2010 tied for warmest year on record

[Ron2K]

It may not seem like it, but 2010 has tied 2005 as the warmest year since people have been keeping records, according to data from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. The two years differed by less than 0.018 degrees Fahrenheit. That difference is so small that it puts them in a statistical tie. In the new analysis, the next warmest years are 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2007, which are statistically tied for third warmest year. The GISS records begin in 1880.

Source

[KatrynKat]

and yet we are heading for an ice age...

[RuadRauFlessa]

KK, you don't seem to understand the concept. If it gets too hot the ice caps melt and flows into the ocean. The ocean is a major factor in the distribution of energy/heat throughout the globe. If it cools down too much due to the cold flow of water from the ice caps then the natural convection of energy within the ocean will or could stop. If it stops then parts of the globe will become even hotter while the temperature in others will simply plummet. I would suspect that if this becomes the case the only other means to the planet of distribution of energy will be air and/or the ground itself. If the air takes on the burden then we are in for some serious climate changes amongst others flash freeze conditions and such. But by that time most of the ocean life will already have died out.

It could be one vicious domino effect until the environment has stabilized itself.

[KatrynKat]

do you realise what i study?

but i was told that the Earth is heading towards an ice age and that we are in fact a few hundred years overdue..... this may be true, but there are so many theories about Climate Change that i tend to stay out of debates about CC.... there are many other people working on it....

but if you go read about the Milankovitch Cycles you will see that "The Milankovitch or astronomical theory of climate change is an explanation for changes in the seasons which result from changes in the earth's orbit around the sun

and according to the NOAA:

What does The Milankovitch Theory say about future climate change?
Orbital changes occur over thousands of years, and the climate system may also take thousands of years to respond to orbital forcing. Theory suggests that the primary driver of ice ages is the total summer radiation received in northern latitude zones where major ice sheets have formed in the past, near 65 degrees north. Past ice ages correlate well to 65N summer insolation (Imbrie 1982). Astronomical calculations show that 65N summer insolation should increase gradually over the next 25,000 years, and that no 65N summer insolation declines sufficient to cause an ice age are expected in the next 50,000 - 100,000 years ( Hollan 2000, Berger 2002).

rest of article

[KALSTER]

We are technically still in an ice age, we are just heading towards another glaciation period. But that is probably still a way into the future. Right now the energy content of the atmosphere is increasing year on year, which means more than it simply getting warmer. It means there are going to be more extremes of weather, including revere cold weather in places. Expect to see more and more weather related records to tumble as time goes on.

[Kronos]

do you realise what i study?

lol, Ruad, can you say pwned?

[Bladerunner]

Meh. The earth has always heated up and cooled down again. Nature stabilises itself.

[KALSTER]

Meh. The earth has always heated up and cooled down again. Nature stabilises itself.

Sure, but that is not the problem. The problem is that we have to suffer the brunt of it.

[rustypup]

The problem is that we have to suffer the brunt of it.

no... no we don't... we could choose to take a hike... unfortunately, humanity in general needs marketing to convince it this may be a good idea... hence the butchering of NASA...

why it is even necessary to sell the idea is beyond me, but it is...

also... 7bn says we're not suffering enough brunt....

[RuadRauFlessa]

do you realise what i study?

lol, Ruad, can you say pwned?

I know what KK studies. But what do you think about
http://www.examiner.com/weather-in-balt ... ng-to-nasa

[Kronos]

Language Warning...

i'll just leave this here for now

[RuadRauFlessa]

Hmm Kronos you should have been a stand-up comedian. Not an upstanding one though.

[doo_much]

I know what KK studies. But what do you think about
http://www.examiner.com/weather-in-balt ... ng-to-nasa

Read the original here. I'm not a statistician so I can not comment on the way Herr Willis amended his statistics to prove his conclusion.

I am however of the opinion that 'anthropogenic' climate change is a load of hogwash.

[wizardofid]

We are technically still in an ice age, we are just heading towards another glaciation period. But that is probably still a way into the future. Right now the energy content of the atmosphere is increasing year on year, which means more than it simply getting warmer. It means there are going to be more extremes of weather, including revere cold weather in places. Expect to see more and more weather related records to tumble as time goes on.

Well technically speaking time wise, perhaps not that quick for another major glaciate period, on the other hand Yellow Stone Caldera ticking mini ice age time bomb with as much destruction as you can possibly imagine likely in the next few 100 years perhaps sooner....

So yeah ice age take a hike...I am hitching a ride on yellow stone to oblivion........

[Prime]

The problem is that we have to suffer the brunt of it.

no... no we don't... we could choose to take a hike... unfortunately, humanity in general needs marketing to convince it this may be a good idea... hence the butchering of NASA...

why it is even necessary to sell the idea is beyond me, but it is...

also... 7bn says we're not suffering enough brunt....

+1

Too many people on this planet, depleting resources. if we keep this up, we'll poison ourselves before any climate change happens.

And who says its not time for us to take a hike. let evolution and natural selection do their jobs!

we could cut the worlds population in 2 generations if we had a global 1 child policy.

[Anthro]

I am however of the opinion that 'anthropogenic'

Someone called ?

I have always looked at the weather patterns, and I must say lately - some weird ***** going on

[doo_much]

I am however of the opinion that 'anthropogenic'

Someone called ?

I have always looked at the weather patterns, and I must say lately - some weird **** going on

I never made that connection!
I remember as a kid - and remember I'm way older than most of you - we had floods worse than this in my area.

But yes, there is some extreme weather. Apparently we don't live on a dead piece of rock, but a living organism that changes with time.

+1

Too many people on this planet, depleting resources. if we keep this up, we'll poison ourselves before any climate change happens.

And who says its not time for us to take a hike. let evolution and natural selection do their jobs!

we could cut the worlds population in 2 generations if we had a global 1 child policy.

True, we have found some rather creative ways of fudging up our little rock haven't we?

[KALSTER]

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/globalw ... rkids.html

[Tribble]

A site that keeps up with all the bad things that are happening
http://saweatherobserver.blogspot.com/

[KatrynKat]

i follow them on twitter...

[Tribble]

So do I

[RiaX]

Lets not forget that the sun itself experiences climate changes, and has winter and summer for itself which are termed solar max and solar min. This cycle takes place every 11 years or so, unfortunately the sun will be at solar max in 2012 so its normal for its radiation output to increase as it gets closer to solar max. Add that effect with global warming and you got some very very hot days on earth.

Now the ocean currents circulate heat across the globe hence why we have warm and cold oceans. The problem comes in because the ice caps are reduced in size, hence there is less of a global mirror to reflect of incoming solar UV radition causing an increased temperature as a whole on the planet. So increased solar output and less reflection equates to increased temperatures.

This can also have terrible outcomes on our health as a whole, with increased radiation output, low ozone and a weaker magnetic field there might be a rise in cancers however this is simple conjecture from my point of view about the cancers