HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Study: Temperatures go of...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 07:39 AM

Study: Temperatures go off the charts around 2047

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) Starting in about a decade, Kingston, Jamaica, will probably be off-the-charts hot permanently. Other places will soon follow. Singapore in 2028. Mexico City in 2031. Cairo in 2036. Phoenix and Honolulu in 2043.

And eventually the whole world in 2047.

A new study on global warming pinpoints the probable dates for when cities and ecosystems around the world will regularly experience hotter environments the likes of which they have never seen before.

And for dozens of cities, mostly in the tropics, those dates are a generation or less away.

"This paper is both innovative and sobering," said Oregon State University professor Jane Lubchenco, former head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, who was not involved in the study.

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/study-temperatures-go-charts-around-2047

53 replies, 5100 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 53 replies Author Time Post
Reply Study: Temperatures go off the charts around 2047 (Original post)
pintobean Oct 2013 OP
Randomthought Oct 2013 #1
baldguy Oct 2013 #13
Orrex Oct 2013 #2
Scuba Oct 2013 #3
awoke_in_2003 Oct 2013 #25
Orrex Oct 2013 #26
awoke_in_2003 Oct 2013 #27
Javaman Oct 2013 #4
meegbear Oct 2013 #6
Javaman Oct 2013 #7
pscot Oct 2013 #36
AAO Oct 2013 #8
Javaman Oct 2013 #9
awoke_in_2003 Oct 2013 #28
RebelOne Oct 2013 #29
Skittles Oct 2013 #51
Enthusiast Oct 2013 #5
toby jo Oct 2013 #10
heaven05 Oct 2013 #11
rug Oct 2013 #12
groundloop Oct 2013 #14
NoOneMan Oct 2013 #15
Uncle Joe Oct 2013 #16
groundloop Oct 2013 #18
Uncle Joe Oct 2013 #20
pscot Oct 2013 #17
mn9driver Oct 2013 #21
GliderGuider Oct 2013 #23
AverageJoe90 Oct 2013 #42
benh57 Oct 2013 #46
AverageJoe90 Oct 2013 #47
Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #48
AverageJoe90 Oct 2013 #50
AverageJoe90 Oct 2013 #39
PasadenaTrudy Oct 2013 #19
ashling Oct 2013 #22
Locrian Oct 2013 #24
Auggie Oct 2013 #30
Locrian Oct 2013 #34
lutefisk Oct 2013 #31
ConcernedCanuk Oct 2013 #32
BlancheSplanchnik Oct 2013 #33
pscot Oct 2013 #37
Peace Patriot Oct 2013 #35
AverageJoe90 Oct 2013 #38
Celefin Oct 2013 #40
AverageJoe90 Oct 2013 #41
Celefin Oct 2013 #43
AverageJoe90 Oct 2013 #44
ffr Oct 2013 #45
brooklynite Oct 2013 #49
Edim Oct 2013 #52
NickB79 Oct 2013 #53

Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 08:06 AM

1. Glad to live in Minnesota

I would like to see the full research paper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Randomthought (Reply #1)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 10:39 AM

13. The Mississippi River basin and its tributaries will become a desert on the scale of the Sahara.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 08:19 AM

2. I blame this on the rise of wind farms.

Wind is a finite resource, you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #2)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 08:37 AM

3. Snort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #2)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 12:25 PM

25. You almost pulled me offsides. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #25)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 12:26 PM

26. I never touched you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #26)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 12:33 PM

27. Know, but you had a good hard count...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 08:54 AM

4. Lets see, I'll be 84 at that point.

If I live that long, that's plenty long enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #4)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 09:14 AM

6. Now you can be one of those old cudetty guys who says ...

"Hot enough for yah?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meegbear (Reply #6)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 09:17 AM

7. LOL

when my lawn is bursting into flames that will be the new thing I say to the kids instead of "get off my lawn!" LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #7)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 05:27 PM

36. I'll be 107

leading a lizard like existence in my basement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #4)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 09:19 AM

8. I'll be 92 (or not). It's my kids and grandkids I worry about.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AAO (Reply #8)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 09:24 AM

9. I know what you mean.

I guess, my point was that I would have lived enough life by then.

I put solar panels on our house last year, not just to save on electricity, but for the future. At some point, we will be leaving the house to my girlfriends kids and at least they know, I tried.

