El Nino in the Southern Hemisphere and other climatic patterns have made an important contribution to the warming. The only consolation - the ice cover in the Antarctic - increased somewhat
Globally, 2010 was one of the two hottest years in history. This is according to the state of the climate report for the year 2010 published by the US Atmospheric and Oceanographic Agency (NOAA). The peer-reviewed report was published in collaboration with the American Meteorological Society, and was authored by 368 scientists in 45 countries. It provides a detailed annual update on global climate indices, and on major climate events on all continents.
This year's report includes 41 climatic indices - 4 more than the previous year - including temperatures in the lower and upper atmosphere, precipitation, greenhouse gases, humidity, cloud cover, seawater temperature and salinity, sea ice, glaciers and snow cover. Each index includes thousands of measurements from independent databases that allow scientists to identify overall trends.
While some cyclical climate patterns have had a significant impact on weather and climate events throughout the year, the comprehensive analysis of gauges shows a continuation of the trend scientists have seen over the past 50 years, and is consistent with known climate change.
"We continue to closely monitor these indicators because it is quite clear that the climate in the past cannot represent the climate in the future. These indicators are essential for understanding and building a reliable forecast of the climate in the future" says Thomas Carle, Director of NOAA's Climate Center in Asheville, North Carolina. The past year was marked by large fluctuations such as El Niño in the Northern Hemisphere and the Arctic Oscillation, which caused significant weather events in 2010.
Here are some of the main findings:
- Temperature: Three independent databases showed that 2010 was one of the two hottest years since data collection began in the late 19th century. The global temperature in the arctic region continued to rise at twice the rate of the low latitudes.
- Glaciers and sea ice: Arctic Ocean ice cover continued to shrink and was the third largest on record. The ice in Greenland is melting at the greatest rate since at least 1958. The melting of the ice in Greenland was about 8% greater than the previous record recorded in 2007. The glaciers in the Alps have shrunk for the 20th year in a row. Meanwhile, Antarctic sea ice cover increased to an all-time high in 2010.
- Sea surface temperature and sea level height: Even given a medium-strong El Niña phenomenon in the second half of the year, associated with colder waters in the equatorial region and the tropical region of the Pacific Ocean, the sea surface temperature was the third highest in history and the sea level continued to rise.
- The salinity of the oceans: The oceans were saltier than average in areas of rapid evaporation and sweeter than average in areas of high precipitation, indicating that the water cycle is increasing.
- greenhouse gases: The concentration of greenhouse gases continues to rise. The level of carbon dioxide increased by 2.6 parts per million, more than the average annual increase in the years 1980-2010.
Some climate patterns played a role in weather and climate events in 2010:
- El Niño in the Southern Hemisphere: A warm and strong El Niño weather pattern in early 2010, which transitioned to a cold La Niña in July, contributed to some unusual weather patterns around the world and affected different regions in different ways. Tropical cyclone activity was below average in almost all basins around the world, especially in most of the Pacific Ocean. The Atlantic basin was unusual with near peak hurricane activity. Heavy rains led to a wet spring (September-November) in Australia that ended a decade of drought.
- Arctic Oscillations: In the negative state for most of 2010, the Arctic Oscillations affected many parts of the Northern Hemisphere and caused the freezing Arctic air to reach the south and the warmer air to reach the north. Canada had the hottest year on record, while Britain had its worst winter at the beginning of the year and the coldest December at the end of that year. Arctic fluctuations reached their most negative value in February, the same month in which snow records were recorded in several cities on the east coast of the USA.
- The southern annular winds: An atmospheric pattern related to the strength and persistence of the winds surrounding the Southern Hemisphere and Antarctica and led to an all-time high in snow cover around Antarctica.
The State of the Climate Report is a peer-reviewed report published each year as a special supplement to the American Meteorological Society's Bethune. The editors are J. Blunden, D.S. Arnett and M.A. Barringer. The full report and accompanying documents are available on the NOAA website.
19 תגובות
Yoel Moshe:
An addition to my father's words:
You need a little modesty and you had no reason to assume that what you don't know - as someone who hasn't learned anything about the subject - is also unknown to the scientists dealing with it.
Not exact. Regarding A, you are right, but it is not the average but the median.
B. Satellites survey the entire Earth - including the South Pole, and it is a fact that this is also referenced in current research.
third. Stop looking for the culprit outside the earth - the sun is standing in its place, and the nakipah is a process whose cycle is approximately 24 thousand years. In the last 200 years, no such changes have accumulated due to precipitation that justify the warming.
d. Human culture is the first factor at the top - cutting down trees on the one hand and burning carbon into its forms on the other, changing the situation in days due to pollution and the collapse of the plankton system that absorbs oxygen - these are not things on a small scale.
God. It is possible to know what was also 500 thousand years ago although not with a resolution of a few years through the study of ice cores and similar methods in other materials. There has never been a time like ours.
It is good that our attention is drawn to the need to protect our world, and also to the possibility that it will be destroyed by our own hands. But the sterilization is not a method of diagnosis and analysis.
A- An average in the field of temperatures is not a scale. After all, if the values change radically up and down as one, the average remains stable even though existence is doubly difficult.
