Warm winter is absolute proof of climate change

[YoDoug]

It was a warm year, no doubt. and things have been warming for many years. But for 2023, we have to keep in mind the water vapor from the Tonga Volcano, which increased the global water vapor by 10-15%. And If scientists are correct water vapor is more efficient than CO2 in the greenhouse effect.

There have been many active volcanos over the last century. So even if this did have an effect on last years temps, then we just write all man made climate change of as fake news?

[beej]

There have been many active volcanos over the last century. So even if this did have an effect on last years temps, then we just write all man made climate change of as fake news?

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2301994120

The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai (HTHH) volcanic eruption on 15 January 2022 is unprecedented in the modern era in both the amount of water vapor injected into the stratosphere and the depth of penetration. The perturbation to water vapor and sulfate aerosols from this volcano significantly altered temperatures, dynamics, and chemistry in the stratosphere, including reductions in stratospheric column ozone, which is essential for protecting life on Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation. Here, the global evolution of the injected water vapor in latitude, altitude, and time is analyzed for the year following the eruption using satellite data. Significant changes in the concentrations of various chemical compounds in the stratosphere are identified and linked to the HTHH eruption.
Abstract
The explosive eruption of the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai (HTHH) volcano on 15 January 2022 injected more water vapor into the stratosphere and to higher altitudes than ever observed in the satellite era. Here, the evolution of the stratospherically injected water vapor is examined as a function of latitude, altitude, and time in the year following the eruption (February to December 2022), and perturbations to stratospheric chemical composition resulting from the increased sulfate aerosols and water vapor are identified and analyzed. The average calculated mass distribution of elevated water vapor between hemispheres is approximately 78% Southern Hemisphere (SH) and 22% Northern Hemisphere in 2022. Significant changes in stratospheric composition following the HTHH eruption are identified using observations from the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder satellite instrument. The dominant features in the monthly mean vertical profiles averaged over 15° latitude ranges are decreases in O3 (–14%) and HCl (–22%) at SH midlatitudes and increases in ClO (>100%) and HNO3 (43%) in the tropics, with peak pressure-level perturbations listed. Anomalies in column ozone from 1.2–100 hPa due to the HTHH eruption include widespread O3 reductions in SH midlatitudes and O3 increases in the tropics, with peak anomalies in 15° latitude-binned, monthly averages of approximately –7% and +5%, respectively, occurring in austral spring. Using a 3-dimensional chemistry–climate–aerosol model and observational tracer correlations, changes in stratospheric composition are found to be due to both dynamical and chemical factors.

[YoDoug]

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2301994120

The Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai (HTHH) volcanic eruption on 15 January 2022 is unprecedented in the modern era in both the amount of water vapor injected into the stratosphere and the depth of penetration. The perturbation to water vapor and sulfate aerosols from this volcano significantly altered temperatures, dynamics, and chemistry in the stratosphere, including reductions in stratospheric column ozone, which is essential for protecting life on Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation. Here, the global evolution of the injected water vapor in latitude, altitude, and time is analyzed for the year following the eruption using satellite data. Significant changes in the concentrations of various chemical compounds in the stratosphere are identified and linked to the HTHH eruption.
Abstract
The explosive eruption of the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai (HTHH) volcano on 15 January 2022 injected more water vapor into the stratosphere and to higher altitudes than ever observed in the satellite era. Here, the evolution of the stratospherically injected water vapor is examined as a function of latitude, altitude, and time in the year following the eruption (February to December 2022), and perturbations to stratospheric chemical composition resulting from the increased sulfate aerosols and water vapor are identified and analyzed. The average calculated mass distribution of elevated water vapor between hemispheres is approximately 78% Southern Hemisphere (SH) and 22% Northern Hemisphere in 2022. Significant changes in stratospheric composition following the HTHH eruption are identified using observations from the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder satellite instrument. The dominant features in the monthly mean vertical profiles averaged over 15° latitude ranges are decreases in O3 (–14%) and HCl (–22%) at SH midlatitudes and increases in ClO (>100%) and HNO3 (43%) in the tropics, with peak pressure-level perturbations listed. Anomalies in column ozone from 1.2–100 hPa due to the HTHH eruption include widespread O3 reductions in SH midlatitudes and O3 increases in the tropics, with peak anomalies in 15° latitude-binned, monthly averages of approximately –7% and +5%, respectively, occurring in austral spring. Using a 3-dimensional chemistry–climate–aerosol model and observational tracer correlations, changes in stratospheric composition are found to be due to both dynamical and chemical factors.

Again, throw out last years temps, we can call it an anomaly caused by a volcano if that makes you comfortable. What about the last century. Do we ignore that and call it fake news?

[beej]

Again, throw out last years temps, we can call it an anomaly caused by a volcano if that makes you comfortable. What about the last century. Do we ignore that and call it fake news?

uh...no. did you read my post? Here it is again, just in case

It was a warm year, no doubt. and things have been warming for many years.

[YoDoug]

uh...no. did you read my post? Here it is again, just in case

Sorry, missed that point. Do you think rising temps are an issue, or will be an issue in the future. I personally think we can deal some rise in temps, but I also think there will be a price to be paid for the planet if temp rises go unchecked. The problem is no one in power wants to talk reasonable ideas.

