2022 Was One of Earth's Hottest Years (msn.com) 135
Planet earth "has now warmed at least 1.1 degrees Celsius (2 degrees Fahrenheit) compared with preindustrial levels," reports the Washington Post, "and nearly every year in the past decade ranks near the top."
"On Thursday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ranked 2022 as the sixth-hottest year on record and reported that the 10 warmest have all occurred since 2010...." Twenty-eight countries set national record-high annual averages last year, including Britain, Spain, France, Germany, China and New Zealand. Despite 2022 being slightly cooler than other recent years, Berkeley Earth reported that 850 million people experienced their warmest year ever. Humans' emissions of carbon dioxide and other planet-warming gases have driven this rapid warming, scientists say.
"This is a big change for the planet. And that activity has increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by 50 percent compared to where it was for the last few million years," Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist at Berkeley Earth, said in an interview. "There's often a debate between adapting to climate change and mitigating climate change. We don't have the luxury of choosing anymore. We're going to have to do both...."
"Even if we get our act together and reduce our emissions dramatically, and get our emissions all the way down to zero, the world isn't going to cool back down for many centuries, it's just going to stop warming," he said. "For better or worse, this is normal and it's our job to keep something worse from becoming the new normal past this."
Hausfather also told the Post that without La Niña cooling the Pacific ocean, 2022 would have been the second-warmest year on record, behind 2020.
Other stats from the article about 2022:
"On Thursday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ranked 2022 as the sixth-hottest year on record and reported that the 10 warmest have all occurred since 2010...." Twenty-eight countries set national record-high annual averages last year, including Britain, Spain, France, Germany, China and New Zealand. Despite 2022 being slightly cooler than other recent years, Berkeley Earth reported that 850 million people experienced their warmest year ever. Humans' emissions of carbon dioxide and other planet-warming gases have driven this rapid warming, scientists say.
"This is a big change for the planet. And that activity has increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by 50 percent compared to where it was for the last few million years," Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist at Berkeley Earth, said in an interview. "There's often a debate between adapting to climate change and mitigating climate change. We don't have the luxury of choosing anymore. We're going to have to do both...."
"Even if we get our act together and reduce our emissions dramatically, and get our emissions all the way down to zero, the world isn't going to cool back down for many centuries, it's just going to stop warming," he said. "For better or worse, this is normal and it's our job to keep something worse from becoming the new normal past this."
Hausfather also told the Post that without La Niña cooling the Pacific ocean, 2022 would have been the second-warmest year on record, behind 2020.
Other stats from the article about 2022:
- Parts of Antarctica's ice sheet were as much as 70 degrees above normal.
- China suffered its worst recorded drought ever.
- Europe experienced its worst drought in 500 years.
- America had its third-driest year, and in late October 63% of America was experiencing drought conditions — a 10-year high.
- "Blistering temperatures in India and Pakistan spanning from March to May were so high that pavement buckled."
Hottest years (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
Just that simple, lie. No 100 years EVER had this big a shift across the entire spectrum.
Re: (Score:3)
What about the year when the Asteroid hit?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
100 years ago warnings were already being made about CO2 levels [jstor.org]
So about 200 years of almost only coal burning in houses and power stations then expanding to gas in late 1800s so basically 300+ years of man made CO2 production
Rate [Re: Hottest years] (Score:5, Informative)
There is nothing unusual about the warming,
The current warming rate is much faster than any known previous warming.
Typical warming rates are over thousands or tens of thousands of years. Not decades, or even centuries.
The other thing unusual about the warming is that we have very good measurements of all the sources-- the solar constant, the cloud cover, the atmospheric aerosols, and, yes, the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. So, this is warming that can be well attributed to a cause: greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.
if any, or the rate, if any...
Wait... "if any"?
Sorry, didn't realize I was responding to a denier.
except for the amount of money the people who are screaming about it, make
The people making literally trillions of dollars are... the oil companies. Everything else is small change.
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus, are you just willfully ignorant or a paid troll?
There is everything unusual with how quickly we're warming. Temperatures that noticably change in the span of decades are not normal, outside of massive volcano eruptions or major asteroid hits the normal wax and wane of Earth's temperature happens over millennia.
At this point you have to be aware of this though so as I said before, willfully ignorant or paid troll here.
Re: Hottest years (Score:5, Informative)
Coming out of an ice age
We are not coming out of an ice age. We came out of a glaciation period within an ice age and then from the 8.2kya event (that's 8200 years ago) the climate has been gradually cooling.
This is to be expected.
No it's not, as noted above. Please go and re-check your sources as they seem to be incorrect.
Re: Hottest years (Score:5, Informative)
What? So you're saying we're still in an ice age but left a glaciation period?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org].
