News Article: Media has ignored the sharp drop in temperatures over the last two years

Displaced Bama Fan · May 21, 2018

https://www.investors.com/politics/...ange-global-warming-earth-cooling-media-bias/

Aaron Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, "global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius." That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century.

"The 2016-2018 Big Chill," he writes, "was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average."

Interesting.

AlexanderFan · May 21, 2018

They covered that by saying global warming would cause short term changes in temperature as well, even cooling.

Can't be wrong if you talk out of both sides of your mouth.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MattinBama · May 21, 2018

I'm pretty sure Washington Post is "media":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...eres-why-thats-normal/?utm_term=.b30a2f43d81c

It was only two years ago that a new record-warm global temperature was set, but things have already cooled off significantly. Temperature anomalies hit record peaks in 2016 but have been sliding since then. Global temperatures are still much warmer than normal, but according to NASA, the first quarter of 2018 (January-March) was the fourth warmest, behind 2015, 2016, 2017 and tied with 2010.

This is normal, of course. The world has not seen the last of global warming. The long-term upward trend in temperatures is the result of man-made fossil fuel emissions, but natural processes that affect global temperature — like El Niño — still play a role. Sometimes they make things warmer and sometimes they make things cooler.

The current cooling episode is mostly the result of a reversal of waters in the Tropical Pacific, which can modulate global temperature. Since the Pacific Ocean is our largest global body of water, what it does makes a big difference on global climate. A similar reversal followed the super El Niño in the late ’90s — 1998 was the hottest year on record at the time in part because of the warm El Niño water pushing global temperatures over the brink. Earth went from having one of the strongest El Niño events on record (very warm waters in the central Tropical Pacific) to a few years of cooler waters, thanks to a La Niña period.

Natural processes like El Niño and La Niña are why we end up with graphs like this. There’s a lot of fluctuation, but overall the trend is up.

MattinBama · May 21, 2018

AlexanderFan said:
They covered that by saying global warming would cause short term changes in temperature as well, even cooling.

Can't be wrong if you talk out of both sides of your mouth.

It's also super easy for deniers to take a small sample of data and claim that a long term trend must be incorrect because of it while ignoring the rest of the data.

AlexanderFan · May 21, 2018

MattinBama said:
It's also super easy for deniers to take a small sample of data and claim that a long term trend must be incorrect because of it while ignoring the rest of the data.

Who is ignoring the data?

I had a long, drawn out answer but your nonsense and insults just aren't worth it. There has been far more weather data unrecorded than has been recorded, determining a pattern with such a relatively small sample size is at best guesswork.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

92tide · May 21, 2018

AlexanderFan said:
Who is ignoring the data?

I had a long, drawn out answer but your nonsense and insults just aren't worth it. There has been far more weather data unrecorded than has been recorded, determining a pattern with such a relatively small sample size is at best guesswork.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

the entire point of samples/statistics is that a relatively small sample size can give you a good indication of the larger dataset.

MattinBama · May 21, 2018

AlexanderFan said:
Who is ignoring the data?

I had a long, drawn out answer but your nonsense and insults just aren't worth it. There has been far more weather data unrecorded than has been recorded, determining a pattern with such a relatively small sample size is at best guesswork.

I'd be interested in you pointing out the insults in my previous two posts.

It is interesting that you claim that such a small sample size is guesswork but then standing up for an article that is cherry picking an extremely smaller sample size. TBF you didn't make a comment on the actual content of the original article so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you think it's bunk as well.

92tide · May 21, 2018

we've reached a tipping point. my guess is that, unlike the myriad "this is totally going to destroy the climate alarmists con-game" opinion pieces that have been regularly posted here for years, this opinion piece is going to totally destroy the climate alarmists con-game.

jthomas666 · May 21, 2018

92tide said:
we've reached a tipping point. my guess is that, unlike the myriad "this is totally going to destroy the climate alarmists con-game" opinion pieces that have been regularly posted here for years, this opinion piece is going to totally destroy the climate alarmists con-game.

Well played, sir.

AlexanderFan · May 21, 2018

92tide said:
the entire point of samples/statistics is that a relatively small sample size can give you a good indication of the larger dataset.

Life on Earth is around 3.8 billion years old. Temperature measurement is around 420 years old, recorded and accurate weather recording has been going on for less time than that. These Doomsday predictions are based on that small piece of weather.

Two years doesn't make a pattern in the grand scheme of things. My comment was more geared to the point that global warmers have addressed this phenomenon already by claiming global warming would make for cooler temperatures as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CajunCrimson · May 21, 2018

MattinBama said:
It's also super easy for deniers to take a small sample of data and claim that a long term trend must be incorrect because of it while ignoring the rest of the data.

You mean like when "experts" are taking 100 years of data and applying to 4.5 billion years?

2 years out of the last 100 is 2%
100 years out of the last 4.5B years is .0000000022%

Which sample size is larger?

CajunCrimson · May 21, 2018

I still believe that the single biggest impact on our temperature fluctuations is that big glowing ball of fire that is usually visible between 7am and 7pm this time of the year.

When it gets hotter - we get hotter....
When it cools down - we get cooler....

TIDE-HSV · May 21, 2018

On the long term, Earth is glaciated on average. We are in an interglacial period...

seebell · May 21, 2018

Perhaps mitigation efforts that have been implemented are already making a difference

AUDub · May 21, 2018

seebell said:
Perhaps mitigation efforts that have been implemented are already making a difference

We haven’t really affected any major efforts at mitigation, and even if we had, you can’t say that definitively with that small of a sample.

Jon · May 21, 2018

investors.com is (sadly) no better than Sea Hannity when it comes to truthful reporting

CajunCrimson · May 21, 2018

92tide · May 21, 2018

seebell said:
Perhaps mitigation efforts that have been implemented are already making a difference

from matt's article upthread

The current cooling episode is mostly the result of a reversal of waters in the Tropical Pacific, which can modulate global temperature. Since the Pacific Ocean is our largest global body of water, what it does makes a big difference on global climate. A similar reversal followed the super El Niño in the late ’90s — 1998 was the hottest year on record at the time in part because of the warm El Niño water pushing global temperatures over the brink. Earth went from having one of the strongest El Niño events on record (very warm waters in the central Tropical Pacific) to a few years of cooler waters, thanks to a La Niña period.

CajunCrimson · May 21, 2018

Jon said:
investors.com is (sadly) no better than Sea Hannity when it comes to truthful reporting

I looked for "Sea Hannity" -- but alas no pictures of Sean in a Pirate's costume

92tide · May 21, 2018

Jon said:
investors.com is (sadly) no better than Sea Hannity when it comes to truthful reporting

targeting the willfully ignorant is extremely profitable.

News Article: Media has ignored the sharp drop in temperatures over the last two years

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast

Senior Administrator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast

TideFans Legend

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast

TideFans Legend

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!