[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-15, 12:11, said:

According to NOAA, 15 new maximum temperatures were set so far this summer. Consider that there are over 100,000 reporting stations, this amount to less than 0.1%. That would be an average summer, if we had 1000 years of temperature data for all the reporting stations. By comparison, 1936 saw the most all-time maximum temperature records set with 793, over fewer stations.

https://www.ncdc.noa...tatools/records

As is noted in your link,

This tool provides simplistic counts of records to provide insight into recent climate behavior, but is not a definitive way to identify trends in the number of records set over time. This is particularly true outside the United States, where the number of records may be strongly influenced by station density from country to country and from year to year. These data are raw and have not been assessed for the effects of changing station instrumentation and time of observation.

And I don't know where your numbers are coming from. When I looked at your link, I see 38 record highs for the year so far just in the USA.

In Seattle (as an example), there is:

Mother's Day Heat Record

July 15 Heat Record

Warmest May in history

Hottest July on Record

That's 2 temperature records for just 1 US city so far in 2018, in addition to 2 of the warmest months in history.

[johnu]

If hotter temperatures weren't enough

U.S. Faces a Rise in Mosquito ‘Disease Danger Days’

I personally blame the mosquitoes for their over the top response to global warming activists. Don't they know that this kind of bad publicity makes Dennison angry?

[Daniel1960]

 johnu, on 2018-August-16, 18:33, said:

As is noted in your link,

This tool provides simplistic counts of records to provide insight into recent climate behavior, but is not a definitive way to identify trends in the number of records set over time. This is particularly true outside the United States, where the number of records may be strongly influenced by station density from country to country and from year to year. These data are raw and have not been assessed for the effects of changing station instrumentation and time of observation.

And I don't know where your numbers are coming from. When I looked at your link, I see 38 record highs for the year so far just in the USA.

In Seattle (as an example), there is:

Mother's Day Heat Record

July 15 Heat Record

Warmest May in history

Hottest July on Record

That's 2 temperature records for just 1 US city so far in 2018, in addition to 2 of the warmest months in history.

You are looking at daily records. You need to switch to all-time records. Seattle has not broken its all-time high this year. The record from 2009 still stands. 2018 has not been a particular hot year for the US. Some places have been hot, but that is true every year. The average temperature is increasing because lows are increasing. Highs are not.

[Al_U_Card]

Just like every instance of anecdotal "proof" of CAGW. Once the analyses are done, nope, no connection, not more extreme weather nor greater losses etc. The "science" is all hype and alarmist innuendo and supposition. Natural variation covers it and more than what we are experiencing. Catastrophy only exists in computer models that are programmed to produce catastrophies. CO2 is the target as it is a convenient source of blame but not much else.

[Cyberyeti]

 Al_U_Card, on 2018-August-17, 13:38, said:

Just like every instance of anecdotal "proof" of CAGW. Once the analyses are done, nope, no connection, not more extreme weather nor greater losses etc. The "science" is all hype and alarmist innuendo and supposition. Natural variation covers it and more than what we are experiencing. Catastrophy only exists in computer models that are programmed to produce catastrophies. CO2 is the target as it is a convenient source of blame but not much else.

The UK is getting several places with 3 or 4 rainfall events in 15 years that were once in 100-200 years before this century. York, Cumbria and various places in the south west have had this sort of thing. Something is clearly happening with weather and climate here.

[Al_U_Card]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-August-17, 15:37, said:

The UK is getting several places with 3 or 4 rainfall events in 15 years that were once in 100-200 years before this century. York, Cumbria and various places in the south west have had this sort of thing. Something is clearly happening with weather and climate here.

England has one of the longest, continuous weather records (Central England Temperatures) in existence. Look into it and don't be surprised when you find that what is happening is just your normal variation with a little extra warmth thanks to the end of the Little Ice Age (like no more Frost Fairs on the Thames...). The recent floods (for example) are mostly due to poor river management and letting drainage systems degrade because of green influence and EU regulations. Sad but true.