B - I have a feeling that as usual the research environment is biased towards the northern hemisphere where most of the scientists and measurements are located. But factually, the research points to the warming of the northern arctic circle and the cooling of the southern circle [Antarctica is covered with snow].
C- Is it possible that everything is mainly related to the phenomenon of Kdvaha's withdrawal? This means that it is the constant but consistent change in the pivot point that affects the weather. But because of the different geography between the north and the south [% land/land etc. near the poles] the projection is different?
D- Is it possible that to the above hypothesis some contribution of the human 'culture' or 'subculture' should be added, but is it a secondary player?
Together with the brevity of the historical canvas of the various indices [200 years of measurements are very little in the historical KNM] a little more modesty is needed before conclusions/bombastic headlines.
pleasantness:
Your words do contradict what I wrote on Wikipedia, but I don't find it appropriate to repeat what was said there or what I said before.
There is no different dating for the history and pre-history of any topic.
Not written, but from my previous knowledge it is 2005.
What is the second year being talked about in the study?
The hottest years are 2010 and what other year?
Michael Shalom!
My words are not contrary to writing on Wikipedia.
Here is an example of a quote from there:
"The study of history is limited to the study of cultures with writing systems, and as such it refers to the beginning of writing, which is dated to the 4th millennium BC"
And you said:
"Do not limit the definition exclusively to the reporter"
It is said there:
"The age of history as the age of civilization"
This relates to what I said about the word "universe" which means in the Torah (and also the literal equivalent in Greek) is civilization.
All the other things I said actually stem from this:
When they say "history" they probably mean the whole of human thought and human actions that have a written record - and as I said it dates more or less according to the Hebrew count.
But when the same definition is applied to narrower worlds of thought such as mathematics or physics, we get the beginning of the timetable for the revelation of mathematics in the world (Thales) or the revelation of physics in the world (Galileo-Newton).
Best regards,
pleasantness
How does Noam manage to spin so much nonsense,
write nonsense, rely on "the book of books"
And after all this, to claim "that the concept of a person is so superior compared to all other things that preceded it".
To think that there is someone who will take his words seriously?
pleasantness:
As mentioned, your words are contrary to the definitions of history and prehistory that appear in Wikipedia.
Joe and Michael!
Physics began in the 17th century with Galileo and Newton.
Before that, that is, Aristotelian physics - this is the prehistory of physics.
When studying physics today, it is very desirable to know how things have developed since the beginning of physics, that is, since the 17th century.
As we know, the beginning of mathematics is in the 5th century BC, and its parents were Thales and Pythagoras.
Before this time there was an era of mathematical prehistory.
The first Adam began to be recorded from Moses (1200 BC) to Ezra the Scribe (444 BC)
The time of Adar, according to the Hebrew counting, which is accepted by more than half of the inhabitants of the earth, is XNUMX years ago.
But as we know, he is a mythological figure, and the sages do not think of confusing him with his historical location at the beginning of the period of agriculture and domestication in Israel - or alternatively -
Since the homospeians realized that the lion is the king of animals - and not man.
In the religion of Israel, they understood that the concept of Adam is so superior compared to all that preceded it, that it is appropriate to see at this time the beginning of the world and the universe (not in the meaning of universe, of course, but in the Torah meaning of the word (the word "universe" was imported from the Greek)).
Today physicists believe that the beginning of physical time is 12.7 billion years ago, but this is only because our telescopes today are very weak. In the future it is possible that this time will grow very far back.
(If by chance it turns out that only the galaxies we see today were involved in the Big Bang - but not all of them...)
Best regards,
Noam Levy
Wikipedia thinks differently:
Do not limit the definition exclusively to the reporter and do not define different definitions for different subjects.
This is not my definition, this is the only definition of the concept. Although I agree that the majority of the population does not know the concepts, so it would be better if my father would have explained things differently.
Joe:
A. I do not believe that anyone in the world will accept your definition of the 17th century as history.
B. Also according to your definition - the beginning of history is in the 18th century
third. I wrote the things in response to Shavi's words and they refer to his understanding of the article - an understanding that was wrong - both because of the poor terminology and because of his poor motivation. All in all, I tried - like you - to defend the article's claim.
History = a period for which there is (human) documentation. Otherwise it is prehistory.
Therefore the nomenclature is appropriate, i.e. the human documentation of temperature exists only from the 18th century. And it is reliable only since the beginning of the last century.
Of course there were much hotter years, 4 billion years ago for example the temperature of the star was about 10000 degrees Kelvin.
The original news is not talking about the hottest years in all of history but only about the hottest years since an orderly recording of temperatures began.
Here is the quote:
Three major independent datasets show 2010 as one of the two warmest years since official record-keeping began in the late 19th century. Annual average temperatures in the Arctic continued to rise at about twice the rate of the lower latitudes.
The ice data from Antarctica and Greenland tell us about the temperature, going back tens of thousands of years:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0dDlwfnT8w
How can you say something like "that the day is the hottest in history"?
It's just nonsense
The data is indeed interesting.
But what do they say is there a prediction of what is going to happen?
Will this warming cause the average temperature on the Earth to rise or fall?
He promised there would never be another flood! And what about an asteroid impact, volcanoes, earthquakes?
Nothing was said about it 🙂
Don't worry, God has promised that nothing will happen.