Global Cooling. The sky is falling.

[Chairman Bill]

Experts are the most dangerous. First, they know sh$t. Second, the public trusts them blindly. But, as a psychiatrist, Bill should already know that.

1. I'm not a psychiatrist, I'm a psychologist.
2. The disdain for science is pretty high, mainly because most people are scientifically illiterate and too many people in the media & politics have been feeding them misrepresentations & pseudoscience for too long. To most people, the tentative nature of knowledge = nobody knows anything, therefore 'I can believe what makes me feel good.'

[Rob C]

1. I'm not a psychiatrist, I'm a psychologist.
2. The disdain for science is pretty high, mainly because most people are scientifically illiterate and too many people in the media & politics have been feeding them misrepresentations & pseudoscience for too long. To most people, the tentative nature of knowledge = nobody knows anything, therefore 'I can believe what makes me feel good.'

That's why many continue to smoke and to drink post-illnesses. They accept that doctors often know how to cure them, but, strangely, not why they got ill in the first place... such is pop culture.

[RSL]

Big mistake. They should be importing beer. Think of all the CO2 drinking beer generates.

[Alan Klein]

The "sky is falling" twice as fast.  Well, so they say. 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180705110027.htm

[Ray]

We had a similar, although more severe, heatwave in 1976. I remember it well, as I was taking my A-levels at the time and conditions in the examination hall were less than pleasant. There was a widespread drought, with water supplies to homes cut off and standpipes the only source. The government appointed a "minister for drought", who did a rain dance; within a short time half the country was flooded.

That was more than 40 years ago. Beware of confusing weather and climate.

Jeremy

Good point, Jeremy. A major problem that causes so many people, especially younger people, to be alarmed about extreme weather events, from a climate perspective, is their lack of personal memories of similar events in the past.

You remember an even worse heat wave in 1976. If people were to live to the age of 200 years or more, with faultless memories, there would be far less alarm about these extreme weather events, because so many people would remember equally severe, or even more severe events, a hundred years ago or more.

Just recently, it is claimed that Glasgow has had its hottest day on record.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/28/uk-heatwave-glasgow-bakes-on-hottest-day-on-record

"Glasgow bakes on city’s hottest day on record"

However, at least the Guardian, to its credit, despite being pro-alarmist about AGW, does make the following very relevant point:

"The forecaster Sophie Yeomans said it was the warmest day of the year in Scotland, but it failed to beat the June record of 32.2C set in 1893 at Ochtertyre, in Perth and Kinross."

In other words, about 125 years ago, before anthropogenic global warming is claimed to have begun, there was a slightly hotter heat wave just a few miles from Glasgow; as the crow flies, about 30 miles away.

However, there's an even more relevant point that the Guardian didn't mention; the Urban Heat Island effect.
The population and urbanization of Glasgow has expanded enormously since 1893. During heat waves it is quite normal for temperatures in the city to be at least a degree or two hotter than in the surrounding areas, because of all the heat absorbed by buildings, pavements and black asphalt roads.

Yet, despite this Urban Heat Island effect, Glasgow failed to even reach the highest temperature experienced a few miles outside of the city way back in 1893.

The following site provides a detailed historical description of the extreme variations in weather in Great Britain going back as far as 4000 BC. From the 16th century A.D. onward, there's almost a year by year description. This is fascinating reading for those who are interested. It provides an excellent insight into the regular swings of extreme weather occurrences, from dry years to wet years, from hot years to cold years, and so on.
https://www.booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/histclimat.htm

Here's the description for the year 1893:

"A notably dry season over England and Wales. Some places in SE England had no rain for 60 consecutive days, from mid-March to mid-May with the longest absolute drought of all being at Mile End (London) from 4th March to 15th May. This (at 1993) is thought to be the longest period without measurable rain ever recorded in the British Isles. During the period March to June, in southeast and central-southern England, some areas experienced less than 30% of average rainfall & over a wider area of England & Wales, the anomaly was under 45%.

Notably persistent warmth over period April to June. The combined effect of the drought, above average temperatures and often intense/prolonged sunshine meant that by the 21st of June, many agricultural areas of southern England and the east Midlands were undergoing great stress: the ground parched, meadows burnt dry with many crops declared a failure. Fruit was withering (not helped by some sharp/late frosts in May) and the hay crop was much reduced; root crops also severely affected. Using the climatological definition of spring (March, April & May), this year's such-named season was warmest (with 2011/q.v.) in the CET record. (See article R. Brugge, 'Weather' May 1993)."

