Yes Bob, it’s a heatwave. This isn’t rocket science. heat wave definition - Google Search
Any media source that considers Anothony Watts a reliable source on climate change cannot be taken seriously.
As for the guy who wrote the article, he’s a RW blogger.
Glad you think so. Unfortunately the climate alarmists continually point to it as evidence of global warming.
It is telling that you criticize the messenger and cannot confine your remarks to the message. Wikipedia is nothing more than a blog written by individuals with preconceived ideas just as ourselves. Anybody can join, anybody can write. Hardly the most credible source.
It is telling of this wikipedia post you credit that it references two popular slogans originated by climate change fatalists; “climate change denial” and “scientific consensus on climate change.” These phrases are a dead giveaway that the author believes in climate change and will ridicule anyone with a dissenting opinion. No one ‘denies’ climate change. The position is simply that there is no proof that it is anthropomorphic. As for ‘consensus’ that merely means there is general agreement (the definition of that climate change exists (as it always has) it does not indicate scientists agree that climate change is man caused.
What proof do you even have that these are the same people? I would hazard to guess there are many people in this country named Anthony Watts. A simple Google search reveals pages of them. Moreover the article credits their Anthony Watts as a Meteorologist while your article simply references him as a “blogger.”
Ad Hominem is a logic fallacy that removes all credibility to your opinions.
Bob, do you believe it is a heat wave?
It’s hot as hell no matter what you want to call it. I did 2 predrywalls Wednesday and went through my one gallon water bottle completely. We have that humid heat here and it is absolutely miserable. Folks, remember to stay hydrated out there and take some rest breaks.
I think rescheduling due to the heat advisory would be reasonable if so desired. But like most of us, you will likely power through. In addition to staying hydrated, I like these. I’ve seen them at Wal-mart etc.
L-o-n-g story, but the client and I originally tried for yesterday morning (her last day of vacation), but agent said won’t work, so today it is. Now that the client is back to work, we had to go with late appointment so she could attend a walkthrough after work.
Oh well, as long as my client is happy! That’s what it’s all about, right?
More global warming hype?
Or reality?
I have a natural science background from my college years, and I take notice of the high level of consensus among scientists that climate change is human caused. Like home inspectors who report on what they see, so it is the same with climate scientists. Addressing my son-in-law, who was arguing with me about human caused climate change, I told him, “I’m not going to have to worry about living with the outcome of climate change. I’ll be dead within the next 25 years. However, you and especially your children will be effected by it for their whole lives.”
Hardly makes you an expert. Given that you have all this knowledge however you do realize that CO2 has an insignificant role as a “Greenhouse gas.” Yet they would have you believe that stopping or reducing the emission of CO2 will limit or reduce “climate change.”
You do know that the word ‘consensus’ means - general agreement. It doesn’t mean complete agreement or even specify what aspects of climate change is agreed upon. Moreover a change in U. S. production of CO2 will not affect a global change or even a local reduction in “climate change.”
Scientist generally agree on things which continue their funding. We saw proof of this during the “Covid” contagion where we were lied to by government subsidized professionals, politicians, and scientists for years about the origin of the outbreak.
Who are “they” Bob? I’ve never heard of that theory.
I’ve heard that if we stopped burning all fossil fuels today it would take at least a century for the atmosphere to clean itself of all the shit we’ve pumped into it.
Also, you never answered my question of whether you believe we’re in a heat wave. I guess you’re scared…
So I like cleaner air. I can see benefits of moving away from fossil fuels. Politics really screws it all up on both sides. We are now so tribal we cannot come to a consensus as a nation.
If we could just agree that air pollution is bad it would be a great start. I would like to see cleaner air in the city I live in. I do not need doomsday messaging from politicians whom I have no faith in. The scientific community is not much better…the politics inside their world is often worse.
Environmentalism is socialism in drag
What would I be scared of Kevin? Not you assuredly; Not the truth; You seem to miss the point of this whole thread.
This administration. You know that.
You are the first to mention a time period. CO2 is the fossil fuel emission specified in countless articles and speeches.
I don’t need to answer stupid questions. If you don’t like the way information is presented in this thread, just move on.
This is interesting.
July 30, 2023
What NASA and the European Space Agency are admitting but the media are failing to report about our current heat wave
The current heat wave is being relentlessly blamed on increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but there is a much more plausible explanation, one that is virtually endorsed by two of the world’s leading scientific organizations. It turns out that levels of water vapor in the atmosphere have dramatically increased over the last year-and-a-half, and water vapor is well recognized as a greenhouse gas, whose heightened presence leads to higher temperatures, a mechanism that dwarfs any effect CO2 may have.
So, why has atmospheric water vapor increased so dramatically? Because of a historic, gigantic volcanic eruption last year that I – probably along with you – had never heard of. The mass media ignored it because it took place 490 feet underwater in the South Pacific. Don’t take it from me, take it from NASA (and please do follow the link to see time lapse satellite imagery of the underwater eruption and subsequent plume of gasses and water injected into the atmosphere):
still from the time lapse photos
When the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcano erupted on Jan. 15, it sent a tsunami racing around the world and set off a sonic boom that circled the globe twice. The underwater eruption in the South Pacific Ocean also blasted an enormous plume of water vapor into Earth’s stratosphere – enough to fill more than 58,000 Olympic-size swimming pools. The sheer amount of water vapor could be enough to temporarily affect Earth’s global average temperature.
“We’ve never seen anything like it,” said Luis Millán, an atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California. He led a new study examining the amount of water vapor that the Tonga volcano injected into the stratosphere, the layer of the atmosphere between about 8 and 33 miles (12 and 53 kilometers) above Earth’s surface.
In the study, published in Geophysical Research Letters, Millán and his colleagues estimate that the Tonga eruption sent around 146 teragrams (1 teragram equals a trillion grams) of water vapor into Earth’s stratosphere – equal to 10% of the water already present in that atmospheric layer. That’s nearly four times the amount of water vapor that scientists estimate the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption in the Philippines lofted into the stratosphere. [emphases added]
NASA published the above in August 2022. Half a year later, a newer study increased the estimate of the water vapor addition to the atmosphere by 30%. From the European Space Agency:
In a recent paper published in Nature, a team of scientists showed the unprecedented increase in the global stratospheric water mass by 13% (relative to climatological levels) and a five-fold increase of stratospheric aerosol load – the highest in the last three decades.
Using a combination of satellite data, including data from ESA’s Aeolus satellite, and ground-based observations, the team found that due to the extreme altitude, the volcanic plume circumnavigated the Earth in just one week and dispersed nearly pole-to-pole in three months. [emphasis added]
Another scientific paper explains the “net warming of the climate system” on a delayed basis. NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory further explains:
Volcanic eruptions rarely inject much water into the stratosphere. In the 18 years that NASA has been taking measurements, only two other eruptions – the 2008 Kasatochi event in Alaska and the 2015 Calbuco eruption in Chile – sent appreciable amounts of water vapor to such high altitudes. But those were mere blips compared to the Tonga event, and the water vapor from both previous eruptions dissipated quickly. The excess water vapor injected by the Tonga volcano, on the other hand, could remain in the stratosphere for several years.
This extra water vapor could influence atmospheric chemistry, boosting certain chemical reactions that could temporarily worsen depletion of the ozone layer. It could also influence surface temperatures. Massive volcanic eruptions like Krakatoa and Mount Pinatubo typically cool Earth’s surface by ejecting gases, dust, and ash that reflect sunlight back into space. In contrast, the Tonga volcano didn’t inject large amounts of aerosols into the stratosphere, and the huge amounts of water vapor from the eruption may have a small, temporary warming effect, since water vapor traps heat. The effect would dissipate when the extra water vapor cycles out of the stratosphere [Emphases added]
So there you have it: we are in for extra atmospheric heat “for several years” until the extra water vapor injected by this largest-ever-recorded underwater volcano eruption dissipates.
Jeff Childers, who brought this scientific data to my notice, writes:
Here’s why corporate media is ignoring the most dramatic climate even[t] in modern history: because you can’t legislate underwater volcanoes. You can try, but they won’t listen. So what’s the fun in that? Corporate media only exists to further political ends. Since volcanoes aren’t subject to politics, why bother?
He brings up the work of Ethical Skeptic:
Ethical is suggesting that the water is heating the air — instead of the other way around. And the Earth’s core is heating the water. It’s a theory that explains everything.
Meanwhile, “science” is baffled. From just a month ago, in mid-June:
See? But though scientists are baffled, corporate media and its repulsive allies are busily blaming ocean warming on carbon dioxide — a ludicrous notion.
I am the first to admit that none of this – not the atmospheric CO2 theory of global warming, nor the effect of the largest ever known undersea volcanic eruption – is scientifically proven. But before we impoverish ourselves trying to reduce CO2 emissions (while watching China dramatically increase them), let’s practice real science and not jump to conclusions based on an imaginary “consensus.”
Hat tip: Alan Fraser
Ironic… Listen to Stan’s question at the very beginning!!