Anyone I know and love who as kids today, I tell them to move north. Texas will be a hell hole in a few years.

Our generation will be the last to remember how things used to be. The next will hate us. and their kids will figure out a way to adapt.

we humans are such puny things, yet we think we know it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #9)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 12:36 PM

28. Been wanting to return to Ohio for years...

especially this time of year- haven't experienced autumn in 22 years. That is hard on this native Buckeye. It probably won't be long until Ohio ceases to experience autumn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #4)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 12:58 PM

29. I won't be around in 2047. If I am, I'll be 108. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RebelOne (Reply #29)

Tue Oct 22, 2013, 09:04 PM

51. I'll only be in my 90's so I will kick your triple digit ass

yes INDEED

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 09:10 AM

5. "It's a hoax!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 09:34 AM

10. I read the other day about how the VA coast is already seeing a higher water level.

I believe it was Norfolk. The article said the ocean would not raise evenly - didn't know that. Apparently different coastlines will get it worse than others, and the US east coast is one of them.

Then we have large fish kills going on in the west coast due to a change in ocean pH. This is due to the water being warmer and infused with the fresh water from the melting icebergs. It's just not cycling like it used to anymore.

I live near Carroll County, OH, where there have been more millionaires created due to gas drilling funds than anywhere in the US. A farmer I met at an auction a few weeks ago is getting $500/acre/month. He owns 400 acres. Yeah, that is 200k / month, for 30 years. "I'm gonna keep my job at the mill" he says. The farmers are pretty humble people, to be honest.

Point is - I've been thinking of getting an alternative energy style program up - by tapping into those funds. A college, why the fuck not? In researching, I've found that this is a growing area of interest - that is, degrees now being offered in alternative energy around the country. There's not alot, but at least it's growing.

So, some good news, hopefully not too late.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 10:27 AM

11. the late, great planet earth

and it's inhabitants

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 10:30 AM

12. The first thing I thought of was how old my children will be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 10:52 AM

14. I have a problem with making predictions like this....

If even one of those predictions turns out to be wrong it gives more ammunition to the deniers of science. And besides that, the entire aspect of global climate change is more about a continuing, dangerous trend than about specific details of "the ocean's gonna' rise 3 inches in x number of years and the temperatures going up 4 degrees in x number of years". NOBODY can make predictions with that kind of accuracy, this is just one study which tends to agree with all the hundreds of other studies and models out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #14)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:00 AM

15. By the time these predictions start panning out

 

There wont be any deniers left looking for ammunition. People will already be starving from crop failures and droughts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #14)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:00 AM

16. Your last sentence seems to be an argument against your own post.



If even one of those predictions turns out to be wrong it gives more ammunition to the deniers of science. And besides that, the entire aspect of global climate change is more about a continuing, dangerous trend than about specific details of "the ocean's gonna' rise 3 inches in x number of years and the temperatures going up 4 degrees in x number of years". NOBODY can make predictions with that kind of accuracy, this is just one study which tends to agree with all the hundreds of other studies and models out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Uncle Joe (Reply #16)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:05 AM

18. Instead of nit-picking my words could we discuss the topic?

Sorry, I wasn't a language major. I apologize profusely for using words that confuse you.

My point is that it's silly for people writing these articles to try to be so specific, and could very well be used as ammunition by climate change deniers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #18)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:14 AM

20. It's not nitpicking, your last sentence was correct, and this study isn't so narrow as to cite

specific temperatures.

It speaks toward regions as exemplified by cities in those regions and record breaking temperatures in general.

This study adds to the overwhelming evidence already on record, and naming regions or cities affected by their scientific analysis is a must and it would be negligent of them not to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #14)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:02 AM

17. You're looking through the wrong end of your telescope

Those objects are a lot closer than you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #14)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:24 AM

21. Making predictions is what science does.

The primary purpose of studies like this is to test models and data sets by making predictions. This one is published in the journal Nature, which is targeted to scientific professionals. An annual subscription is $199. If the predictions in this study turn out to be in error, we will learn something from that and make better predictions in the future.

There will always be those who try to invalidate an entire branch of science by misusing these natural and necessary errors as evidence that everything we know is wrong. The mistake we as a society make is in giving them an equal platform to spew their nonsense. Popular Science recently said it very well when they announced they were turning off their comments permanently:

"...A politically motivated, decades-long war on expertise has eroded the popular consensus on a wide variety of scientifically validated topics. Everything, from evolution to the origins of climate change, is mistakenly up for grabs again. Scientific certainty is just another thing for two people to "debate" on television..."