[Alan Klein]

There you go again, Ray, confusing everyone with historical facts.  Shame on you. 

[Ray]

There you go again, Ray, confusing everyone with historical facts.  Shame on you.

I'll bear the shame in the interests of truth. 

[LesPalenik]

Big mistake. They should be importing beer. Think of all the CO2 drinking beer generates.

Russ, you have it wrong. When it comes to beer consumption, it's CO2 in and methane out.

[Ray]

Russ, you have it wrong. When it comes to beer consumption, it's CO2 in and methane out.

"A new study by researchers in Sweden has found that Christmas trees absorb methane, the second most important greenhouse gas next to carbon dioxide."

Hallelujah!  

"In contrast to earlier studies of CH4 (methane) exchange by plants, we find a net consumption by all plants studied both in situ and in the laboratory," the researchers write in the journal."

https://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/439/20121226/christmas-trees-absorb-greenhouse-gas-methane-study.htm

[LesPalenik]

I presume that the CO2 absorption takes place primarily before the pine trees become Christmas trees.

[Chairman Bill]

There you go again, Ray, confusing everyone with historical facts.  Shame on you.

A historical fact. A single datum point doesn't tell us anything about anything, other than that datum point. The general trend is what matters, and the science gives us information into prehistory and the facts point to a fast & sustained warming, with human activity contributing significantly to that trend. People can cherry-pick to suit their philosophical, political, religious, whatever point-of-view, but that doesn't alter the science.

[Ray]

A historical fact. A single datum point doesn't tell us anything about anything, other than that datum point.

Alan mentioned 'historical facts' (plural). Did you miss my link to a very comprehensive and detailed description of the past history of exteme weather events in Britain?

"The following site provides a detailed historical description of the extreme variations in weather in Great Britain going back as far as 4000 BC. From the 16th century A.D. onward, there's almost a year by year description. This is fascinating reading for those who are interested. It provides an excellent insight into the regular swings of extreme weather occurrences, from dry years to wet years, from hot years to cold years, and so on."
https://www.booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/histclimat.htm

[Ray]

I presume that the CO2 absorption takes place primarily before the pine trees become Christmas trees.

As does the CH4 absorption.   However, there seems to be some uncertainty about the mechanism of the absorption of methane by certain plants. Here's the original study:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012GL053592

There are a number of mystifying acronyms in this study. However, the following quote near the end of the article seems reasonably clear.

"This indicates that the CH4 sink is located somewhere inside the leaves and that the diffusion rate is controlled by the stomatal conductance."

[LesPalenik]

Thanks for researching it, Ray. It was a pleasant article to start my day.

The interesting thing about the stomatal conductance is that the predawn water potential of the leaf remains consistent throughout most of the year while the midday water potential of the leaf shows a variation due to the seasons. For example, canopy stomatal conductance has a higher water potential in July than in October (presumably in the northern hemisphere - not in Australia).

[RSL]

Russ, you have it wrong. When it comes to beer consumption, it's CO2 in and methane out.

You're right, Les. I thought of that after I'd made the post, but CO2 sounded better. Just following the usual approach to the way things are done on this thread.

[Chairman Bill]

Alan mentioned 'historical facts' (plural). Did you miss my link to a very comprehensive and detailed description of the past history of exteme weather events in Britain?

"The following site provides a detailed historical description of the extreme variations in weather in Great Britain going back as far as 4000 BC. From the 16th century A.D. onward, there's almost a year by year description. This is fascinating reading for those who are interested. It provides an excellent insight into the regular swings of extreme weather occurrences, from dry years to wet years, from hot years to cold years, and so on."
https://www.booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/histclimat.htm

Yes, but they're individual, isolated events, notable for being exceptions. Hence the need to look at trends instead.

[RSL]

Like the "trend" shown in the "hockey stick," Bill?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

There you go again, Ray, confusing everyone with historical facts.  Shame on you.

Indeed! Isolated weather events are not climate but weather.

However, if the frequency of such weather events is increasing, then that may be a sign of a changing climate. One would have to analyze a multi-decadal trend to identify climate 'change' (change, as in a trend).

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Like the "trend" shown in the "hockey stick," Bill?

Yes, like multi-decadal trends (which tends to flatten out the solar-cycles, which makes the trends easier to see).

Cheers,
Bart

[Frans Waterlander]

Yes, like multi-decadal trends (which tends to flatten out the solar-cycles, which makes the trends easier to see).

Cheers,
Bart

Are you aware that the hockey stick hoax has been dispelled a looooong time ago?