In response to frequent contributor, Gary Miller (It's not man-made climate change, but climate cycles," The Daily News, June 12): Miller’s letter proves the old adage that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. He's correct that the Earth does experience climate cycles, but it's erroneous to conclude that this disproves man-made climate change. In fact, we should be experiencing a cooling cycle now, but the overriding greenhouse effect created by carbon dioxide and methane is negating it.

Anyone with some math background knows you can take a sinusoidal curve (a cycle) and add another function to it to create something different. If that other function (in this case man-made activity) is large enough the cycle can be changed considerably. But we shouldn't worry since, as Miller states, “…warm cycles offer prosperity and growth.”

I guess he forgot about prolonged drought, flooding, species extinction, intensifying storm activity, and so on.

However, I would like to try some of that Greenland wine he mentions.

Mark Niles

San Leon

Locations

(35) comments

Bailey Jones

I think people get hung up on the idea of "natural" cycles vs "man-made climate change". One argument I frequently hear from people my age is along the lines of "scientists used to say we were headed towards a cold spell. Now, they're saying we're getting warmer. They were wrong then and they're wrong now!!!" I remember the forecasts for a cooler climate. The ice cores taken from the Greenland ice sheets, in particular the Camp Century site (a fascinating story in its own right) showed a natural temperature cycle with a period of 80 - 180 years. This is what Gary refers to as the warming trend that began in the late 1800s. It's a real thing. But that natural cycle peaked in the 1940's. We should have had a cool spell in the 1950s - 1980s, but the natural cycle was overtaken by CO2 driven warming, and we had a period of relatively flat temperatures instead. What we are seeing now is the next natural warm cycle being amplified by CO2 driven warming. As Mark implies, the natural cycle is something like a sine wave, but that sinusoidal pattern is riding on the back of a baseline average temperature, and that baseline is going up due to the green house effect. To be sure, there are many such natural cycles (sunspots, volcanic activity, the Milankovitch cycles, ocean circulation patterns, El Nino / La Nina, etc. ) - skeptics typically will pull out one or the other to "prove" that climate change is "natural". But what is missed is that climate change is "complicated". Scientists who devote their lives to the understanding of climate change take all of these natural cycles into account in their models. And the conclusion is clear - global warming due to CO2 created by the modern world is overwhelming the natural cycles, and making it too dang hot.

Carlos Ponce

The temperature numbers were skewed by scientists trying to get more government money for their climate change studies. "Climategate, the sequel: How we are STILL being tricked with flawed data on global warming" https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11367272/Climategate-the-sequel-How-we-are-STILL-being-tricked-with-flawed-data-on-global-warming.html "NASA Exposed in ‘Massive’ New Climate Data Fraud" https://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/ Now ask yourself, where is the OFFICIAL temperature taken for Galveston, Texas? Over the decades has this location been the same? I doubt it. Is it scientific to change the location and use data to draw conclusions? Not at all? I heard of a city that moved their official temperature taking station to the airport and annual temperatures rose. Global warming? No - a HOT tarmac.

Bailey Jones

Yes - concrete gets hot. Scientists know that. Most temperature data actually comes from ocean measurements - no concrete there, and rising temperatures are being recorded at all stations, rural and urban - no matter what you've "heard". I could mention that the arctic ice is melting, that glaciers are receding, that permafrost is no longer permanent, that coral reefs are dying, that planting seasons are changing, how subtropical fish species are showing up in Cape Cod waters, how higher temperatures are being measured at both urban and rural locations, but really - what would be the point? Your mind is made up, and no amount of evidence will change it.

