurate 150 years ago.
More importantly we can measure and quantify the level of inaccuracy of those older systems compared to our current ones.

How do you know they were accurate 150 years ago? Unless you can compare them to modern technology you cannot possibly know. Please tell me how you know they were accurate, bearing in mind the readings are different now. 

[Nick]

You are wrong.

The answer was YES.

May 2024 was the hottest May on record for both the UK and the world as a whole.

The combined expertise of two of the worlds premier weather and climate monitoring organisations outranks your "but I felt cold". Have you considered you're getting old and feel the cold more?

And yes, technology to.measure climate has improved but that just makes error less likely. The current error (to 95% confidence) is 0.05C and even as far back as 1880.it is 0.15C

I have NEVER mentioned anything about feeling cold in May, you need to sort your targets out. Weather has very little to do with climate. 

A question just occurred to me, bearing in mind we are at almost the farthest point from an ice age, do you think we are going to keep on heating or head back to another ice age?

[BeElBeeBub]

a) Have you evidence this has never happened? You're the one shouting that humans are altering the cycle with zero evidence that this cycle is not normal.

So let's get this straight

You show a temperature record then say:

Because we cannot see X occuring we can say X has not occured

Because we cannot see Y occuring we cannot say Y has not occured 

X being co2 leading temperature
Y being a rise in comparable to today

You seem to make up your rules as you go along to fit your situation.

Trace gasses can simultaneously have a great effect on the climate and no effect on the climate apparently.

Do you not see your own selectivity? You ask for evidence then refuse to accept any evidence contrary to your preconceived notions. You say you cannot use theories and models, then invoke theories and models to argue it isn't co2.

b) We haven't missed anything, we know about these variations, we just don't know exactly what the variations bring.

• Every 100,000 years, Earth's orbit stretches from nearly circular to slightly elliptical and back. Every ~400,000 years, this change in eccentricity is even more pronounced.
• Every 41,000 years, Earth's axis tilts 2.4 degrees more toward the sun; the obliquity then cycles 2.4 degrees away from the sun.

And all the above happens in a slow gradual and predictable fashion. The fact you were able to quite those figures is proof we know about the cycles and we can detect any unexpected changes in real time. Say a black hole swung past our system and shifted out orbits. We would see that. We would know how much we had moved.

Can you point to a change in the earths orbit or the sun's output that can account for the sudden rise in temperature - far outpacing any we have seen despite 400,000 years being a blink of an eye in the 600m.year records we have.

[BeElBeeBub]

I keep making this point, the method of measuring in 150 years ago will have been much more inaccurate than today, the errors could easily absorb a 1 degree change. Ice core records give you a trend, not a year on year picture.

Whilst it is true measurements have got more accurate they were pretty accurate 150 years ago.
More importantly we can measure and quantify the level of inaccuracy of those older systems compared to our current ones.

[BeElBeeBub]

It does not state "mean" in any temperature columns.

Yeah but the table is titled "average tables" so there is that.

[BeElBeeBub]

I think the answer was NO, it wasn't worldwide, seeing as you had to mention another source. And as I just posted, the technology to measure these increases has improved, and could quite easily absorb a 1 degree error.

You are wrong.

The answer was YES.

May 2024 was the hottest May on record for both the UK and the world as a whole.

The combined expertise of two of the worlds premier weather and climate monitoring organisations outranks your "but I felt cold". Have you considered you're getting old and feel the cold more?

And yes, technology to.measure climate has improved but that just makes error less likely. The current error (to 95% confidence) is 0.05C and even as far back as 1880.it is 0.15C

[Nick]

Both.

From met office May report:

"The UK experienced its warmest May on record, in a series going back to 1884. The UK provisionally recorded a mean temperature of 13.1°C, 2.4°C above the average May temperature and 1°C above the previous record (12.1°C in 2008). England, Scotland and Northern Ireland all provisionally experienced their warmest Mays on record, while Wales experienced its equal-warmest May."

From the US NOAA

"The May global surface temperature was 1.18°C (2.12°F) above the 20th-century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F), making it the warmest May on record. This was 0.18°C (0.32°F) above the previous record from May 2020. May 2024 marked the 48th consecutive May (since 1977) with temperatures at least nominally above the 20th-century average. May had a record-high monthly global ocean surface temperature for the 14th consecutive month."

I think the answer was NO, it wasn't worldwide, seeing as you had to mention another source. And as I just posted, the technology to measure these increases has improved, and could quite easily absorb a 1 degree error. 

[Nick]

You really have no idea how quickly temperature changed a million years ago.  How could that be tested?

I keep making this point, the method of measuring in 150 years ago will have been much more inaccurate than today, the errors could easily absorb a 1 degree change. Ice core records give you a trend, not a year on year picture. 

[BeElBeeBub]

This Met Office warm May was where? In the U.K. or worldwide?

Both.

From met office May report:

"The UK experienced its warmest May on record, in a series going back to 1884. The UK provisionally recorded a mean temperature of 13.1°C, 2.4°C above the average May temperature and 1°C above the previous record (12.1°C in 2008). England, Scotland and Northern Ireland all provisionally experienced their warmest Mays on record, while Wales experienced its equal-warmest May."

From the US NOAA

"The May global surface temperature was 1.18°C (2.12°F) above the 20th-century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F), making it the warmest May on record. This was 0.18°C (0.32°F) above the previous record from May 2020. May 2024 marked the 48th consecutive May (since 1977) with temperatures at least nominally above the 20th-century average. May had a record-high monthly global ocean surface temperature for the 14th consecutive month."

[Scott777]

are you proposing that we have missed an orbital variation so large it has managed to increase the temperature of the earth at a rate not seen in thousands of years?

You really have no idea how quickly temperature changed a million years ago.  How could that be tested?