MELBOURNE is blazing hot in mid march?

Question

Usually this time of the year summer heat should cool down but recently its very hot for 1 week straight, above the high 30's around 35-40 max, today is 39degrees at the moment

*takes a sip of coke*

is this the effect of global warming?

Answer 1

Global Warming is about climate change.  Climate is the average of weather over a 30 year period of time.  So no individual short-term weather events should be confused with long-term climate change.

Answer 2

Move to Melbourne Florida. you would be freezing because we use Fahrenheit in the US and 39 degrees is cold for Florida. You could be drinking a hot coffee instead of that cold coke.

Oh yeah, I really hope one of the AGW zealots point out that warm temps in Melbourne is weather and not climate like they have been doing all winter to the folks from the mid-west US.

Answer 3

Skeptics keep repeating arguments that are not real.  Like that global warming stopped in 1998

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11...  



"According to NASA, it was elevated far above the trend line because 1998 was the year of the strongest El Nino of the century. Choosing that year as a starting point is a classic cherry pick and demonstrates why it is necessary to remove chaotic year-to year-variability (aka: weather) by smoothing out the data. "

"Now, this is an excusable mistake for average folks who do not need the rigors of statistical analysis in their day jobs. But any scientist in pretty much any field knows that you cannot extract meaningful information about trends in noisy data from single-year end points. It's hard to hear a scientist make this argument and still believe they speak with integrity in this debate -- seems more like an abuse of the trust placed in them as scientists."

And this link shows warming beginning again in 1999.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

Skeptic argument:  The glaciers aren't melting, or variations on this.  

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11...

"This is simply not true, rumors on "the internets" aside. The National Snow and Ice Data Centre and their State of the Cryosphere division, on their Glacial Balance page, report an overall accelerating rate of glacial mass loss. The World Glacier Monitoring Service has similar findings, the most recent data coming from 2004."

"While there surely are some growing glaciers, studies like these are designed to determine a global trend by ensuring glaciers from all regions of the globe are assessed. There are 67,000 glaciers in the World Glacier Inventory. Not all, or even most, have quality data for many decades, but there are enough with adequate data, located in enough regions of the globe, to know the average trend."

  

  Skeptic argument:  It's cold in Kalamazoo today, so doesn't that disprove AGW?

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/10...

"The chaotic nature of weather means that no conclusion about climate can ever be drawn from a single data point, hot or cold. The temperature of one place at one time is just weather, and says nothing about climate, much less climate change, much less global climate change."

Skeptic argument:  A lot of scientists disagree with AGW.  There's not concensus, or the consensuc proves collusion.

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/10...

"Greenhouse effect theory is over 100 years old. The first predictions of anthropogenic global warming came in 1896. Time has only strengthened and refined those groundbreaking conclusions. We now have decades of very detailed and sophisticated climate observations, and super computers crunching numbers in one second it would have taken a million 19th century scientists years with a slide rule to match. Even so, you will never ever get a purely scientific source saying "the future is certain."  

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11...

"This consensus is represented in the IPCC Third Assessment Report, Working Group 1 (TAR WG1), the most comprehensive compilation and summary of current climate research ever attempted, and arguably the most thoroughly peer reviewed scientific document in history. While this review was sponsored by the UN, the research it compiled and reviewed was not, and the scientists involved were independent and came from all over the world."

"The conclusions reached in this document have been explicitly endorsed by ...

Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)

Royal Society of Canada

Chinese Academy of Sciences

Academié des Sciences (France)

Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)

Indian National Science Academy

Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)

Science Council of Japan

Russian Academy of Sciences

Royal Society (United Kingdom)

National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)

Australian Academy of Sciences

Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts

Caribbean Academy of Sciences

Indonesian Academy of Sciences

Royal Irish Academy

Academy of Sciences Malaysia

Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences



"In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed or published the same conclusions as presented in the TAR report:"

NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

National Academy of Sciences (NAS)

State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)

American Geophysical Union (AGU)

American Institute of Physics (AIP)

National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)

American Meteorological Society (AMS)

Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)

If this is not scientific consensus, what in the world would a consensus look like?"

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/0...  