Carlos Ponce

So where does Galveston get its "official" temperature? Prior to September 1874 data was collected at 67-69 Strand. Beginning in September 1874, data came from 23rd and Strand. Beginning in 1878 data was collected at the Customs House 21st and Mechanic. May 1882 at the Santa Fe Rail Station 25th and Strand. 1883 it was collected at the Customs House again which became the Cotton Exchange. In 1898 Levy Building located at 2223 Market Street. After the 1900 Storm it was moved to the Trust Building, at Tremont and Post Office. In 1946 601 Rosenberg - The US Post Office. December 1994-Data collection continued at Scholes Field. ASOS (Automated Surface Observing Systems) was established at Scholes Field in 1994 and climatological data collection began at this location in January 1995. There's concrete there.

Bailey Jones

What does Galveston's temperature have to do with anything, Carlos? Global temperature is based on 6300 land based sensors, plus ocean buoys, plus Antarctic weather stations, and has been verified by satellite measurements of air, land and water temperature since at least 2002.

Jim Forsythe

Houston is full of concrete and are able to get official temperature records because they like Galveston follow the rules. It hard to believe that someone would think that they would report official temperatures that were taken on concrete. The following are the requirements that the National Weather Service follow in reporting records---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Temperature sensor siting: The sensor should be mounted 5 feet +/- 1 foot above the ground. The ground over which the shelter [radiation] is located should be typical of the surrounding area. A level, open clearing is desirable so the thermometers are freely ventilated by air flow. Do not install the sensor on a steep slope or in a sheltered hollow unless it is typical of the area or unless data from that type of site are desired. When possible, the shelter should be no closer than four times the height of any obstruction (tree, fence, building, etc.). The sensor should be at least 100 feet from any paved or concrete surface.

Carlos Ponce

Hello, Bailey, Galveston is on the GLOBE ....[rolleyes] Its official temperature like many others is taken from a ground position. Notice how Gaveston's recording site has moved from the east end of the isle to the west end. This relocation is similar to most global reporting stations.

Carlos Ponce

Jim, Houston is a large city. What location does Houston use for data? I was in Manhattan with Hitchcock High School Students while it was snowing. The snow did not stick but melted rapidly due to the heat radiating from the buildings, streets, sidewalks. There were a few sites where the snow actually stayed - Central Park and Battery Park where we had a snowball fight. You don't have to take the temperature on the concrete to fell the effects of sunlight - even on a snowy day - radiating from buildings, etc.

Jim Forsythe

------------Energy radiating from buildings makes no difference in the temperature.----- The question was about Galveston and the answer is they use the standard the National Weather Service uses.Other reporting station for the National Weather Service are also using the same standard. Part of the standard is the temperature instruments will be shielded from the following elements: 1. precipitation 2. direct and reflected sunshine 3. direct and reflected thermal energy (i.e., Infrared) , so your radiating from buildings makes no difference in the temperature. For outdoor instrument displays, cotton region shelters are used which have liquid glass thermometers that provides the daily maximum temperature, daily minimum temperature, and current temperature.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as the snow in NY. if you had grown up with large amount of snow,you would have know that several different factors cause this. What was the temperature of the air, it has to be low enough to let it stick. Ground temperature is also a big factor. Was the snow wet or dry?Was the day clear or overcast? Was the wind blowing? The same thing happens on farms as in city, melting can happen as soon as snow hits the ground. Some years we would have to have several snows before any would stick.

Carlos Ponce

"Energy radiating from buildings makes no difference" HEAT radiating from buildings makes a difference. And the snow not sticking was told to us by native New Yorkers, Overcast, wind etc. etc etc didn't matter. It's the radiant heat the buildings absorb not only from the sun but internal as well.

Jim Forsythe

How many feet of snow did you have growing up? All of what I talked about makes a difference in snow sticking. As far as Energy radiating from buildings making a difference in the official temperature , it does not, since cotton region shelters prevent this from happening.

Carlos Ponce

I spoke with people who grew up in NYC and they told me snow doesn't stick except in park areas- little concrete there. It doesn't matter whether I grew up with snow or not.

