President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
52%↑
48%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
50%
50%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
December 16, 2010 09:39 PM UTC
12 Comments
.6 degree in a century. What else you got?
then get back to us, OK?
Let me guess. You didn’t do so well in science class, did you?
Why go to ad hominem?
But I am curious. What conclusion would you have me draw from this chart? If we look back 130 years, we have an anomaly of .6 degree from the mean. Do you see something different?
And I say again, so what?
This chart has to convince me that:
1) The underlying data are reliable
2) The climate models can accurately backcast and forecast and…
3) Somehow this increase leads to a tipping point and a meaningful change in climate
Not so q.e.d. Alarmist claims about warming or change or disruption have not proven out.
You have no idea what my education or experience is. I have no idea what your education or experience is. Speak to the issue. That is my interest. What’s yours?
And finally, with all of 6 comments, no one cared about this thread. Why do you think that is?
This graph has to do no such thing. A single graph is insufficient to provide a complete education. So, but asking this of one graph, it suggests to me that you aren’t really very serious.
Besides, no one was making any claims that the graphs were “scary.” I just put them up there as evidence of what practicing and publishing climate scientists have concluded. I apologize if you find this “scary.”
I hesitate to be patronizing, because you are correct, I don’t know your education nor experience. On the other hand, you didn’t hesitate to be a dick even though you do not know my education or experience. Maybe you want to start over?
To clear up one misunderstanding, the graph above shows that average global temperatures have increased nearly 1degC in one century (not 0.6deg – the full range of anomolies is from near -0.4 to +0.6degC)
So, before I go any further, it would be helpful if you cleared up a few issues I have with your questions. I’m not going to get into a game of whack-a-mole or moving goalposts. (Plus, this time of year it’s hard to devote time to COPols when there are more important family events to participate in.)
> What do you need to know in order to conclude the data are reliable? Do you have a priori criteria?
> What would be an accurate backcast/forecast? Do you have a priori criteria?
> Why must there be a tipping point involved? Do you have an a priori definition of “meaningful change in climate?”
I’m sure you don’t need any further clarification, but for anyone else who reads this, I would like to point out that the average annual temperature in Pueblo is just over 1degC warmer than Denver. And that Albuquerque is just over 3degC warmer than Denver. So, every degree warmer in average temperature is equivalent to moving 100-130 miles south. All else being equal, of course.
So far there have been no “alarmist” claims coming from actual practicing scientists. Indeed, their sober and carefully stated conclusions resulted in scientific predictions that underestimated the rate at which Arctic sea ice has declined. Scientific predictions have underestimated the rate of glaciers break up into the ocean around Antarctica. Scientific predictions have underestimated the rate of ocean level rises.
If you know more than all those scientists, please share your knowledge with us.
Perhaps this diary hasn’t gotten many comments, perhaps, because nobody has made any dickish claims that anyone else took seriously. My apologies for ignoring you up until now.
And seriously, quit insulting people you don’t know. What’s the point?
I think that is because most sentient creatures find it hard to disagree with solid scientific data, provided they understand it. I read it, and knowing ardy to be one of the smartest, most well-informed posters here, didn’t see the need to give him an “attaboy”. But since it matters to you:
Well done, as usual, ardy.
Oh…and the other thing:
Critics have also called into question whether Fox News is really a news organization or simply a well financed mouthpiece for the U.S.Chamber of Commerce and the Club for Growth (or whatever the hell their name is now).
And critics can’t be wrong…now can they?
Some dipstick on this diary called into question whether Ardy39 (or Ardy33, or Ardy36, . . . or any of the other Ardys from the fine line of ArdyCo products) knows what he’s talking about — that dipstick remains a dipstick, and Ardyxx prevails.
It’s the non-critical thinkers you have to watch out for. (And with that statement, I now call into question dipstick and his or her ugly information.)
is this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L…
The list, it should be pointed out, is incomplete. But out of all the scientists in the world, deniers could only come up with THREE who say that global warming isn’t happening. Two of them are in sciences closely tied to the coal industry (one’s a geologist and one’s a coal chemist). Go figure.
And 2 of those 3 make claims that there’s been no warming since 1998. Which is true only if one denies facts, including such inconvenient ones that 2005 & 2009 were both warmer than 1998 (and that 2010 is forecast to be within hundredths of a degree of the record). And that a line fit to data since 1998 shows an increasing trend!
At least you can rest assured that our new congressman takes climate change seriously…oh, wait…Scott who?…oh, never mind.