The Cold Truth about Global Warming  by Joseph Romm

"The big difference I have with the doubters is they believe the IPCC reports seriously overstate the impact of human emissions on the climate, whereas the actual observed climate data clearly show the reports dramatically understate the impact."

"One of the most serious results of the overuse of the term "consensus" in the public discussion of global warming is that it creates a simple strategy for doubters to confuse the public, the press and politicians: Simply come up with as long a list as you can of scientists who dispute the theory. After all, such disagreement is prima facie proof that no consensus of opinion exists."

"So we end up with the absurd but pointless spectacle of the leading denier in the U.S. Senate, James Inhofe, R-Okla., who recently put out a list of more than 400 names of supposedly "prominent scientists" who supposedly "recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called 'consensus' on man-made global warming."

"As it turned out, the list is both padded and laughable, containing the opinions of TV weathermen, economists, a bunch of non-prominent scientists who aren't climate experts, and, perhaps surprisingly, even a number of people who actually believe in the consensus."

"But in any case, nothing could be more irrelevant to climate science than the opinion of people on the list such as Weather Channel founder John Coleman or famed inventor Ray Kurzweil (who actually does "think global warming is real"). Or, for that matter, my opinion -- even though I researched a Ph.D. thesis at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography on physical oceanography in the Greenland Sea."

"What matters is scientific findings -- data, not opinions. The IPCC relies on the peer-reviewed scientific literature for its conclusions, which must meet the rigorous requirements of the scientific method and which are inevitably scrutinized by others seeking to disprove that work. That is why I cite and link to as much research as is possible, hundreds of studies in the case of this article. Opinions are irrelevant."

Answer 4

This is just local weather which cannot be attributed to global warming.  Global warming is the long term average warming over the whole world, as seen here.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2007/

This data also shows how ridiculous this statement is "Global temperatures have been going down for the last 10 years".

OK, Stinky?

Answer 5

If you bother to look at NOAA satellite picture - you should see the "Hot Spot" in the Ocean near you.

http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite...

It's not Global Warming - It's Ocean Warming!!!

http://www.iceagenow.com/Ocean_Warming.h...

EDIT:   Please verify if this article is TRUE!

"Sydney's Coolest Summer in 50 Years Leaves Empty Cafes, Gloom "

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=e...

Answer 6

im from newcastle (NSW) and it's pretty crazy weather here too. One day it is raining like all h**l then it is really hot the next minute.

It is global warming. My theory is that we have changed seasons.

pretty crazy huh?

Answer 7

yaa ofcourse you can relate it to the global warming...

definitely its the effect of global warming...

wat needed to be done the most imp thing to be considered by analysing the cause not the effect.

Answer 8

You are experiencing what we like to call "localized global warming".  Since your local temp is above average, your community is obviously contributing more to global warming than the rest of us.  Not to worry, though!  Global thermal credits are now available.  You can purchase these credits from the U.S., where we are experiencing abnormally low temperatures.  Try to clean up your act down there, will ya?

Answer 9

We'll all be runed!

Spare a thought for China who have been through a record cold winter.

Climate scientists don't seem to like talking about global temperatures anymore since they've been going down for the last 10 years.  

Melting mountain glaciers are the new buzzwords now as data from these can actually be manipulated to show that the Earth is still warming.

Answer 10

yup, and it has been below average temperatures for about 90% of the winter in the midwest of america.  This an effect of global warming too, I suppose?

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/

Global sea ice anomoly is +592,000 square miles of ice.  Is that global warming too?

Answer 11

Well "stinky badger" I don't think I’m a zealot but Hobart Tasmania hit 37.3c (99.14F) yesterday this equals the record March temp set in 1940 and we are about ~1000km farther south and about the same farther east of Adelaide (Aust). And this is not just Australia, southern Africa and South America also had warm summers. And if heat temps in the Southern Hemisphere being broken after 60-70 years don't mean anything, then how do cold and snow record that only date back to the 70's prove anything either.

Rick : While that sounds like a cool theory about warm spots, there are none on the link you provided, Tasmania is the large island South of Australia, Hobart is near the bottom of that, which is in the green cool band (almost blue) sea temp is about 14c.