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

50%

50%

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

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 28, 2009 05:15 AM UTC

Meanwhile on the Global Warming Front...

  • 3 Comments
  • by: Aristotle

The Obama Administration declassified Bush-era military photos showing the dramatic effects of climate change. The linked article features these two particularly horrifying pictures.

Satellite images of polar ice sheetsView larger picture

These satellite images of Barrow, Alaska, show that in the summer of 2005 there was still a lot of ice off the coast while just one year later the water is completely free of it. You can enlarge the images at the link above.

The Guardian implies that the Bush Administration hid this evidence by classifying it, per their headline, but don’t go on to support that claim in the article.

Why did the Bushies keep this stuff classified?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Comments

3 thoughts on “Meanwhile on the Global Warming Front…

  1. From the National Climatic Data Center, 16 July 2009

    Based on preliminary data, the globally averaged combined land and sea surface temperature was the second warmest on record for June and the January-June year-to-date tied with 2004 as the fifth warmest on record.

    and

    The most notable cooler-than-average temperatures were present from the southwestern U.S. to the Northern Plains, the Canadian Prairie Provinces, central Asia, and across the boundary of northeastern China and southeastern Russia.

    So, yes, June 2009 was cooler than average for Denver, Grand Junction, and other locales in the SW US, but it’s called global for a reason.

    But, if that wasn’t enough, there is this ominous note:

    El NiГ±o-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) transitioned from ENSO-neutral to El NiГ±o conditions across the equatorial Pacific Ocean during June 2009. If El NiГ±o conditions continue to mature as projected by NOAA, global temperatures are likely to continue to threaten previous record highs.

  2. If we are supposed to be alarmed by the Barrow image, then why can we not take comfort in local temps being cooler? Both are just local snapshots of global climate change, no?

    As for the claims that we are having the warmest months ever, it really depends on who is doing the measuring and how they are doing it. Satellite data do not reflect the warming trend that surface monitoring stations are seeing. There is plenty of reason to believe that heat island effects are distorting surface temps and creating the so called warming trend. Some discussion of this at http://www.climate-skeptic.com

    And finally, I love when el Nino comes to town – makes for a very pleasant summer with a watering bill near zero.

    1. Arctic sea ice is a reflection of large scale trends, not merely a “local” snapshot. Did you follow any of the links which provide a graphical overview of how local short term phenomena might not be typical of global long term trends?

      Meanwhile, you ought to get yourself some updated satellite data. After flaws were corrected in the earlier data (as satellites lose altitude they measure different parts of the atmosphere; each satellite is essentially a unique sensor that is not necessarily calibrated to previous or subsequent satellites; etc) the “discrepancy” you noted disappeared.

      I find it interesting that people consider a few years worth of data from a few uncorrected sensing devices (early satellite data) trumps 100+ years of data collected from thousands of calibrated instruments.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

87 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!