The worst thing scientists could do in response to anti-science loons would be to stop making predictions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mn9driver (Reply #21)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:33 AM

23. Very well said. Thank you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mn9driver (Reply #21)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 02:20 PM

42. "If the predictions in this study turn out to be in error," And they certainly will, no doubt......

After all, this study's suggestions are way, way off from the research placed into IPCC climate models, that have years of tireless hard work and devoted research put into them. And none of the IPCC's models have suggested such an extreme scenario.

You may wish to note that this prediction of former record highs becoming averages was based on just a total of 3*C. 5.4*F rise. And here's where the problem lies:
As I have pointed out in my comments, West Coast cities such as San Diego & Los Angeles are particularly tricky in this regard. As for the former, you have to realize that while the highest recorded temp is about 110*F, the average high in August is only about 75*F. That's a total jump of 35 whole degrees.....which no other model has claimed, and which isn't supported by anyone else.

I understand that Nature and other magazines do try to be open to new ideas, and TBH, that's not such a bad thing. But when Mora's terribly research is inevitably exposed for what it is, then Nature, I hope, will be amongst the first to correct such....well, I hope, anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AverageJoe90 (Reply #42)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 04:43 PM

46. No, that's not what it says.

I don't think that's what they are saying at all. they are saying the highest 'average' will become the lowest 'average' year, not that the highest temp ever recorded will be the new average. Its not a rise of 35 degrees, it's a rise of 3-5 degrees.

You can see the data here. http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/mora/PublicationsCopyRighted/Data.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benh57 (Reply #46)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 06:37 PM

47. Well, I read this carefully, and that was the additional impression I got.

From what the article writer was saying, they were making it sound like that the highest recorded summer temps would indeed be the new summer averages, ON TOP of everything else. So perhaps this may have been more of a screwup on the part of Seth Borenstein, then, if that is indeed the case. In any case, 3*C certainly wouldn't be enough to shift cities like L.A. and San Diego into entirely new climate regimes, or make temps "off the charts", and the tropics certainly aren't going to be nearly as affected as the poles, temp wise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AverageJoe90 (Reply #42)

Tue Oct 22, 2013, 08:29 PM

48. Are you a climate scientist? Do you have background in the field? Thanks! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #48)

Tue Oct 22, 2013, 08:59 PM

50. No, but all you need to do is look at the actual data and projections from the IPCC and others......

to realize that none of these projections add up to "off the chart" averages or highs by 2047 in any city, with only a 5.4*F/3*C rise in temperatures, and we're not likely to get that high that early anyway.

Even the charts supplied by Mora's team don't support that statement(yes, I've looked at them). Perhaps it was just imperfect wording on their part, but with important subjects such as AGW, slight slip-ups can be costly if not addressed.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #14)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 04:04 AM

39. I think you missed one thing, though: This study is an extreme outlier.....and a poorly done one....

at that, from the looks of it.

The truth is, pretty much every model agrees that summers will get hotter as the world's average temperature goes higher. Okay? But not by nearly as much as what has been posited here: Mora has basically claimed, from what it appears(unless he has failed to be entirely clear), that by 2047, in many places the average summer will be hotter than historical records, with just a 3*C temperature rise(keep in mind, 3*C is only about 5.4*F or so). In Los Angeles for example, that would entail a rise of as much as 28*F from today's average hottest month! Which doesn't make sense. Even if we were to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he meant averages of hottest months(here in Dallas, that would be about 107*F),and not records, it still wouldn't add up 100%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:12 AM

19. Glad I didn't have kids...

and I'll be long gone by then. Feel bad for everyone else tho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:24 AM

22. Well, at ;east I will not be here to see it

I think I will leave DU by then . . . is there a DU afterlife?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 11:57 AM

24. oh bullshit - we won't die from the heat ...

we'll starve to death first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Locrian (Reply #24)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 01:02 PM

30. Yes. Along with deaths associated in a kind of class warfare -- haves vs have-nots

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Auggie (Reply #30)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 04:11 PM

34. yes. basically anarchy and breakdown of all as everyone struggles to survive n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 03:38 PM

32. It's like summer up here - shouldn't be . . .

 

.
.
.

