2010 Tied For Hottest Year

EagleGreen · January 24, 2011

The warmest year on record is a three-way tie: 2010, 2005 and 1998. So says the U.N. weather agency, providing further evidence that the planet is slowly but surely heating up. Average temperatures globally last year were 0.95 degrees Fahrenheit (0.53 Celsius) higher than the 1961-90 mean that is used for comparison purposes, according to World Meteorological Organization. That's a bit lower than what the U.S. National Climatic Data Center announced earlier this month, but the World Meteorological Organization also uses figures based on data collected by Britain's Meteorological Office and NASA which still show a warming trend.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/UN_UN_WARMEST_YEAR?SITE=FLDAY&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Travis · January 24, 2011

Damn global warming....

Had last year been one of the coolest, you know what they would say... Damn global warming!!!

Rudy · January 24, 2011

Damn global warming....

Had last year been one of the coolest, you know what they would say... Damn global warming!!!

Such a warm year, and yet we STILL got 12-14 inches of snow in FEBURARY, and snow on the first day of Spring. Dear God we're all gonna melt.

Coffee and TV · January 25, 2011

Such a warm year, and yet we STILL got 12-14 inches of snow in FEBURARY, and snow on the first day of Spring. Dear God we're all gonna melt.

I'm not going to get involved in another ridiculous debate about this, but this kind of idiocy has to be called out.

Just because its the cold(er) in Texas/Florida/Maine/where ever the hell you're talking about, it doesn't contradict the theory of global climate change. While the overall temperature of the earth might be rising (again, I'm not going to debate whether it is or not), it doesn't automatically mean that everywhere on earth at all times will be x-amount warmer. It means that the overall warmer temperature of the atmosphere causes monumental changes in the climate. These changes can mean anything - higher precipitation in Australia accompanied by floods, polar-like temperatures in the northeast, fires cause by drought in Russia, record snowfall in Texas. If you want to disagree with the theory, find evidence that is contradictory, come up with your own conclusions, knock yourself out. It doesn't make you stupid or ignorant or have some sort of agenda just because you disagree with what I do. But at least understand what you're disagreeing with before making incredibly ignorant statements like this. Weather is not = climate.

JayDub · January 25, 2011

Just because its the cold(er) in Texas/Florida/Maine/where ever the hell you're talking about, it doesn't contradict the theory of global climate change. While the overall temperature of the earth might be rising (again, I'm not going to debate whether it is or not), it doesn't automatically mean that everywhere on earth at all times will be x-amount warmer. It means that the overall warmer temperature of the atmosphere causes monumental changes in the climate. These changes can mean anything - higher precipitation in Australia accompanied by floods, polar-like temperatures in the northeast, fires cause by drought in Russia, record snowfall in Texas. If you want to disagree with the theory, find evidence that is contradictory, come up with your own conclusions, knock yourself out. It doesn't make you stupid or ignorant or have some sort of agenda just because you disagree with what I do. But at least understand what you're disagreeing with before making incredibly ignorant statements like this. Weather is not = climate.

Rational thought...what a novel concept!

UNT90 · January 25, 2011

I'm not going to get involved in another ridiculous debate about this, but this kind of idiocy has to be called out.

Just because its the cold(er) in Texas/Florida/Maine/where ever the hell you're talking about, it doesn't contradict the theory of global climate change. While the overall temperature of the earth might be rising (again, I'm not going to debate whether it is or not), it doesn't automatically mean that everywhere on earth at all times will be x-amount warmer. It means that the overall warmer temperature of the atmosphere causes monumental changes in the climate. These changes can mean anything - higher precipitation in Australia accompanied by floods, polar-like temperatures in the northeast, fires cause by drought in Russia, record snowfall in Texas. If you want to disagree with the theory, find evidence that is contradictory, come up with your own conclusions, knock yourself out. It doesn't make you stupid or ignorant or have some sort of agenda just because you disagree with what I do. But at least understand what you're disagreeing with before making incredibly ignorant statements like this. Weather is not = climate.

Or, they can mean nothing.

Seriously, probably one of your best posts on this subject. The closest you have ever come to admitting we just don't know.

milestoaustin · January 25, 2011

Obvious troll post that is a huge debate waiting to happen.

Rudy · January 25, 2011

I guess my point was missed. Coffee and TV, you're right, we don't know what the hell is going on. What is the data for the years from 1998 until 2005? Some places get colder and some are getting hotter. Noone is disagreeing that there is climate change. But I do think its inaccurate to assume that everything is going to melting and we're all gonna drown or melt away or whatever. Personally, I think we will hit another "Ice Age" while the Earth and the atmosphere balance out. I just get peeved at those articles that cry the sky is falling.