[Jeff]

Nothing will happen drastically within the next thousand years at least. And there's nothing we can do about it.
If the U.S. made their carbon footprint ZERO and produced ZERO emissions for the next 100 million years, nothing would change because we're not the only country making pollution and emissions.
The Earth will survive. It's seen worse.

[neurosis]

The problem is no one in power wants to talk reasonable ideas.

The problem is that half of them want to deny there is a problem at all while the other half want's to convince us that the only way to solve this problem is to tax us in to the poor house.  Neither is going to work. As others keep saying, if all Countries don't make an effort, it's a wasted effort. Taxing people to death in California and Washington is just a big virtue signal and a guaranteed money grab from gullible voters.

[beej]

Sorry, missed that point. Do you think rising temps are an issue, or will be an issue in the future. I personally think we can deal some rise in temps, but I also think there will be a price to be paid for the planet if temp rises go unchecked. The problem is no one in power wants to talk reasonable ideas.

If the numbers continue to climb, I think it could be a problem. I believe that over a period of time technology will be developed to correct it. I don't believe in the alarmism over the climate. And I don't believe that a lot of the "Alarmists at the top of Alarmism" (ie, Kerry, Gore, Gates, etc.) actually are all that alarmed. Demand for beach front houses hasn't dropped, and those are places mostly being bought by Elites with a left bent.

I think that if they were really in panic mode, they would have spent more time building Nuclear Power plants, but there's been little movement on that front. We are told that Nuclear Fusion power is about 10 years away and it's been 10 years away for several decades. It would solve a lot of problems if that were figured out, but there's still not much money being invested in that compared to the money being invested in solar and wind. $6 billion is all we've invested in that so far vs 358 billion in renewables.

Right now if you want to force people to buy EV's, I'm convinced that you've got to build Nuclear Power plants to power the grid. I understand that is an imperfect solution, but it's the best one we have for where we are right now.

The problem is no one in power wants to talk reasonable ideas.

This is true on so many fronts, Federal Debt, Social Security, Energy... But then again the electorate is not really voting for people that are known for the reasoning abilities. We are, instead, voting for Firebrands.

[YoDoug]

As others keep saying, if all Countries don't make an effort, it's a wasted effort. 

I guess I don't necessarily agree with that. Morally if you feel something is wrong it should matter that someone else does it more or to a worse degree. That's like Subway Jarrod saying he's ok because Epstein was a monster.

[MIL-TFP-41]

And as for global warming. Since the industrial revolution there has been a slow warming of average temps. This past year was first time ever that the one year average temp rise was 1.5C. I'm not one of those doomsday cult people, but I do question how sustainable this rate of increase is. It will affect a lot of natural cycles of earth as well as farming and food production. I don't think forcing electric cars are the answer but I also think the current level of fossil fuel use is not sustainable.

I like the Thanos snap solution. Eliminate 1/2 the population (hopefully all the assholes like thieves, violent crime offenders, etc) and by default you cut consumption in half. Then see how the climate does. It has always changed, always will. Do humans have an impact on the change? I believe so. Is it to the extent that we are led to believe? Not a chance.

[YoDoug]

I like the Thanos snap solution. Eliminate 1/2 the population (hopefully all the assholes like thieves, violent crime offenders, etc) and by default you cut consumption in half. Then see how the climate does. It has always changed, always will. Do humans have an impact on the change? I believe so. Is it to the extent that we are led to believe? Not a chance.

+1 on the Thanos snap. There are way too many people. I also think a good hard reset to pre-internet would do the world good.

[beej]

The problem is that half of them want to deny there is a problem at all while the other half want's to convince us that the only way to solve this problem is to tax us in to the poor house.

There are not many people denying that the earth is warming. There are a lot of people denying the cartoonish politicization of it.  When you have people saying that climate change is the reason people are illegally coming across the border. People are denying that. when you hear a politician saying that a drought or a hurricane or a particular tornado is a result of global warming. people are denying that. I once read an article that climate change was causing a sand shortage. sorry, I'm denying that!

for a long time, we heard that stronger El Nino's are sign of global warming, then last year after unexpectedly having the 3rd La Nina in a row, there were articles saying maybe it time to connect La Nina to a warming planet. The idea that a cooling ocean is somehow created by global warming and is actually a bad thing is exactly the reason that some of us end up looking like a climate deniers, because people with a brain are going to dispute that.

[neurosis]

I guess I don't necessarily agree with that. Morally if you feel something is wrong it should matter that someone else does it more or to a worse degree.

Sure, morally. If you're trying to get results your personal morals aren't going to help you unless you can convince others to join in. 

[neurosis]

people are denying that.

What I see people denying, is that man has any measurable effect on the climate change.

To be honest, I don't look in to it enough to argue one way or the other.

What I can argue, is that a half dozen States in the US committing to reduce carbon output isn't going to make much, if any, difference.

[beej]

There are way too many people.

I don't believe that at all. If you took all of the people in the world, and gave them 9 square feet to stand on they wouldn't fill up Puerto Rico. And the rest of the world would be empty. Not a single person in Africa, Europe, Asia, or South or North American continents or Australia.