Lived in Northern Ontario for almost 30 years (I'm 62)

Even before I lived up here, weather was predictable - the nicest time to camp was the first week or so in September,

warm sunny days cool nights - sometimes with frost.

2nd week October now, and it's hotter than September, and hardly any overnight frost.

Even some plants/flowers are starting to bloom again - dat ain't normal.

also, bugs are getting active again - REALLY unusual.

Yep we have a problem - dunno for sure if we are responsible,

but if I was a betting man, I'd say we are.

I'd probably win, if I live long enough.

(sigh)

CC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 03:50 PM

33. guess we'll be seeing another Great Migration starting in about 7-9 years

That will be just the beginnings...

probably start getting real uncomfortable and crowded up north in about 15 years.


When will people start taking over-population seriously? The power of romanticized fantasy attached to biological drives is killing us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlancheSplanchnik (Reply #33)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 05:35 PM

37. All those Mexicans, Central Americans and Caribbeans

with no place to go but north.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 05:17 PM

35. This may explain the "Mad Tea Party" insanity in Washington DC...

...I mean, besides ES&S/Diebold--a corporation with far rightwing connections that would make your hair stand on end--controlling 75% of the vote 'counting' in the U.S., using 'TRADE SECRET' code (code that the public is forbidden to review), and with half the states doing NO AUDIT AT ALL (automatic check of machine totals against ballots) and the other half doing only a miserably inadequate 1% audit.

Besides THAT, the 1% have weighed their lifespans against their vast riches, and figured they can ride out the death of planet earth, living lives of luxury, while the rest of us fry and drown, and what do they care? Predatory capitalism produces these sorts of royal fascist billionaires, with egos the size of Jupiter, who DON'T CARE about the future, DON'T CARE about humanity, DON'T CARE about the poor majority, DON'T CARE about other critters, DON'T CARE about society, from which they are insulated by their vast riches, and DON'T EVEN CARE about their own children and grandchildren. Sociopaths.

And they now control our government, which is why our government is WASTING TIME and MONOPOLIZING all political discussion with this PHONY DEBT CRISIS, while the planet burns!

Deep down, these 1%-er sociopaths are PANICKED but, being who they are, they manifest their panic by GREED. They want ALL THE MONEY NOW, to purchase, stock and secure their insulated "biospheres" and whatever they think will need, or will need to control, as the planetary meltdown gets worse. And they have seized control of the political discussion, and have put THEIR office holders in place, through various and multiple means (of which ES&S/Diebold is the latest and, I think, final blow to our democracy), to prevent even "trickle down," insurance-corporation-run helps to the poor like Obamacare (which includes subsidies to the very poor who can't afford even minimum health insurance). They want ALL THE MONEY. Get it?

This "Mad Tea Party" so-called debt crisis is as insane as anything Lewis Carroll thought up. The pity is that it appears to serve Democratic leaders as well, who get to bloviate against this truly treasonous outrage and get everybody to think that Obamacare must be great because the "Mad Tea Party" hates it so much. But it's really and mainly the greatest boon to the insurance corporation 1%-ers ever, forcing all the millions of uninsured to now pay insurance premiums!

What SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED is extending Medicare to all, or some other form of single-payer health care, along with vast reforms of for-profit medical care.

WHAT SHOULD BE HAPPENING--if our democracy had not been hijacked by these sociopaths--is REFORM in all spheres--BIG reforms, such as the total elimination of private money, and especially corporate money, from political campaigns; a new "Fairness Doctrine" to beat corporations into providing REAL journalism; vast and deep investigations into the war profiteers; serious questioning of the Forever War and the maintenance of a standing military; busting up of all monopolies--the banksters, the media, the Wall Street fraudsters, the crap food chains, the Chinese-manufactured crap product stores; punishment of the outsourcers of jobs; restoring a progressive tax system, and so much more. So many reforms desperately needed--perhaps the biggest one of all, and the most desperately needed: vast reform of U.S. environmental policy!

Do you see ANY of this being done? Do you see ANY of these even being talked about?

NO! They're all talking about a NON-EXISTENT "debt crisis." You know what? If we had just a few of the above reforms, there would be no debt. The debt has been created by the 1%-er sociopaths not paying their fair share toward the common good and hijacking our government and our military to their purposes--for instance, controlling the world's oil--and by a system of outrageously corrupt private contracting and lobbying. THEY created the debt! And now they're USING the debt to create an ENTIRELY PHONY 'discussion' and raging 'crisis' to mask their greed--while the planet burns!

