so_whats_happening

4 minutes ago, Jack Frost said:

 

My dear sheople:

"Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
—Charles Mackay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, 1841

 

But enough about this - we have a legit plowable snowstorm to track in the NE!

 

 

 

 

 

What does this have to do with anything here? lol I mean you tell us to be nice to one another and post factual evidence yet you are calling people --> sheople. Come on with that if you want anyone to take you seriously post something validating your points other then obscure quotes.

Just now, Msalgado said:

Wait, so now Obama is behind this too?  Amazing.  I never understood the follow the money argument.  Scientists - especially those working for government agencies like NOAA, are far from rich.  And why does that logic never apply to people like Lamar Smith and his campaign contributions from oil companies?  Where's the critical thinking here?

I was just thinking that lol to me it just seems like dirty money got into some peoples pockets to put the hush factor out there or to overblow the situation. There is no denying the Earth has been warming the biggest issues have always been how much influence humans are putting on the system and in what ways that is being done. Its nice to see the back forth but it does become very much a nuissance when same things get said over and over without data properly backing things up. 

I personally have no climate studying besides my basic for Met classes and a 400 level undergrad class, that is why I ask some of these questions and yes I have doubts of my own but personally am not established enough to go on a full on rant about topics like climate change. I get some honk the horn a little too much and some go way over into parking lot of a baseball stadium to get their points across. Just is frustrating if we can not just get factual information out there without people always throwing their opinions based off the data when its right in front. lol

I dont get it what would be the purpose in lieing about Climate Change? Is it for funding purposes? Im not swaying one side or the other but just what would be the reason for having to change data, what would it prove?

10 hours ago, blizzard1024 said:

Appreciate your polite response. Can you show me where you are finding this temperature data for the Arctic pre-1950s? If you have done this on another thread I apologize. I am just curious because like ocean SSTs in the far regions of the world, I have a hard time comparing such old data in the Arctic versus the more comprehensive data of today. Below is the Hadcrut Arctic temperatures I posted.  It shows that the Arctic is a little warmer now than in the 1940s but not by much, not enough to decimate the sea ice. Of course this is the HADCRUT dataset which does have its biases...

 

So just by taking a quick glance while from your data being presented yes it looks as though the temps are fairly close 1940's but what seems interesting is that this temperature anomaly has been steady since what looks like 2007 timeframe.