An interglacial period (or alternatively interglacial, interglaciation) is a geological interval of warmer global average temperature lasting thousands of years that separates consecutive glacial periods within an ice age. The current Holocene interglacial began at the end of the Pleistocene, about 11,700 years ago.
And you think we've been cooling for 8200 years?
You got a source for all that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
The Holocene Climate Optimum (HCO) was a warm period that occurred in the interval roughly 9,000 to 5,000 years ago BP, with a thermal maximum around 8000 years BP. It has also been known by many other names, such as Altithermal, Climatic Optimum, Holocene Megathermal, Holocene Optimum, Holocene Thermal Maximum, Hypsithermal, and Mid-Holocene Warm Period.
We are currently in the Holocene.
Re: Hottest years (Score:2)
Safe bet: 2023 will be warmer than 2022 as we keep on 'developing' the world.
Obligatory stats: https://xkcd.com/1732/ [xkcd.com]
Re: Hottest years (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure if we should get worried, but I'm starting to see a trend here.
https://www.noaa.gov/news/2021... [noaa.gov]
https://www.nasa.gov/press-rel... [nasa.gov]
https://www.noaa.gov/news/2019... [noaa.gov]
https://earthobservatory.nasa.... [nasa.gov]
https://www.noaa.gov/news/2017... [noaa.gov]
https://www.nasa.gov/press-rel... [nasa.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The glaciers have been retreating for 10,000-12,000 years...
Seems like a well entrenched trend.
Re:Hottest years (Score:5, Informative)
The glaciers have been retreating for 10,000-12,000 years... Seems like a well entrenched trend.
Yes, it is warmer now than 12000 years (which is what is required to melt glaciers), but in 1800 is was cooler than 8200 years ago. The trend 8200 years ago to 200 years ago was down. There has been a significant and sudden shift in this trend over the last 200 years.
Glaciers [Re:Hottest years] (Score:2)
The glaciers have been retreating for 10,000-12,000 years...
Nope.
The most recent glacial retreat was pretty much finished by 6 to 8 thousand years ago. The glacial retreat has been over for all of human history.
There's pretty good visualization of this from sea level measurements: see here: https://d32ogoqmya1dw8.cloudfr... [cloudfront.net]
(Source: https://serc.carleton.edu/inte... [carleton.edu] )
Re: (Score:2)
> The glacial retreat has been over for all of human history.
So you're saying Bimini road was constructed by ancient Aliens then?
I'll stick with - it was made by humans and then covered over by water from ice melt.
LOL [Re:Glaciers [Re:Hottest years]] (Score:2)
LOL. Sure, a remnant of ancient Atlantis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://archeothoughts.wordpre... [wordpress.com]
Does kinda look like a road, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Ancient maps also depict that area as land. There are quite a few instances of islands / land disappearing under water during human civilization. This is nothing new and will continue to happen.
Re: Hottest years (Score:2)
Gotta live this brilliant insight:
Hausfather also told the Post that without La Niña cooling the Pacific ocean, 2022 would have been the second-warmest year on record, behind 2020.
If it weren't for something that cooled the planet, the planet would have been warmer! Brilliant! Let's start spinning up a few La Niña events to cool the planet!
Too many people on Earth, all wanting... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
What's dumb is that we could all have houses and trucks if we would accept ones that weren't excessive, and if they were expected to last a lot longer instead of being shiny new churn.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
IBM is a multibillion dollar capitalist corporation as well as Lenovo.
Factual, but irrelevant, which is your SOP
You cannot ride rsilvergun's dick to relevance with this level of half assery
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
No one is preventing you from moving on to better care for your "Mother Gaia."
But you got what's yours and you're not about to act on your principles, so I guess that's how it works with you Malthusian types.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
You are an over consuming pig about it.
Cities are death zones stripped of all natural life. You carbon killers call that efficiency though. But oh wait, there was that tree you saw once in the nearby park so it's ok.
Cities are huge heat generators. It is why temperature sensors anywhere near these huge man made unnatural heat islands can not be used to determine long range climate change effects. Because people like you gather in your little death hives and fuck up an entire region.
And where do you thin
Re: (Score:2)
I'm already doing my part ... I live in a city, ...
You are an over consuming pig about it. Cities are death zones stripped of all natural life. You carbon killers call that efficiency though.
That was more or less what the hippies thought sixty years ago. They were wrong.
Turns out it really is more efficient to pack the human more tightly in zones 'stripped of all natural life" (and leave the other areas untouched) than to take the same number of humans and spread them across a larger area.
Seems counterintuitive if you grew up in the 60s, but nevertheless it's true.
Unless you're advocating reducing the population radically, it's better to put the population in cities with a small area, then s
Re: (Score:2)
No you're not.
You are consuming at least 10x the resources of someone living in a slum in Delhi or Caracas (probably 100x if we're being honest). Your life is one of luxury in an urban apartment in the West where your so-called "clean" electric trains are likely powered in large part by fossil fuels, not to mention your indoor heating and air conditioning. Billions of people live every day consuming less, emitting less, and living worse than you do, but you don't want them to have better lives and suffer l
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The reason we need intensive farming is to feed all the city dwellers. You are the recipient of most of that food. And it usually gets shipped or trucked in via dirty diesel from another part of the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Humans not living in cities don't eat? (Score:2)
The reason we need intensive farming is to feed all the city dwellers.
...Because if they lived outside of cities, you wouldn't feed them?
Re: Too many people on Earth, all wanting... (Score:2)
Re: Too many people on Earth, all wanting... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Or we can break up your disgusting cities and live in smaller groups the way we were born to instead of high density death zones full of angry psychotics. Your cities are disgusting, crime filled, ugly, and destroy entire regions so you can have your espresso shipped in on a dirty diesel truck or ship from another part of the planet for you to sip while posting your hypocritical "I got mine" noise.
Re: Too many people on Earth, all wanting... (Score:2)
Nope [Re: Too many people on Earth, all wanting] (Score:2)
Or we can break up your disgusting cities and live in smaller groups the way we were born to instead of high density death zones
Turns out that living in smaller groups uses more resources, not fewer.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
We;re coming out of an ice age dumbass
We are not coming out of an ice age. We came out of the ice age 7,000 years ago.
(* vocabulary note: technically, ~7,000 years ago we came out of a glacial period (or 'glaciation'). But the popular vocabulary calls it an "ice age".)
Re: Was it really? (Score:2)
Hello guy who read only the headline and did not read the article. Phrases like "on record" exist and have meaning.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not so much "right" or "wrong", but about what our current ecosystem is adapted to live with. Rapid climate changes tend to be very disruptive to ecosystems, and we don't really understand the ramifications of those changes. In previous cataclysms that caused disruptive weather patterns, some life obviously survived, but there were also mass extinctions. The apex species tends to be most vulnerable, so there's obviously self-interest in maintaining the ecological status quo.
The reality is, no one re
Re: Was it really? (Score:2)
Nostalgia has a bit to do with it too. In my area, when I was growing up, winter was predictably cold (10-20F average with some days 10F and maybe even 0F). There would always be snow in December and some years in November. Within the last ten years we are closer to a 20-30F average winter temperature and no accumulated snow until January (this year no snow and itâ(TM)s almost February). So if you are person that enjoys the winter (snow, skiing, sledding), you probably miss that.
And thereâ(TM)s al
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you really gotcha'd them. I bet it was hotter several times, if you look at any given constituent atom I bet it was hotter during the big bang, or when it was formed from some sun somewhere, or at several points.
You got 'em! They probably feel like idiots and their careers are now in tatters.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably not relevant to compare the global environment to anything that was going on before human beings depended on agriculture for their survival.
Allowing long term changes in ocean temperature, air currents, precipitation, and storms is something we have to avoid. Unless of course we want to go back to being a hunter-gather society, then I guess we can do whatever we want to. The Earth will adapt, with or without humanity.
Re: Was it really? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's quite relevant what the planet was like. It is the closest thing we have to a scientific control to study. If the planet went through wild swings before we got here then why assume we are the current cause of any current events?
Re: (Score:1)
It's quite relevant what the planet was like. It is the closest thing we have to a scientific control to study. If the planet went through wild swings before we got here then why assume we are the current cause of any current events?
Because the 'wild swings' you talk about happened over tens of thousands of years. Whatever flora and fauna existed at those times had time to adapt, to move, or they died. And they would have precipitated extinctions, even at those slow rates. What we're forcing now is tens of thousands of years of change over a century. Not only will the natural world fail to adapt, but the geopolitical world will be upended.
As another poster suggested, check this: https://xkcd.com/1732/ [xkcd.com]
Re: Was it really? (Score:2)
Humanity is just marching toward it's doom (Score:5, Insightful)
... and half the people in this comment section are going to make factually incorrect statements and tell themselves global warming is not real. We live in tragically sad times.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The amazing power of stupidity is that it can easily overlap many domains.
Re: (Score:1)
Lololol, look at this walking self caricature. Used to be you couldn't tell satire from reality when someone said they were a Wolf-kin Druid alter ego with a vampire watching over them and 13 sexualities including ACBV, Shaman-hetrogay, and Krunk-adjacent semi-affected lesbionic. Now we get these fucking clowns who are worried the "globohomos" under "Soros" are in kahoots with the lizard people, George Soros, and Fauci to mind-control doddering old fool Biden and make us "own nothing and like it", and again
Re: Humanity is just marching toward it's doom (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When in drought, whip it out! The trickle down economy really is better for the environment.