[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-17, 12:09, said:

You are looking at daily records. You need to switch to all-time records. Seattle has not broken its all-time high this year. The record from 2009 still stands. 2018 has not been a particular hot year for the US. Some places have been hot, but that is true every year. The average temperature is increasing because lows are increasing. Highs are not.

I knew Dennison climate change deniers were low information (or no information) decision makers but this quantifies matters. You are willing to toss out 99.7% of the world's temperature data to try to make your case look better.

Suppose Seattle had a real crazy weather spell in January where every day topped 100F. If none of those days broke the highest temperature reading of all time for any day of the year, you are saying to ignore the significance of those days because it's just averages. Well done. I can see how this just confuses those Dennison climate change deniers.

My suggestion is to ignore temperatures from any year which is not a leap year divisible by 400 (ie, 1600, 2000, 2400, etc). This will greatly reduce the data for those who are being overwhelmed by numbers. You can now claim that we really only have 1 data point to work with, and should wait until 2400 or 2800 before trying to make conclusions about climate change.

[johnu]

Could the Dennison climate change deniers have something to think about?

Climate Researchers Warn Only Hope For Humanity Now Lies In Possibility They Making All Of This Up

For those unfamiliar with the Onion, it is a premiere satire site.

[Daniel1960]

 johnu, on 2018-August-18, 03:38, said:

I knew Dennison climate change deniers were low information (or no information) decision makers but this quantifies matters. You are willing to toss out 99.7% of the world's temperature data to try to make your case look better.

Suppose Seattle had a real crazy weather spell in January where every day topped 100F. If none of those days broke the highest temperature reading of all time for any day of the year, you are saying to ignore the significance of those days because it's just averages. Well done. I can see how this just confuses those Dennison climate change deniers.

My suggestion is to ignore temperatures from any year which is not a leap year divisible by 400 (ie, 1600, 2000, 2400, etc). This will greatly reduce the data for those who are being overwhelmed by numbers. You can now claim that we really only have 1 data point to work with, and should wait until 2400 or 2800 before trying to make conclusions about climate change.

Sorry for overestimating your scientific nature, but now I see you are just here to post misinformation and insult those with whom you disagree. What does your knowledge of leap year calculations have to do with temperatures.

I show real data that maximum temperatures have not risen, and you dismiss this because it only represents a single data point? Sorry, but the lack of new maximum temperatures clearly shows that summertime high temperatures have not risen. This is supported by many other lines of evidence. Even your previous misreading if the data shows a similar result. There are over 100,000 recording stations in the U.S. The hottest summers has several hundred to a thousand new all-time maximum records. Anything below 100 is a decrease, and the lower number you claim shows a greater decrease. Even the epa heat wave index, which shows an increase since the cooler 70s, shows that heat waves are much less than earlier years.

Some of us try to keep this site scientific in nature. Please try to follow suit.

[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-18, 06:05, said:

Some of us try to keep this site scientific in nature. Please try to follow suit.

Stop, you're killing me

[Cyberyeti]

 Al_U_Card, on 2018-August-17, 19:36, said:

England has one of the longest, continuous weather records (Central England Temperatures) in existence. Look into it and don't be surprised when you find that what is happening is just your normal variation with a little extra warmth thanks to the end of the Little Ice Age (like no more Frost Fairs on the Thames...). The recent floods (for example) are mostly due to poor river management and letting drainage systems degrade because of green influence and EU regulations. Sad but true.

That hasn't changed any more in the last 20 years than it did in the previous 20.

And I'm talking about the rainfall events more than the floods, when you're getting what has been the best part of a year's normal rainfall in 3 days, 4 times in 15 years, this is not normal.

[Daniel1960]

 johnu, on 2018-August-18, 07:33, said:

Stop, you're killing me

Perhaps you should take the words of MLK jr to heart, “nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance or conscientious stupidity.”
I would which you are following.

