New pictures show Great Barrier Reef is not repairing itself as it should
New images of the Great Barrier Reef have revealed the extent of the damage climate change has caused to the coral.
The world’s largest reef system, which stretches for over 1,400 miles off the coast of Australia, has been severely affected by rising water temperatures.
In May, researchers found more than a third of corals in central and northern parts of the reef had been killed and 93 per cent of individual reefs had been affected by a condition known as coral bleaching, where too warm water causes corals to expel algae living in their tissue and turn completely white. Corals depend on a symbiotic relationship with algae-like single cell protozoa, so when these are expelled they stop growing and often die.
Another month, another broken global temperature record
The planet's hot streak is crawling to a temporary end, but it's not over quite yet. September was the hottest such month on record, according to NASA, coming in at 0.91 degrees Celsius, or 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit, above average. This marks nearly a year straight of record heat, according to NASA, with 11 of the past 12 months ranking as the warmest on record.
September's record warmth assures that 2016 will be the warmest calendar year on record, taking over the top spot from 2015.
September only narrowly beat the previous warmest September, which occurred in 2014, making it a statistical tie, according to NASA.
According to a press release, September 2016's global average temperature was just 0.004 degrees Celsius, or 0.0072 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than September 2014.
Jezz, check out the Antarctic Peninsula.
Scary shit.
Over all that's about what the models were indicating.
Physics dictates what's happening.
The models help us understand the details.
Perfection about the future has always been impossible.
duh, yuh think?
New study reveals climate change affect future crops world
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uxCnKo7w5k
This constant big deal being made of oceans rising 20 feet is ridiculous compared to the probable food problems. The Statue of Liberty under water is just too photogenic.
psik
Plenty of scientists are concerned about the impact of climate change on food production. It isn't scientists who are choosing the photos.
Climate change can bring cold and related volatile weather patterns, too, not just heat and melting polar ice caps. Cold can have as negative an influence on food production as heat can have.
The question is, Are Climate Models Accurate Enough to Trust? They are as accurate as any well-founded scientific prediction and we ignore it at our peril. What do you think will happen when changing weather patterns create deserts out of arable land.? It will make the present European migration crisis look like child's play. Every country that remains in the tenperate zone will be overrun by migrants whose lands can't support them. Americans and Europeans may be forced to join the next migration wave. Will countries with arable land welcome us as we welcome political and economic migrants today? Or will we wind up in refugee camps, perhaps permanently?
Not sure if I’ve mentioned this in an earlier post, if I did, it’s worth repeating since it’s quite the informative talk.
Engineering the Software for Understanding Climate Change
Steven Easterbrook
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIiW6ugLHL4
Published on Sep 7, 2016
Climate scientists build large, complex simulations with little or no software engineering training, and do not readily adopt the latest
software engineering tools and techniques. In this paper, we describe an ethnographic study of the culture and practices of climate
scientists at the Met Office Hadley Centre. The study examined how the scientists think about software correctness, how they prioritize requirements,
and how they develop a shared understanding of their models. The findings show that climate scientists have developed customized techniques
for verification and validation that are tightly integrated into their approach to scientific research.
Their software practices share many features of both agile and open source projects, in that they rely on self-organisation of the teams,
extensive use of informal communication channels, and developers who are also users and domain experts.
These comparisons offer insights into why such practices work.
The question is, Are Climate Models Accurate Enough to Trust? They are as accurate as any well-founded scientific prediction and we ignore it at our peril.
No, the predictions of the motions of the planets beat climate models by parsecs. :lol:
psik
Some new data came out in the news today. ‘We have reconstructed temperature over the past 4,000 years and our preliminary analyses show the variations of Greenland temperatures significantly correlate with solar activity’ says Kobashi but adds the interpretation is not what might be expected. ‘When solar activity increases, Greenland’s temperatures actually get colder, and vice versa’. The phenomenon seems to be related to atmospheric and oceanic changes, and is also reproduced in some climate models. Also. ‘It has been known that Greenland temperature co-varies with North Atlantic temperature so understanding Greenland’s temperature variability provides information on North Atlantic temperature and changes in ocean current change in the past.’