What we need to ask is HOW DO THESE 'MAD TEA PARTY' AGENTS OF THE UBER-RICH even get a forum in our country, let alone the power to shut down our government? And how do our allegedly elected Democratic leaders play along, and why? I say "allegedly" because not one of them--NOT ONE!--can prove that he or she was actually elected. Maybe some of them were. I think Obama was. But I don't know--and NOBODY knows--for sure, except the far rightwing executives at ES&S/Diebold and the programmers in their basement.

That is the situation--as our people are plagued with increasing poverty, our "Commons" is destroyed, our democracy is OBVIOUSLY not working--and the planet burns!

The 1%-er sociopaths are panicked--and that panic may be spreading to others, for instance, to the nutcases with assault rifles shooting up nursery schools and movie theaters and workplaces and bombing sporting events. CRAZINESS!

THAT doesn't even get talked about, in any real way. WTF is wrong with us?

Understand this. This "debt crisis" is completely phony. It doesn't exist. We have debt, yes--which is EASILY handled by common sense policies. We do NOT have a "debt crisis." It is an INVENTED PLOY by the uber rich to disguise their greed--just like their phony bullshit about the U.S. Post Office or Social Security. That is the reality. But we are having a hard time, as a people, dealing with reality these days. An awful lot of our people have just hunkered down, in complete bewilderment at this madness, and have gone "head in the sand" (I hear this at work--people bragging that "I don't vote") and are focusing on survival, for themselves and their families. They've GIVEN UP participating because nothing makes sense to them. They are right about nothing making sense, but of course wrong about choosing the easy way out--ignoring it all.

The 'Mad Tea Party' has been unleashed on our land. We need to climb out of the "rabbit hole" and look around at the real world and re-establish common sense--for instance, if you have a far rightwing corporation tabulating most of the votes with 'TRADE SECRET' code, you are NOT going to get adequate, or even sensible, representation--let alone GOOD representation--by your office-holders. You are going to get 'mad hatters' acting for uber rich sociopaths, to your great peril and the peril of the country--and, given the REAL crisis of global warming that we now face--peril to all life on earth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Thu Oct 10, 2013, 09:12 PM

38. I'm sorry, but this study isn't exactly "innovative". It smells really off, actually.

The claim that cities such as Phoenix, Dallas, Los Angeles, etc. would be hotter, on average, than even the hottest temperatures ever recorded in the past, with just a 3*C temperature rise, was perhaps the biggest giveaway that there was something wrong.

Particularly in the case of Los Angeles & San Diego, for example : the hottest temperature ever recorded in L.A. is about 113*F. But the average high in August is only about 85*F. A 3*C temperature rise would not have as much effect on So.Cal. as it would in the High Plains or the Arctic, as well as the fact that winters and nights are likely to really start warming notably first according to some recent studies, so for these purposes, we'll say that L.A.'s new August high ends up being at around 88.5*F. Certainly, it wouldn't be good news, but nowhere near what Mora has claimed.

Furthermore, San Diego's average high is about 75*F in August, with the warmest ever temperature having been 110*F. Now, let's assume that San Diego may possibly be more affected than L.A. for whatever reason, with it's average high in August now 79*F, Again, not exactly good news, but nowhere near what Mora claims.

And even Dallas wouldn't be shifting that far: even if we assume a rough summer rise of 3.5*F, that does take Dallas to 98*F or thereabouts, but again, nowhere near the "former records now averages" schtick that he's insisting is somehow possible with just 3*C temp rises(for those in doubt, here's a quote from the article: "By 2043, 147 cities more than half of those studied will have shifted to a hotter temperature regime that is beyond historical records.").

If Mora is truly trying to help, instead of just attention seeking as people such as Guy McPherson are apt to do, then he needs to really rethink this. Otherwise, he should step back to the sidelines, and let the actual research speak for itself.













Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AverageJoe90 (Reply #38)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 06:12 AM

40. Attention Seeking won't get you into 'Nature' (or 'Science', for that matter)

It's every scientists dream to publish in Nature or Science - with the extremely high impact factor of these journals you basically fulfill a year's worth of publication duty in addition to the high prestige this brings. These journals have the toughest peer-review processes imaginable.