Jim Forsythe

-------------Snow sticking has nothing to do with the National Weather Service recording of temperature! --------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "snow doesn't stick except in park areas" If that was true, NYC would have no need for snowplows to clear the streets and shovels to clean sidewalks. It is clear that you did not grow up with snow, and that you believe that snows sticks in parks only. You do remember a few years ago during Christmas week, that we had a large snow fall for us. You may not have had snow in your streets, but I did. That was a small snow amount compared to what New York gets. Snow will not stick if the conditions are not right. This included the ground temperature, air temperature, is the snow dry or wet. Was the day clear or overcast? Was the wind blowing. It is clear, why you do not know why all these factors must be right for snow to stick.

Carlos Ponce

Bottom line - taking official temperatures in an area with tarmacs will increase the average temperature.

Jim Forsythe

They do not take official temperatures on tarmacs. The instruments are housed inside cotton region shelters to prevent increases from outside sources such as tarmacs. The sensors inside the cotton region shelters are at least 100 feet from any paved or concrete surface to prevent this.

Carlos Ponce

"an area with tarmacs" "an area with tarmacs""an area with tarmacs" NotON the tarmacs.

Jim Forsythe

The instruments are housed inside cotton region shelters to prevent increases from outside sources such as tarmacs. The sensors inside the cotton region shelters are at least 100 feet from any paved or concrete surface to prevent this.

Carlos Ponce

Have you been snooping around Scholes Field?

Jim Forsythe

I do not need too snoop around Scholes Field because they are required to have cotton region shelters that meet the National Weather Service requirements.

Carlos Ponce

Cotton region shelters shield the instrumentation from direct sunlight and precipitation, while allowing a free flow of air. We're not talking about direct sunlight, Jim, but about heat generated by tarmacs. A cotton region shelter won't filter that. Nice try but not the issue here.

Carlos Ponce

Reason why I posted you've been snooping around Scholes Field is because the cotton region shelters have been largely replaced for official measurements in the United States by the MMTS (maximum-minimum temperature system) system. The cotton region shelters are still in use by some NWS weather stations but have gradually been replaced by the MMTS system since the 1980s. It is possible that the Galveston weather station still has the old system but since it moved to Scholes Field in the 1990s..........

Jim Forsythe

Carlos, the cotton region shelters or the MMTS, which they are probably using now, are not located anywhere near heat generated by tarmacs. The standard is such to prevent the heat from man made surfaces from changing temperatures recorded. "The sensors inside the cotton region shelters(MMTS) are at least 100 feet from any paved or concrete surface to prevent this." Radiant heat from the tarmac, goes up and not out over 100 feet Heat goes up and not out for a long distance like you are trying to say. If temperatures spread like you are trying to say, no one could stand working in refineries because of the extreme heat that is produced on the units. Temperatures reported by the National Weather Service are not a guess as you are trying to say, but exact measurement. Take it up with them if you disagree. .

Carlos Ponce

Only 100 feet? If it's at Scholes Field it is definitely affected.

Jim Forsythe

You need to brush up on your Thermodynamics. Heat does not transfer in the manor you suggest. At any National Weather Service reporting facility, they are recording the true temperatures. Contact them, if you think they are recording it incorrectly. ,

Carlos Ponce

"Heat does not transfer in the manor you suggest." Experience says it does. Hitchcock and other stadiums are using artificial turf. It gets HOT during summer months - much hotter than traditional grass turf. And you can feel that heat up in the stands. When the weather gets cooler that's not so bad. Now a tarmac is not so dramatic but the difference even at 100 yards away is measurable.

Jim Forsythe

Contact the National Weather Service and they will walk you thru the reason your thinking is wrong. If you had worked in refineries, you would have worked around product from a minus 150 degrees to a plus 2500 and you would know how thermodynamics work. If you did not before you started working at the facility. --------------------------------------If you live in a area that has temperatures so high that they have heat wavy lines on the road you would know heat goes up not out at the rate you suggest. As the heat is leaving the surface it is dropping down because it is cooling.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On a hot surface, such as a sunny road, air will stand in layers of different densities. Hot air naturally rises, so as air comes off the hot surface, it rises for a bit before rapidly cooling and sinking to be heated again.

