Now that winter is drawing near (northern hemisphere), I see the global warming chatter has died down (right on cue).

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Thanks for contributing that huge ad-hominen attack--you who support the party of facts!!!

For one thing, you need to learn what an ad hominem attach is. I didn't use name-calling or smearing as a means of trying to bolster a point; all I did was call a bunch of idiots with no facts on their side a bunch of idiots with no facts on their side, which is much different.

I'll do that now and call you an idiot, not just for this misunderstanding but for referring to me as someone who supports "the party of facts." I gotta ask, what is this party and what is wrong with being in favor of facts over all other alternatives?

Wow, you guys are practically hyperventilating in your attempts to refute me. But sorry, no consensus for AGW no matter how much you bloviate. Perhaps you folks that like to go along with an alleged consensus instead of thinking for yourself can explain why it is that Mars and Venus have a warming trend similar to the Earth? Since neither of these planets host enthropogenic activity it is clear the sun plays the most significant role in global warming. Again thank you in advance for capitulating, the wisest choice for you in this situation.

Actually, no, I am sitting her quite calmly.

Among credible scientists there is, but if you're arguing that fools like you aren't on board, well, tell me something I don't already know.

Wow. You just got even dumber. Want to back that crap up with some data? I'll throw in the fact that neither planet has an atmesphere comparable to that of Earth.

Enthropo...never mind, I'm ashamed I'm even replying to an MR/DD person. Jesus.

.

The temperatures have been steadily dropping where I live since mid-September.

.

Shameless bump to re-state this question:

not my real name wrote:A few people have asserted that 2012 is on track to be the hottest year on record. Can anyone link me to some meaningful data that shows that?

Thanks

You could always try Googling "2012 hottest year on record" instead of waiting to get an answer on a site where only about 80 percent of the regulars are scientists whose chief area of expertise is climatology.

Or just try this:

http://www.climatewatch.noaa.gov/video/2012/the-making-of-the-hottest-year-on-record-usa-temperature-update

"[W]e will most likely finish with the warmest year on record—and by a huge margin."

Thanks, that looks to be an examination of national (US) temperature

From here:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2012/6

Looking at the global temperature anomaly, they write:

"The January–June worldwide land surface temperature was 0.88°C (1.58°F ) above the 20th century average, marking the sixth warmest such period on record.

The global ocean surface temperature for the year to date was 0.39°C (0.70°F) above average and ranked as the 12th warmest such period on record. This was the warmest monthly departure from average since August 2010."

They go on to show that the combined land + sea temperature anomaly is the 11th highest.

ELEVENTH

Not hottest on record.

Am I misreading the data?

not my real name wrote:

Thanks, that looks to be an examination of national (US) temperature

Yes, it is. I thought this what you were asking about, since all of the claims I've heard this year in the media about 2012 being the warmest year on record have referred specifically to the temperature in the continental United States, which is where I live, where I am guessing you live, and where the NCDC is based.

not my real name wrote:

They go on to show that the combined land + sea temperature anomaly is the 11th highest.

ELEVENTH

Not hottest on record.

Am I misreading the data?

You're not misreading it per se, but I'm not sure why you chose to look at data only through the first six months of the year when data for the first ten months is available from the same source.

"The average combined global land and ocean surface temperature for January–October 2012 was the eighth warmest such period on record, at 0.58°C (1.04°F) above the 20th century average."

0.58°C is 0.09°C shy of the 2010 record, so 2012 is unlikely to become the warmest ever worldwide.

This graph is more telling than the data from any one month, year or even five- to ten-year stretch:

Thanks, no I'm not American.

I don't think that graph you linked is particularly telling, beyond what's already been discussed. It's obvious the general trend over the last half century had been of warming.

I'm interested in trends on all time scales. I find the claims of 2012 being hottest ever distracting and also I gather untrue

I didn't see the January to October data or would have linked it instead. Thanks

Not my real name wrote:

I'm interested in trends on all time scales.

Well, you won't likely find them on the NCDC site because that organization wasn't around in the Paleolithic era, or for that matter until 1934.

Not my real name wrote:

I find the claims of 2012 being hottest ever distracting and also I gather untrue

Distracting from what? If you are saying that those who trumpet this fact as "proof" of anything, then I agree.

