Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's a new graph each month showing no trend warmer for almost 2 decades.
Are you worried about sea levels? Do you live right on the water? Are you worried about the planet catching fire? I say screw the global crap and lets focus on the local stuff. India or Australia's temps have nothing to do with us.
Not just 2 decades for NYC... since 1980. 2012 was warmest on record but the trend is meaningless ranging from 55F to 56F mostly. Pretty flat. Slight uptick since 2004
I'm sorry, but this is just incredible. Are you THAT narrow minded, or just joking? GLOBAL warming is not something that is local. It will hit NYC no matter what you think.
"India or Australia's temps have nothing to do with us."
That is the most selfish sh*it i have read in quite some time.
Right now in Poland we've got one of the worst droaughts ever. 60% of crops, fruits and vegetables are destroyed, big trees in my neighbourhood are getting yellow.
And this IS thanks to global warming.
If we start the trend at the previous dip in global temps, even using GISS (which is what Tamino prefers) the problem with "the trend" becomes obvious.
Using more recent quality data, the trend problem is also obvious. Not that facts will matter of course.
Of course some might object to using cherry picked trends to slant the view of things.
Lets use a longer period to see why the previous warming (which is no considered from CO2 changes) is used as a reason to be skeptical.
My oh my, it certainly seems like warming might be due to something else, at least in the past.
Don't tell Tamino, but picking a trend to slant the information isn't scientific.
I mean, if you show the larger picture, people might ask questions and become skeptical!
But it obviously was from something else in the early 20th century (carbon dioxide level change were minor), if you're looking at where carbon dioxide may have had an effect it wouldn't make sense to include in the graph. Your point doesn't make much sense.
Of course it does. I was responding to the cherry picking of the coldest period to start the trend. As well as the questions about the warming that happened with out being blamed on CO2 levels. These are reasons many people are skeptical.
Right now in Poland we've got one of the worst droaughts ever. 60% of crops, fruits and vegetables are destroyed, big trees in my neighbourhood are getting yellow.
And this IS thanks to global warming.
Thats sad. So you know "global" means data from across the globe yet u pin point your drought on it. So essentially you are saying Australias temp increase is to be blamed for your drought. Who cares about global warming. Worry about your own region.
And let me guess, when flooding occurs its because of global warming as well because after all, atmosphere holds more moisture. cant have it both ways. Pick. Oh yeah... that climate change thing.
So you can blame your drought on Global Warming but we cant for our historic colds, snowpack and Great Lakes Ice?
And your telling me you dont realize there were droughts in Poland in the past.. during global cooling? Gimme a break.
Once again.. discuss weather and climate (including your drought) without using what has been pushed upon us. Its truely sad to read those comments IMO.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.