Read more : Reconstructing Greenland's climate - Geology Page
Follow us: @geologypage on Twitter | geologypage on Facebook Sounds to me like there is a little guessing on the phenomenon. If correct, then it is a plus for the climate models.
Sounds to me like there is a little guessing on the phenomenon. If correct, then it is a plus for the climate models.
Sounds to me you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
Some new data came out in the news today. ‘We have reconstructed temperature over the past 4,000 years and our preliminary analyses show the variations of Greenland temperatures significantly correlate with solar activity’ says Kobashi but adds the interpretation is not what might be expected. ‘When solar activity increases, Greenland’s temperatures actually get colder, and vice versa’. The phenomenon seems to be related to atmospheric and oceanic changes, and is also reproduced in some climate models.
Also. ‘It has been known that Greenland temperature co-varies with North Atlantic temperature so understanding Greenland’s temperature variability provides information on North Atlantic temperature and changes in ocean current change in the past.’
Read more : http://www.geologypage.com/2016/11/reconstructing-greenlands-climate.html#ixzz4PeE2nf7A
Follow us: @geologypage on Twitter | geologypage on Facebook
And what pray tell does any of that have to do with current AGW?
You know, increasing our atmosphere's insulation ability by a staggering amount, within a geologic eye blink?
Of course ckimate models are not accurate enough to trust. Neither are tornado warnings, tidal wave warnings or volcanic eruption warnings.
People who don’t trust climate models should go out and face down the next tornado, tidal wave or volcano warning. Just stand there and say “What do scientists know about climate predictions! I’m not being taken in by scientists. They’re all commies, anyway!”
See what happens.
Sounds to me like there is a little guessing on the phenomenon. If correct, then it is a plus for the climate models.
Sounds to me you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
Some new data came out in the news today. ‘We have reconstructed temperature over the past 4,000 years and our preliminary analyses show the variations of Greenland temperatures significantly correlate with solar activity’ says Kobashi but adds the interpretation is not what might be expected. ‘When solar activity increases, Greenland’s temperatures actually get colder, and vice versa’. The phenomenon seems to be related to atmospheric and oceanic changes, and is also reproduced in some climate models.
Also. ‘It has been known that Greenland temperature co-varies with North Atlantic temperature so understanding Greenland’s temperature variability provides information on North Atlantic temperature and changes in ocean current change in the past.’
Read more : http://www.geologypage.com/2016/11/reconstructing-greenlands-climate.html#ixzz4PeE2nf7A
Follow us: @geologypage on Twitter | geologypage on Facebook
And what pray tell does any of that have to do with current AGW?
You know, increasing our atmosphere's insulation ability by a staggering amount, within a geologic eye blink?
Thirty thousand papers each year. I would like to see more matching back up. The point was that this post is “Are Climate Models accurate enough to trust?" And this data was sort of making the point that a couple of the Climate Models they thought were wrong may have been correct because they were expecting hotter results not colder. The Models were matching their new field results. And that's good news.
Thanks for the posting. Nobody is ignoring anything. My view is that all points of view and issues should be checked and re-checked until the models are up and working. Just a couple of days ago, a report on NASA said that temperature reading for the last 150 years were wrong. The models were not matching. And it turns out the models were more correct. We got to get this right, no second chance. Obama wants to increase the UN funds for Climate Change. That too is a step in the right direction. I have not used climate central before. I took a look and first impressions are that it is a little too political for me. What I would like to see is Climate Change data that is not just weather.
Just go here] if you're interested in the actual science behind human forced climate change and ignore the above poster on this issue please.
http://www.skepticalscience.comhttp://www.climatecentral.orghttp://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
What he said^
Ignore the fuzz peddlers like Mike Yohe here, go to the sites that present the best evidence placed in a genuine scientific context as CC links to. It takes a bit of work to get a strong grasp of the fact on this issue but they are the most important in our history.