Re: (Score:2)
The truth is already known and you people still look like the anti science nuts that you are.
Much as JFK isn't coming back from the dead to somehow support modern conservatives https://www.vice.com/en/articl... [vice.com] there is no secret hidden truth that's been kept from you by sinister comic book level forces that will inevitably be revealed. If there was it would already be out there as the number of people required to be involved to keep secrets like you allude to are incredibly unlikely to keep anything secret
Re: Humanity is just marching toward it's doom (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Factually correct:
1) earth has been much warmer, and much cooler, than today.
2) For the last 20k years or so, it was cooler.
3) Before that, periodically warmer back to about 2.5 mya.
4) Before 2.5 mya, it was MUCH warmer, pretty nearly all the time.
5) over the last 2.5 million years, about every 120k years, there has been a sudden spike of warming.
6) the last such spike of warming was about 120k years ago.
7) no authority (that I'm aware of) has explained how THIS spike in CO2
And this is just the beginning (Score:2)
The very early, very harmless beginning in comparison to what is to come.
Denialism isn't relevant anymore (Score:2)
If it's so hit the pavement buckles, who believes what isn't really important. Physical reality makes the arguments mostly irrelevant. You still need to stop the buckling.
Droughts, floods, fires... the causal determination is less and less important - even strictly academic.
Regional starvation doesn't care one whit about your mindset.
Re: Depends on what you measure (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
We know the earth has been warming for thousands of years
No, we know it was cooling until 200 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
According to NOAA the average temperature was 6th highest on record. NASA says 5th.
So 2022 was one of the hottest, as per title.
January is looking the same (Score:1)
Other than today, I think we've only had two days in the 30s (mid-Atlantic state). Everything else has been in the 40s and even 50s, with a day or two near 60. Next week's forecast is to be in the mid-40s to potentially low 50s with maybe one day in upper 30s.
Halfway through January and temps this warm? I'll take it. Here's to hoping February is just as warm.
Re: January is looking the same (Score:2)
You'll love your next local heat event too! Longer and stronger!
Re: (Score:2)
You'll love your next local heat event too! Longer and stronger!
Which is fine by me. I like the heat.
What are the woke alarmists doing to fix it? (Score:1)
https://twitter.com/Konstantin... [twitter.com]
Can they do something other than throw soup at paintings.
Ask the poor & starving in India, Asia and Afr (Score:1, Insightful)
"Where does "Global Warming" rank on your list of priorities?"
It's either going to be at the bottom of the list, or not even present.
Roughly HALF THE PLANET and . In the countries with the largest impact.
Their priorities are getting enough to eat, living in (relative comfort) and making sure their kids grow up healthy and with enough food.
How do they do that? By getting "rich" (relative term) enough to make this a reality.
The fact that they just HAPPEN to pump out massive emissions isn't even a blip on th
Re: (Score:1)
You're looking at "per capita". In which we're 13th.
However, that's weasel thinking.
Why?
Because the environment is ONE BIG POT.
Overall output is the important thing.
Even if the US dropped to zero TODAY, China and India would simply absorb the difference in a couple years.
Not to mention that doing this would destroy our economy.
If you see a REAL solution to this problem, please front it out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Good (Score:2)
How's Hurricane seasons working out for you there in Florida lately? Not flooded out yet?
Re: (Score:2)
You might not want to look at just you and people like you for how Florida's actually going. I know you'll discount the story and the data because of the source, but I'll put it up anyway:
"Florida is not a model for the nation, unless the nation wants to become unaffordable for everyone except rich snowbirds." :
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/0... [nytimes.com]
(probably paywalled)
Nobody smart wants capitalism to die, it's the best way out of economic poverty shown so far. What most people don't want is to have the
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Hurricane frequency is at a 20 year low. ...
Ha ha! I was going to ask for a citation, but I see your username is "misinformation"!! OK.
For actual information, instead of misinformation, try this one: https://www.epa.gov/climate-in... [epa.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Nobody wants to talk about the fact that we're into the middle of a stronger than usual solar cycle.
Nobody talks about shit that has been debunked as not relevant to global warming countless times. Your UID is low enough that I'm sure this isn't the first strong solar cycle you've posted that pointless bullshit in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Nobody wants to talk about.. (Score:4, Informative)
Nobody wants to talk about the fact that we're into the middle of a stronger than usual solar cycle.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j... [forbes.com]
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/prod... [noaa.gov]
No one wants to talk about juggling acrobats either because they're not relevant to this discussion.
Look at the temperature trend over the past few decades [noaa.gov]. Now look at the graph of the solar progression cycle. Is there any relationship?
Nope.
So move on.
Re: (Score:2)