Apart from that, contrary to your claim in post 39, the article clearly states that the 3C rise (Centigrade, not Fahrenheit - in Fahrenheit this would be 37.4) refers to annual averages, not monthly. Here's the chart. Look at the explanatory text below the chart under a, first three words.

Taking your San Diego example, the August average temperature would thus be (at the very least) 112F - about equal to the warmest ever recorded temperature. As summer and winter temperatures vary considerably, the actually possible summer maximum temperatures would indeed be of the charts: using your example temperature difference between today's August average to recorded highest temperature, 35F, this would mean temperatures up to 149F or 65C (!14F higher temp than ever recorded (!Death Valley high! Table 4 on page 8) - very bad news and 'off the charts' indeed.

'Let the actual research speak' is exactly what Mora's team does. But that demand incidentally is the typical climate change skeptics' 'schtick' in the hope that people won't be able to interpret the actual science, by no means simple. Sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celefin (Reply #40)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 02:04 PM

41. My response.

Taking your San Diego example, the August average temperature would thus be (at the very least) 112F - about equal to the warmest ever recorded temperature. As summer and winter temperatures vary considerably, the actually possible summer maximum temperatures would indeed be of the charts: using your example temperature difference between today's August average to recorded highest temperature, 35F, this would mean temperatures up to 149F or 65C (!14F higher temp than ever recorded (!Death Valley high! Table 4 on page 8) - very bad news and 'off the charts' indeed.


Just as I suspected, I'm afraid. Looks like I was right on the mark on this, at least.

Apart from that, contrary to your claim in post 39, the article clearly states that the 3C rise (Centigrade, not Fahrenheit - in Fahrenheit this would be 37.4) refers to annual averages, not monthly. Here's the chart. Look at the explanatory text below the chart under a, first three words.


Well, alright. Small mistake on my part, then. But here's the thing: it still doesn't disprove what I've pointed out:

3 degrees centigrade, as I pointed out, is only 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit, and because of this, such exorbitant rises in average highs, particularly in locations such as San Diego and L.A., are simply not possible under *those* circumstances.

'Let the actual research speak' is exactly what Mora's team does. But that demand incidentally is the typical climate change skeptics' 'schtick' in the hope that people won't be able to interpret the actual science, by no means simple. Sorry.


Unfortunately, again, this was obviously not well done as no official climate models have ever suggested such a massive rise in high, or average temperatures with only a 3*C rise. To be frank, Dr. Mora has some serious revising & repairing to do......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AverageJoe90 (Reply #41)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 02:33 PM

43. Alright then

Our main disagreement seems to be on the study's and publication's quality which I think is very good and you think is very poor.

I'd still say if the article needed a lot of revising and repairing it would never, ever have had the slightest chance of being published in Nature.

Anyway, we'll have to agree to disagree on this then.
Thanks for your elaborate response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celefin (Reply #43)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 02:38 PM

44. You're welcome......

"I'd still say if the article needed a lot of revising and repairing it would never, ever have had the slightest chance of being published in Nature."

Unfortunately, the editors at Nature are only human. They do mess up every once in a while, and if this article truly was published as one of the next big things, instead of just a curiosity, then this certainly would be one of those times, hands down, because literally nobody else has made such a wild claim.

Regardless, at least we were able to remain civil with each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Sat Oct 12, 2013, 02:38 PM

45. Is it okay for me to father 40 more children then?

We'll need them to drive to work every day to do the important work of figuring out how to get everyone to agree that global warming is real.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Tue Oct 22, 2013, 08:58 PM

49. I'll probably be dead so...wear sunscreen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pintobean (Original post)

Wed Oct 23, 2013, 05:03 AM

52. Off the charts?

How laughable, we go down now.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Edim (Reply #52)

Wed Oct 23, 2013, 01:56 PM

53. The HADCRUT graph shows a clear warming trend

That's obvious to anyone who's not either blind or blinded by ideology.

You think the recent short-term dip proves anything? The chart shows FAR larger temporary dips that that in the recent past, yet overall we've warmed almost a full degree C in the past century. Also, the cause of the recent slowdown in warming has a ready explanation: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-29/slowdown-in-global-warming-only-temporary/4920476

Anyone who thinks the theory of climate change requires a steady, year-over-year-over-year increase with no dips to be proven correct doesn't understand how climate works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread