Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, November 28, 2016

Global average temperatures over land have plummeted by more than 1C since the middle of this year – their biggest and steepest fall on record.

The news comes amid mounting evidence that the recent run of world record high temperatures is about to end.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Some scientists, including Dr Gavin Schmidt, head of Nasa's climate division, have claimed that the recent highs were mainly the result of long-term global warming.

Others have argued that the records were caused by El Nino, a complex natural phenomenon that takes place every few years, and has nothing to do with greenhouse gas emissions by humans.

The new fall in temperatures suggests they were right.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

You really love being on RCADE'S crap list huh???

#1 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2016-11-28 08:23 PM | Reply

This is not crap data, Laura.

This is real data, scientific data, and real scientists and not a crack site.

#2 | Posted by boaz at 2016-11-28 08:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

Its coming from the daily smell er I mean the daily mail a BS British tabloid.

"In March 2015, James King, a former contract worker at the Mail's New York office, wrote an article for Gawker titled 'My Year Ripping Off the Web With the Daily Mail Online'. In the article, King alleged that the Mail's approach was to rewrite stories from other news outlets with minimal credit in order to gain advertising clicks, and that staffers had published material they knew to be false."

#3 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2016-11-28 09:27 PM | Reply

This is not crap data, Laura.

This is real data, scientific data, and real scientists and not a crack site.

#2 | Posted by boaz at 20

Lets see how the daily smell treated Scientific reports in the past shell we.

"In October 2011, the Daily Mail printed an article citing the research, titled "Just ONE cannabis joint can bring on schizophrenia as well as damaging memory." The group Cannabis Law Reform (CLEAR), which campaigns for ending drug prohibition, criticised the Daily Mail report. Dr Matt Jones, co-author of the study, said he was "disappointed but not surprised" by the article, and stated: "This study does NOT say that one spliff will bring on schizophrenia". Dorothy Bishop, professor of neuroscience at Oxford University, in her blog awarded the Daily Mail the "Orwellian Prize for Journalistic Misrepresentation", The Mail later changed the article's headline to: "Just ONE cannabis joint 'can cause psychiatric episodes similar to schizophrenia' as well as damaging memory."

"The Mail's medical and science journalism has been criticised by some doctors and scientists, accusing it of using minor studies to generate scare stories"

#4 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2016-11-28 09:35 PM | Reply

shall we

#5 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2016-11-28 09:37 PM | Reply

El Nino has without doubt affected the last few years.

Milder winters here in BC, and more Pacific and fewer Atlantic tropical storms.

#6 | Posted by REDIAL at 2016-11-28 10:04 PM | Reply

This is real data, scientific data, and real scientists and not a crack site.

Boaz,

It's the Daily Mail. They're notoriously denier friendly when it comes to GW.

I'm betting if I look at the actual study it isn't in any way represented accurately.

#7 | Posted by jpw at 2016-11-28 10:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You know what, I don't even need to find the original study.

This is pure garbage.

A bunch of assertions (without quoting the studies), a few flashy misleading graphs and a closing with statements from two known climate deniers.

www.sourcewatch.org

www.sourcewatch.org

Not shocking, I know (well, to some of us at least...). But seriously, boaz. The next time you see a GW article you agree strongly with, look into it a bit and see if you can find anything to back it up.

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2016-11-28 10:14 PM | Reply

Let me fix your headline:

"One tenth of one percent of scientists think manmade Climate Change is pure bunkum."

#9 | Posted by soheifox at 2016-11-28 10:36 PM | Reply

Seriously, Boaz, you're a --------- idiot. out of the last 13 months, twelve of them have been the warmest in the history of RECORDED HISTORY. One degree C drop would be significant if it weren't already 3.8 higher than EVER BEFORE.

#10 | Posted by soheifox at 2016-11-28 10:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Advertisement

Advertisement

Really, it's like Boaz is pointing at 12 dead kittens and stating that since they were ACTUALLY run over by a 12 ton loaded semi rather than a 14 ton loaded semi... the future of the kittens is looking up.

#11 | Posted by soheifox at 2016-11-28 10:39 PM | Reply

The stupid is strong in bozos.

#12 | Posted by bored at 2016-11-28 10:49 PM | Reply

"Last week, Mr Trump's science adviser Bob Walker said he was likely to axe Nasa's $1.9 billion (about £1.4 billion) climate research budget.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook"

It is obviously stupid policy to kill the research budget that gives you research that does not fit the agenda.

Instead of fixing the problem, kill the messenger. Brilliant!

Good going dopes. You elected a moron.

#13 | Posted by 726 at 2016-11-29 09:49 AM | Reply

twelve of them have been the warmest in the history of RECORDED HISTORY. One degree C drop would be significant if it weren't already 3.8 higher than EVER BEFORE.

Ever before

Link?

And ever before isn't 200 years ago, it's 40 million give or take a million years.

and no, I don't take tree rings...

#14 | Posted by boaz at 2016-11-29 10:46 AM | Reply

You done getting your ass kicked yet, Boaz? Linking to the Daily Mail on climate science is like asking McDonald's for healthy eating advice.

#15 | Posted by rcade at 2016-11-29 11:23 AM | Reply

So you dispute the data?

#16 | Posted by boaz at 2016-11-29 12:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I dispute the Daily Mail as a credible source of climate change reporting. As I and others have done a dozen times before, but you never seem to get a clue.

Stop pretending this is about data. You only care about data when you think it debunks climate change. You ignore every bit of data on stories that show why climate scientists overwhelmingly believe human activities are changing the climate.

#17 | Posted by rcade at 2016-11-29 12:33 PM | Reply

You do realize they are guessing right? All be it an educated guess. Oddly we will find out soon enough the Sun is going to be doing some interesting things between 2020-2030, so time will tell who is right here and who eats crow.

#18 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2016-11-29 01:32 PM | Reply

I'm with Boaz, El Nino, sun spots and volcanoes.

#19 | Posted by patron at 2016-11-29 01:50 PM | Reply

I dispute the Daily Mail as a credible source of climate change reporting.

Kill the messenger, eh?

Stop pretending this is about data.

I cant because that's what it's about.

Look, I'm not putting thermometers on hot cement to raise temps. I havent been caught putting in fake temps. It has to be about the data.

Do you dispute the findings or the hypothesis about El Nino?

#20 | Posted by boaz at 2016-11-29 02:12 PM | Reply

Why not admit that weather is controlled though technology and we're subject to it's abuse? The freakin' evidence is sprayed ad nausem. Look up.

Project Popeye proved this works in the late 60's and essentially ended the Vietnam war though weather warfare. The Ho Chi Min trail was completely wiped out. They have had a few decades of secret development, who's to say el Nino isn't their invention?

I trust nothing on this topic but my eyes. These tools are indeed measuring activities and climate changes, but the causation has more to do with military control than carbon emissions, imo.

Strangely, on this topic Trump appears to also be skeptical of this relationship, which obviously could mean that even Russia has a direct interest in this American opinion division. Perhaps a weather coalition has already been invented to dominate global food production?

#21 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2016-11-29 05:10 PM | Reply

Kill the messenger, eh?

No one on this planet fails to understand that sources of information are not all created equal.

The Daily Mail is a crap tabloid. Do you prefer not to know this when it suits your biases?

#22 | Posted by rcade at 2016-11-29 05:42 PM | Reply

I'm looking forward to when global warming causes a late season blizzard in March, and the Trump Admin dispatches President Trump to be on scene and comfort the local residents of the emergency area, while Pence mans the battlestations in D.C., dispatching FEMA and the National Guard.

#23 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-11-29 06:10 PM | Reply

If you bother to do any research, you will find that 16 of the warmest 17 years on record have been since 2000. During that same time there have been 5 El Nino events covering 6 years. Clearly El Nino events cannot explain every record year and scientists have recognized this as something requiring further study and research.

Further, while El Nino contributes to warmer temperatures, the effect is marginal, meaning that the record years would probably have been record years without the impact of El Nino - it's impact simply pushed the records higher.

The 2014-2016 El Nino was one of the strongest recorded, at it's height sea surface temperatures were 4.1 degrees f above normal.. It has now faded to neutral ( sea temperatures reverting to seasonal normal ) and is expected to cycle to LA Nina in dues course. It is to be expected therefore that global temperature will fall both as the northern hemisphere enters the winter period and also because the additional boost from El Nino has gone. It should be noted though, that September 2016 is the second warmest on record, behind only 2015, with global temperatures roughly 1.6 degrees f above 20th century norm - hardly a sign that the warming trend is dead.

If you are going to be a AGW denier, you will need to look way beyond the crap that is the Daily Mail for your information.

#24 | Posted by Foreigner at 2016-11-29 06:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#24 Stop confusing my favorite poster with facts.

#25 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2016-11-29 06:27 PM | Reply

Bah, this whole subject will be moot after the asteroid impact anyways.

#26 | Posted by Daniel at 2016-11-29 06:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#25 - Rookie error - apologies.

#27 | Posted by Foreigner at 2016-11-29 06:54 PM | Reply

#24 | POSTED BY FOREIGNER

If you bother to do any research, you will find that the earth is in one of its coolest periods of time ever for the longest period ever in the about 540 million year history of the climate. For the vast majority of time in that 540 million years, the earth's temperature has ranged between about 17C and 25C. About 23 million years ago, the temperature fell below 17C and bottomed out at about 12C about 12 million years ago. About 11 million years ago, the temperature began to increase until it reached its current level of about 14.5C.

http//www.scotese.com/climate.htm

#28 | Posted by Visitor2 at 2016-11-29 07:55 PM | Reply

#28 When did it rise 2 degrees Celsius in only 120 years, matching the CO2 rise?

#29 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2016-11-29 08:05 PM | Reply

This is funny stuff you guys believe in. Guessing at science is like predicting when Kudz is going to have sex again!
And even better what he or she's name will be!

No offense intended Kudz.

#30 | Posted by Federalist at 2016-11-29 08:17 PM | Reply

This is funny stuff you guys believe in.

No need to pile on Boaz like that.

#31 | Posted by REDIAL at 2016-11-29 08:27 PM | Reply

#31 | Posted by REDIAL

Touche

#32 | Posted by Federalist at 2016-11-29 08:29 PM | Reply

When I was a younger man the threat was heat domes over cities due to overbuilding and lack of open space to cool the earth.

But we kept building, and building and building.

How do we know it's not the heat domes that are expanding?

#33 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2016-11-29 09:10 PM | Reply

#33 | Posted by Prolix247
You be quiet! Those big cities are where we get our votes. The left.

#34 | Posted by Federalist at 2016-11-29 09:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#28 - That might be all well and good but I don't think anyone debates the fact that the Earth goes through natural warming and cooling cycles.

Under these cycles, the Earth should be in a cooling phase, as you seem to suggest, but something has changed the natural cycle. This is explained here:

ossfoundation.us

10,000 years ago the population of the globe was estimated to be 5-10m. It is now roughly 7.5b. Does it take much imagination to believe that the adverse impact of continued global warming on 7.5b people might be more disastrous than than the impact on 10m?

#35 | Posted by Foreigner at 2016-11-29 09:40 PM | Reply

#35 | Posted by Foreigner
Did you ever consider the 7.5b people may be the problem? Nope its the cows.

#36 | Posted by Federalist at 2016-11-29 09:57 PM | Reply

www.youtube.com

#37 | Posted by Federalist at 2016-11-29 11:22 PM | Reply

youtu.be

#38 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2016-11-29 11:28 PM | Reply

#36 - As far as I am concerned, growth in the human population is intrinsically linked to climate change, so to answer your question, duh!

Then again, it's not just more humans, but many changes in human activity that are contributing factors - for example, changes in the nature and size of livestock farming - or the cows you so dismissively quote. You seem pretty closed minded to me, but here is a link to your cow problem:

www.skepticalscience.com

#39 | Posted by Foreigner at 2016-11-30 09:23 AM | Reply

#2 | POSTED BY BOAZ
"This is real data, scientific data, and real scientists and not a crack site."

Boaz, this is the Daily Mail. When it comes to scientific reporting it IS a [crap] site.
I am, however, curious how you can be so sure that it's "real, scientific data".
How you looked deeper, or are you simply relying on the Daily Mail to get it right?
Come to think of it, to which "data" in the article are you referring?

#40 | Posted by TheTom at 2016-11-30 10:57 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

-->
Drudge Retort