AvantHiatus

^If not we will hit the HCO this year or before 2020. Yes, that's how important 2015 is. The red meat effects of AGW are about to kick into high gear. Tho I would argue we're already there due to the California situation alone. Stuff like that cannot be 100% natural variability, especially when you run East Pacific SSTA against the sediment records.

In the grand scheme of things, the system has a larger CO2 buffer now, to prevent it from sliding too deep into melt feedbacks. That does not rule-out dangerous melt tho. It is why Hansen has warming peaking in the 2045-2060 range and then stabilizing due to massive negative feedbacks associated with meltwater pulsing that were overwhelming CO2 levels as high as 600ppm. http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2012/20121226_GreenlandIceSheetUpdate.pdf

Negative feedback city.

Probably 0.1-0.25C away from the HCO....exciting times indeed.

Mindblown. Can we agree that the sky is blue? Where did you get that 1.5C number from? The difference between the Eemian and early Pliocene is that the latter is more persistent and less transient in regards to warming.

You are downplaying the 20th century warming too much. We need to warm by about 0.9C to surpass everything in the last 2.5 million years except the Eemian. I am using Hansen's (2013) dataset to formulate these numbers.

Opps, it is 1960-1990 baseline. So we are starting from about 0.55C.

I love being brainwashed. Warm era of the Pliocene is a range of 3.8-1.8C, besides the Eemian interglacial peak, this approaching 1.5-2.0C range has been unchallenged territory for millions of years. We are starting from 0.85C so subtract that. Do you not know what the Pliocene is? This graph is the most accurate big picture view we have, some of the datapoints are coarse but good enough. Sad to see you go down that path. Trying to get at my lack of credentials to make my post look discreditable. I have a formal education, just not a PHD by the way. We can still be warm during glacials, not sure of the official definition but since interglacials are unique to the Pleistoscene transition, our interglacials are probably like the glacials of the Pliocene if you move the baseline up.

That would be borderline mid Pliocene temps. I want what your smoking.

We'll be blowing past that very soon if we haven't done it already. There is only so much you can interpret from paleo and exact numerical measures of global temperature in small intervals is not one of them.

Yes, true story. You miss nothing

Brewer-Dobson hype!

Since nobody cares about climate science, that bar is pretty damn low? Agreed? Time will tell who was on the money, no need to make rush judgments.

No other poster on this forum responds so poorly to criticism. Every response is hate laden and just flat out uncomfortable to read, you should work on that and I know you can figure it out given your immense intelligence.

That exchange was like a snapshot of industrial civilization.

I would not be able to succeed in a traditional masters in science path. Regardless, my biggest strength is gathering/connecting information others have built and I believe I do this better than most. I think I understand the climate system better than most, especially versus someone who only holds a mathematical degree, but it was accomplished on my own time and on my terms. I believe self-education is the new frontier, especially with the rising costs of college. Everyone has their place in this field of study. I posted about educating/giving internet to impoverished African Americans in the PR forum and got slammed by everyone for being racist. It's not a one-way street, lol. My goal here is to make it easier for people without credentials to have a voice, because they should be valued to some degree depending on what they can deliver.

Climate science requires a unique type of person, one who can crunch the data and make broad-sweeping systematic interpretations and build a puzzle from scratch. Many suffer from a low field of view, meaning that they fail to pick up on things like the nuances of carbon cycles and albedo loss caused by algae blooms. Just two examples of how complex the system is. Nobody really knows where we are going 100%, to claim otherwise would be arrogant.

eh, it's just noise. Nothing to see here really.

This is just what happens when you have a +NAO. I suppose we still haven't had enough warming to reach tipping points without a -NAO.

That is caused by the heat-pump to Antarctica/Arctic going beserke and fooking up the hemispheric energy balance. It has been a bizarre year thus far between the Major Hurricane spike and Sydney floods.