Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Donate

Twitter Facebook YouTube Pinterest

RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
Keep me logged in
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Climate Hustle

2018 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #11

Posted on 17 March 2018 by John Hartz

A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook page during the past week. 

Editor's Pick

5 reasons the Arctic’s extremely warm winter should alarm you

You can see dramatic climate change impacts even in the dead of Arctic winter. 

Plar Bear

This polar bear is alarmed. LightRocket via Getty Images 

Cape Morris Jesup in Greenland is just about the northernmost piece of land on planet Earth. It’s located just 400 miles south of the North Pole, on Greenland’s craggy, desolate north shore. This is a place so far north that the sun doesn’t rise for most of the winter months.

In February, in the dark of winter, Cape Morris Jesup’s weather station recorded nearly 60 hours of temperatures above freezing — a new record. On February 24, the temperature reached a high of 43 degrees Fahrenheit.

Think of it like this: On February 24, you could be standing on the northernmost bit of land in the entire world, in darkness, in shorts and a T-shirt. That you wouldn’t quickly die is astounding because the cape’s temperatures are usually closer to minus 30 degrees in February.

It’s often said that on this warming planet, nowhere is changing faster than the Arctic. But this winter is providing stunning new evidence of a region in extraordinary, worrying flux. It’s also a hint of the future to come: an Arctic Ocean that’s not permanently frozen and all the disastrous consequences that come with that.

Here are five of the most alarming observations of the Arctic from the beginning of this year.

5 reasons the Arctic’s extremely warm winter should alarm you by Brian Resnick, Energy & Environment, Vox, Mar 16, 2018 


Links posted on Facebook

Sun Mar 11, 2018

Mon Mar 12, 2018

Tue Mar 13, 2018

Wed Mar 14, 2018

Thu Mar 15, 2018

Fri Mar 16, 2018

Sat Mar 17, 2018

0 0

Bookmark and Share Printable Version  |  Link to this page

Comments

Comments 1 to 3:

  1. Oh how I wish people would throw Fahrenheit in the rubbish bin where it belongs and stick to Celsius.  The older I get the more irritated I get with Fahrenheit.  It's a pain in the arse.

    0 0
  2. As part of Reason 3 in "5 reasons the Arctic’s extremely warm winter should alarm you", the NSIDC Arctic Sea Ice Extent data is presented in 10-year averages, sort of.

    The lines are for 1979-1990, 1991-2000, 2001-2010 and 2018 so far.

    Science data presentation does not have to be confined to the decades of the Western year-date system.

    Since the first year of the NSIDC data set is 1979, a better way to use the data to show the trend of 10-year averages would be 1979-1988, 1989-1998, 1999-2008, 2009-2017 (noted as a 9 year average) then 2018 so far.

    The penchant for using 10 year averages only when a decade has ended leads to nonsense claims that 'we need to wait 10 more years to see if the 10-year trend is actually still happening'.

    That type of claim making would say:

    • Since the required correction would be to the disadvantage of many more fortunate people who have over-developed perceptions of prosperity and opportunity based on benefiting from the burning of fossil fuels, let's wait until the 2020 data is in and verified before we make any serious efforts to correct what has developed
    • Followed then by the recommendation that since it now appears that very rapid action is required even more detrimental to those perceiving themselves to be most fortunate, serious action should actually wait until the 2030 data is in,
    • Followed by, OMG the required correction is now so dramatically detrimental to those perceived to be most fortunate that we really should wait until the 2040 data is in.
    0 0
  3. This is off topic,  but is rather interesting,  and deserves mention I feel given the circumstances. From MSN News: Steven Hawkings final research paper:

    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2019 John Cook
Home | Links | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us