Carlos Ponce

The NWS says I'm right!

Gary Miller

The next cooling cycle will start in two or four hundred years. Right on time. Today we are being tricked by clever wording about global temps. It was claimed 2017 was the hottest on record. Yes but the trick is it averaged hotter because winter temps were up while summer temps flat lined or declined. Snowfall in 2017 was up because there was more high level warm air carrying moister, a lake effect worldwide.

Bailey Jones

Are you saying that a year that averages 90 in the summer and 50 in the winter isn't warmer than one that averages 90 in the summer and 40 in the winter? Because I'm pretty sure that "average" means taking the average. Warming doesn't always mean that the peak temperatures are increasing (although they are in many areas). It can mean that winters aren't as cold as they used to be. Or that summer nights are warmer than they used to be. Both of which are true. I have to admit to being a little surprised by you and Carlos. I know a lot of people are skeptical about the causes of global warming, but I didn't know that anyone still believed that global temperatures weren't actually increasing.

Jack Cross

Regardless of which side you are on with the issue of climate change which use to be global warming, every one should admit when they were wrong and this should be included in the conversation. Former Vice President Al Gore’s made a living off climate change his movie “ An Inconvenient Truth”“ revealing the “grave” threat of global warming in 2006 caused the Washington Post to print that Al “believes humanity may have only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan.” Good ol Al won an Oscar and Nobel Prize for sounding the alarm in book and film as a Climate Control Caped Crusader. Al crisscrossed the world waving his arms “We can’t wait… We have a planetary emergency… the future of human civilization is at stake!!” This is no exaggeration. The Washington Post labeled him “the world’s most renowned crusader on climate change.” Wow! And remember he almost became President of the United States were it not for a few “hanging chads” that didn’t go to his column. President Obama subsequently picked up the “crisis” telling world leaders that “climate change (not Islamic terrorism or skyrocketing, unsustainable debt) is the number one issue facing us today.” Obama pushed the Paris Climate accord. The cost of his United Nations Global Warming Treaty came in at $12.1 trillion Now you have the democrats and AOL’s recycling this again saying the world has only 12 years. If you lived through through the 1960s and ’70s you should remember the dire global-cooling predictions that were hyped and given great credibility by Newsweek, Time, Life, National Geographic, and numerous other mainstream media outlets. According to the man-made global-cooling theories of the time, billions of people should be dead by now owing to cooling-linked crop failures and starvation. If this is to be a serious issue then you need some honesty and fact checking of the predictors because some people get rich off this and others use it as a political tool to get elected.

Gary Miller

90 in summer, 40 in winter averages cooler than 90 summer,50 winter. A nearly record high is cooler than a record high. A true average would count 24 hourly temps a day year around. I find it strange people complain when it's cooler than the medieval warm period and warmer than the little ice age. Today is the best it's been in 2,300 years. Think carefully. There are people wanting to use the myth to take your right to choose or prosper. They won't have any effect on the weather but will destroy your chance for success. Bailey. The global temp is increasing. It's up to 52.1 C from 51.8 C in just 40 years. Try not to forget the global average counts north, south and equator + high and low, day and night.

Gary Miller

You should know the lighting strike counting method is the most accurate way to find or record the global temp. Each counter anywhere in the world records the global temp everywhere to the second decibel.

Gary Miller

Bailey! Global average temps are going up. If they continue at same rate for the next 400 years this cycle will still not be the warmest on record. Today humanity is enjoying the best climate it has ever been, not as hot or cold as it was, and a few people want to ruin the US economy to make climate stop changing. Not me. Not Carlos.

Gary Miller

Bailey. 90 summer, 50 winter is more comfortable than 90 summer, 40 winter. Same in summer but more comfortable winter.

Mary Gillespie

When global warming protagonists "adjust" (change!) their data, they're no longer engaged in science.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.