[hrothgar]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-18, 06:05, said:

I show real data that maximum temperatures have not risen, and you dismiss this because it only represents a single data point? Sorry, but the lack of new maximum temperatures clearly shows that summertime high temperatures have not risen. This is supported by many other lines of evidence. Even your previous misreading if the data shows a similar result. There are over 100,000 recording stations in the U.S. The hottest summers has several hundred to a thousand new all-time maximum records. Anything below 100 is a decrease, and the lower number you claim shows a greater decrease. Even the epa heat wave index, which shows an increase since the cooler 70s, shows that heat waves are much less than earlier years.

Some of us try to keep this site scientific in nature. Please try to follow suit.

Here's a site the allows one to look at said recording stations

https://www.ncdc.noa...tatools/records

I just did a quick search on 7/16/2018 --> 8/15/2018

Claims that well over a thousand records were broken in this 30 day period alone

[Daniel1960]

 hrothgar, on 2018-August-18, 12:30, said:

Here's a site the allows one to look at said recording stations

https://www.ncdc.noa...tatools/records

I just did a quick search on 7/16/2018 --> 8/15/2018

Claims that well over a thousand records were broken in this 30 day period alone

Yes, 1024 new daily highs out of about 3 million potentials. That would be normal, if there were 300 years of temperature data at all reporting stations. Since there are much fewer, this is quite a lie value, indicating a decrease in new daily highs.

[hrothgar]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-18, 21:19, said:

Yes, 1024 new daily highs out of about 3 million potentials. That would be normal, if there were 300 years of temperature data at all reporting stations. Since there are much fewer, this is quite a lie value, indicating a decrease in new daily highs.

Two posts back, there is a quote from you in which you directly assert

Quote

The hottest summers has several hundred to a thousand new all-time maximum records. Anything below 100 is a decrease, and the lower number you claim shows a greater decrease.

You're shifting goalposts

[johnu]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-August-18, 09:33, said:

That hasn't changed any more in the last 20 years than it did in the previous 20.

And I'm talking about the rainfall events more than the floods, when you're getting what has been the best part of a year's normal rainfall in 3 days, 4 times in 15 years, this is not normal.

Are you going to believe your lying eyes, or believe the climate change deniers who tell you this is a random fluctuation?

For example, in the US, glaciers are disappearing at an increasing rate.

US Glacier national park losing its glaciers with just 26 of 150 left

Climate change deniers will say there are just as many glaciers around as before, but some of them are taking a break and will be back real soon. I could give you a mathematical proof but it's "New" math so I can't.

[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-18, 06:05, said:

What does your knowledge of leap year calculations have to do with temperatures.

I'm just trying to help you out by making your numbers look even better for the low information Dennison climate change deniers. You can run some numbers and post them on some client change denier forums and claim full credit with my compliments. Maybe somebody in Dennison's circle will take notice and offer you a job at NASA or NOAA to keep making those numbers up. If that happens, you don't even have to thank me.

[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-18, 12:02, said:

Perhaps you should take the words of MLK jr to heart, “nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance or conscientious stupidity.”
I would which you are following.

I can tell you what I see from climate change deniers, and that is sincere stupidity, and conscientious ignorance.

[Al_U_Card]

 johnu, on 2018-August-19, 07:09, said:

Are you going to believe your lying eyes, or believe the climate change deniers who tell you this is a random fluctuation?

For example, in the US, glaciers are disappearing at an increasing rate.

US Glacier national park losing its glaciers with just 26 of 150 left

Climate change deniers will say there are just as many glaciers around as before, but some of them are taking a break and will be back real soon. I could give you a mathematical proof but it's "New" math so I can't.

Did [CO2] cause their recent retreats the last couple of times prior to the advances in the 50s and 60s? Overall a bit less ice over the last 3 centuries due to natural warming with several coolings mixed in. Neither catastrophic nor even remarkable.

[Winstonm]

 johnu, on 2018-August-19, 07:21, said:

I can tell you what I see from climate change deniers, and that is sincere stupidity, and conscientious ignorance.

I think you are missing their point - their beef has nothing to do with climate. It is change they so adamantly despise because it means intervention in the "free markets".