MeanGreenTexan · January 25, 2011

I dunno. 1999 was pretty hot back in her day. dotcom stocks going through the roof, the Thong Song, etc... I'd definitely put 1999 ahead of 2010 in terms of "hotness".

forevereagle · January 25, 2011

Before we are really able to make any real conclusions about climate change, do we know what the temperatures were from 200 years ago? 300? 400? How do we know that this isn't a 10-20 year cycle that has happened once every 500 years over the course of time and we have no impact? We really cannot know the answer about this, but both sides seem certain that they know best.

MeanGreenTeeth · January 26, 2011

The warmest year on record is a three-way tie: 2010, 2005 and 1998. So says the U.N. weather agency, providing further evidence that the planet is slowly but surely heating up. Average temperatures globally last year were 0.95 degrees Fahrenheit (0.53 Celsius) higher than the 1961-90 mean that is used for comparison purposes, according to World Meteorological Organization. That's a bit lower than what the U.S. National Climatic Data Center announced earlier this month, but the World Meteorological Organization also uses figures based on data collected by Britain's Meteorological Office and NASA which still show a warming trend.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/UN_UN_WARMEST_YEAR?SITE=FLDAY&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

So... the fact that the temperature hasn't increased in 12 years provides further evidence that the planet is warming up?

Coffee and TV · January 26, 2011

Or, they can mean nothing.

Seriously, probably one of your best posts on this subject. The closest you have ever come to admitting we just don't know.

I didn't say that at all, but if it helps you sleep better at night more power to ya.

I guess my point was missed. Coffee and TV, you're right, we don't know what the hell is going on. What is the data for the years from 1998 until 2005? Some places get colder and some are getting hotter. Noone is disagreeing that there is climate change.

Sadly many on these boards act as if nothing is going on, and its all political hogwash. As if that many climate scientists could magically be bought or confused about their lifelong professions. If a proven engineer told you tomorrow that a bridge by your home was on the verge of collapse I could guarantee you and anyone else would find a new way home. It seems that climate scientists and NFL coaches are the only professions where its ok to 2nd guess them.

Before we are really able to make any real conclusions about climate change, do we know what the temperatures were from 200 years ago? 300? 400?

C'mon dude, this is exactly what I'm freaking talking about. You want to argue that climate change isn't man-made, knock yourself the heck out. But don't come around making silly assumptions like this.

Edited January 26, 2011 by Coffee and TV

forevereagle · January 26, 2011

C'mon dude, this is exactly what I'm freaking talking about. You want to argue that climate change isn't man-made, knock yourself the heck out. But don't come around making silly assumptions like this.

What silly assumption did I make? I merely asked a question. And here's another, how can anyone call my question a silly assumption when they are making an argument either way without all of the facts?

Coffee and TV · January 26, 2011

What silly assumption did I make? I merely asked a question. And here's another, how can anyone call my question a silly assumption when they are making an argument either way without all of the facts?

The climate change theories generally involve ice core and sea bed samples from as far back as 600,000 years. Seriously dude, a quick check on wikipedia would be something of a start.

forevereagle · January 26, 2011

The climate change theories generally involve ice core and sea bed samples from as far back as 600,000 years. Seriously dude, a quick check on wikipedia would be something of a start.

I refuse to think of wikipedia as a source of facts.

GrayEagle · January 27, 2011

There are climate changes all over the world. Some places get hotter and some places get colder. It's always been that way and it always will be.

What disturbs me is that some say that the cause is manmade. We put less CO2 in the atmosphere than we did 75 years ago. Furthermore, we can't afford to spend trillions to maybe reduce the output of carbon dioxide by maybe 2%. Especially when countries such as China and Russia are doing little or nothing to reduce pollutants. We've already closed many of our factories and greatly reduced exhaust fumes by going to unleaded gas.

There are also many noted meterologists that say global warming is bunk but they are no longer getting research dollars so they're comments are squashed. This crap is all about money.

UNT90 · January 27, 2011

This crap is all about money.

And the human propensity to want to think they have control over something that they clearly don't, and then to show how much they care by proposing solutions to a false problem.

forevereagle · January 28, 2011

UNTflyer · January 28, 2011

Just because its the cold(er) in Texas/Florida/Maine/where ever the hell you're talking about, it doesn't contradict the theory of global climate change.

You're right. By falsifying data does.