The claim about 2012 is true as applied to the U.S., which, granted, hardly gives a complete picture. But I don't think anyone here mistakes the United States for all of planet Earth's surface, appearances notwithstanding.

Not my real name wrote:

I don't think that graph you linked is particularly telling, beyond what's already been discussed. It's obvious the general trend over the last half century had been of warming.

The linked plot breaking out global land and sea temperatures indicates that the temperature plateau of the last decade is driven by the sea component. The land component has contined upward during that period. This is consistent with the plateau being caused by changes in ocean currents even while there is a net positive energy influx.

I'm interested in trends on all time scales. I find the claims of 2012 being hottest ever distracting and also I gather untrue.

Not sure what you mean by "all timescales". The linked plot goes back more than a half century and nobody worth listening to would claim that climate has not changed over gelogical timescales. Neither would anyone worth listening to claim that fact disproves AGW theory. 2012 is on track to be the warmest in the US recorded history but not globally. Anyone who stated the latter is incorrect.

On my phone, can't dig very deep at the moment, but that article about 2012 being the warmest ever for the US doesn't really seem to contain any particular evidence that that is true. Link up some US data?

Btw I don't hope to prove anything one way or another, as I don't have an opinion on AGW one way or another. I'm just asking questions, challenging some things presented as facts, and trying to better understand what we actually know

Not my real name wrote:

On my phone, can't dig very deep at the moment, but that article about 2012 being the warmest ever for the US doesn't really seem to contain any particular evidence that that is true. Link up some US data?

Btw I don't hope to prove anything one way or another, as I don't have an opinion on AGW one way or another. I'm just asking questions, challenging some things presented as facts, and trying to better understand what we actually know

Data and research results are not hard to find. Let us know when you figure out what we actually know.

Citizen Runner wrote:Let us know when you figure out what we actually know.

Citizen Runner wrote:

Data and research results are not hard to find. Let us know when you figure out what we actually know.

You're dealing with a troll, someone with a very short attention span or both. Earlier today I posted this link:

The National Climatic Data Center page at the other end states unequivocally that the U.S. is on track for its warmest year since humans have been able to keep track. "not my real name" clearly read it because he thanked me for the link and commented on what he saw on the NCDC site.

Here's more:

"Even with the near-average October temperature, the January-through-October period of 2012 (lower map) is still the warmest first ten months of any year on record for the contiguous United States."

I'm not sure what "particular evidence" would satisfy him, but my guess is that his "I don't have an opinion on AGW one way or another" statement probably added a few centimeters to the end of his nose.

Back in the 70s, I believe Time Magazine put a picture of a blue Earth on its cover, with a story about how global cooling was going to be a huge threat. However, they found out that wasn't scary enough, so they worked with liberals to design a diagram of Earth that was red and they called it global warming instead.

If you lived in New York you would be talking about it a lot. Most of the people I know are now reasonably convinced that something is going on. If you get another storm/hurricane within the next two years I guarantee New Yorkers will go NUTS over this issue. I didn't believe it 10 years ago but I have changed my mind over the last 5 years or more. Even if not true it does not hurt to cut down on emissions. It's like saying it's okay to smoke in a crowded room. It's not okay anymore. Future generations are going to think we were stupid...

In last week's Time, there was an article stating that there really is no doubt that Sandy was caused by global warming.

bobama wrote:

Back in the 70s, I believe Time Magazine put a picture of a blue Earth on its cover, with a story about how global cooling was going to be a huge threat. However, they found out that wasn't scary enough, so they worked with liberals to design a diagram of Earth that was red and they called it global warming instead.

In a sense you are correct -- "Time" and similar rags do in fact like to sensationalize everything and gleefully spread all sorts of unsubstantiated "facts" around for the sake of garnering attention and selling subscriptions.

But if you are insinuating that the idea global warming (whatever the cause[s]) is nothing more than a product of the mass media and not a result of hard data, you're off-base. There was never any scientific consensus in the 1970s to the effect that global cooling was imminent, and scientists themselves do not routinely draw upon "Time," "Entertainment Weekly," "Hustler" and "People" when in need of evidence to support their hypotheses.