Climate Spiral
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 มี.ค. 2022
- UPDATED VERSION OF THIS VIDEO IS HERE: • Climate Spiral: 1880-2...
This visualization shows monthly global temperature anomalies (changes from an average) between the years 1880 and 2021. Whites and blues indicate cooler temperatures, while oranges and reds show warmer temperatures. As you can see, global temperatures have warmed from mainly human activities as time has progressed.
These temperatures are based on data from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). Anomalies are defined relative to a base period of 1951 to 1980. The data file used to create this visualization can be accessed here: data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.csv.
The "climate spiral" is a visualization designed by climate scientist Ed Hawkins from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Reading: www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/sp.... Climate spiral visualizations have been widely distributed; a version was even part of the opening ceremony of the Rio de Janeiro Olympics.
Download the video and get the version in degrees F here: svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4975 - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
The best representation I've ever seen
You might like my channel too 😀
yes, this goes to show Earth is only 200 years old, small sample sizes for a system that has cycles lasting lasting thousands of years, got to love it. Also we stopped polution in 2021 due to COVID lock downs and nothing changed. what gives?
Ye sab fake dikha rahe h
Actually it’s only 140 years. And the truth is revealed in the earths 500,000 year temperature charts that show we are in a completely normal pattern. @@pluto8404
Too short...
Those graphics are so beautifully done. Thank you
Would like to be able to explore the result within an interactive 3D environment.
P.S. The article in the description has some really great graphics.
Also with 500,000 years of temperature. Not 140, which is a ridiculous low sample size of data.
Could you update to include the data up to 2023? Please 🙏
th-cam.com/video/uh_1RhD1htI/w-d-xo.html
Beautiful and dynamic data visualization!
😂😂😂😂
Excellent visual. It's a real shame that more people don't understand how how significant this is. I fear we are about to cross the point of no return.
I only fear that they are hiding the full truth like why they only talk about the past 150 years its because the climate has always changed like this
we live with idiots, and they get to vote
No this is 140 years of what we know of a 500,000 year earth temperature cycles. It’s also perfectly normal in earths history. You can look up the 500,000 year temperature graph and see yourself. You can also study Milankovitch cycles which explain this is all natural.
@@rogerc23 so global warming is just a big hoax? Wow! I’d never thought of this!
@@rogerc23 u cannot not blame human activity, cause and reaction, and we caused a lot
This is outstanding. I've seen the raw data and dozens of visualisations, but this is the best.
Beautiful graphics. When did you guys move away from hockey stick model?
Brilliant!
Very impactful data visualization!! Renewable Energy is the solution?
It is far too late now. :( "Global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions rose by 6% in 2021 to 36.3 billion tonnes, their highest ever level."
Best thing every single person could do to save the planet is go vegan. It can be done TODAY without waiting for scientists to try and come up with a miracle cure.
@@JapaneseJoineryYeah, but that 6% is relative to 2020 emissions, which were low because of people sheltering in their homes.
@@JapaneseJoinery Stop freaking out. You forget many people were too frightened in 2020 to move about as they did previously. Not only that, renewable energy is *always* an option. You think its too late? How so? If you think that, then you are admitting that NOTHING humans do can stop the inevitable- which then completely disproves that theory that human-caused climate change is happening and that there might be something to do about it.
Pick one.
@@SPQR7117 36.3 billion tonnes of CO2 were emitted in 2021, the world record to date. Human related emissions (fossil fuels) are disturbing the systems natural balance. Human emissions are resulting in increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations. This results in ocean acidification, and climate change. As emissions continue to rise each year, the impacts will also rise. It may sound like small changes in temperatures/weather patterns, but they can have cascading impacts that will devastate life on this planet in the near future. It is a difficult truth to accept, but only when the world is ready to accept the truth, and stop spreading disinformation, climate denial, etc. can we even attempt to make steps to even slightly slow the progress.
for a thinking human being this should be the scariest thing imaginable.
the implications are astonishing.
To bad this isn't real it's only made to scare people into allowing our government to waste money, they only give grants to organizations that show a negative climate change but if you wanted to do a study that proves climate change is a natural event they won't give you a dime and that's sad
Important point ..Below 10oC and Above 40oC life as we know it cant continue ....So weve only got a 30 degree window ...not much . 30 precious degrees of bandwith .😢 😮.😮😮😮
“At 3C of warming, scientists predict the world could pass several catastrophic points of no return, from the runaway melting of ice sheets to the Amazon rainforest drying out. "Present trends are racing our planet down a dead-end 3C temperature rise,"
Not so big of a bandwith is it now?
3 degrees C would cause serious problems for much of civilization. 1.5 C already is.
Great visualization.
Would be interesting to see this expanded backwards into the ice ages and beyond
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record
"Get me my sharpie!"
- Trump, probably.
What was causing the spike on 1940 and 1900?
We humans started industrialization as early as 400BCE.
Some examples are Maurya Empire and Gupta Empire of Indian subcontinent were the chief producers of iron ore and iron products during 400s BCE. And there were many across globe.
Where as in case of 1900s, it is the period after USA's independence, where almost every Empire started industrialization. The British had the major manufacturing industries.
Excellent visualization for anthropocene climate change.
There is no such thing. But there are people making 💰 and controlling you
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand.
- WB Yeats, The Second Coming
We are cooking like in a microwave
Some mistakes once made, are made. They cannot be undone.
Okay… so this is quite frightening. Yikes.
It's designed and the data chosen to frighten you.
@@andyf10 no.
Yes @@radscorpion8
amazing visualization !
We always see the rise in temperature, but this is such a simple visualization that shows how we never go backwards. Those temperature norms from the 1950s are gone.
it shows temperature-drop, through the movement back to center.
Or what do you mean?
@@tubate20092 When did the actual drop occur? Was it within the last 30 years?
Never goes backwards huh???? Well i just looked it up. In my work city west point GA.
The same day last year as today. Minimum temperature was 57.2f (2021) today 37.0f (2022) and 20.2 degree difference on the down side. Never going back down. Give me a break.
@@snakebite2170 weather and climate are different things.
Have you ever reviewed the earths 500,000 year temperature graphs? We are in a completely normal pattern. @@KarltheBarl
Annual and global averaged air temperature. 2016 was the hottest year, but 2023 may exceed it. Not uniform over the globe, with the Arctic warrming 4x the global average and Antarctic not, an active research area termed "Polar Anomaly". The much greater warming seen in Sep-Oct of 2023 is attributed to reducing SO2 emissions from ships after a mandatory change to low-sulfur fuels. Might want to repeal that law. Ditto for some of the air pollution rules. Wood smoke also reflects sunlight and forest fires were common for millennia, as evidenced by trees like Sequoia requiring fire for their cones to disperse seeds.
Fanatastic video NASA! Love it. 👍👍👌
th-cam.com/video/6kUAtt2pXlc/w-d-xo.html
You are being fooled
@@rogerc23And i’m sure that you have tons of proof that global warming is fake right? Hint: tweets by trump and facebook posts dont count as scientific evidence!
@@PappyP hey genius. Learn to read. It would be a great skill for you in the future. I never once said the globe wasn’t heating. Read. Give it a try.
@@rogerc23 Wow thats so funny given by the looks of your comment you didnt read your own comment at all or just dont have reading comprehension! If NASA is lying about global warming that means you are saying global warming is fake. So are you going to give me some evidence to support your claim or are you going to continue to throw insults?
We're fucked, but it was a good run
It would probably be wise to realize a few facts first!!
1/ The average temperature of the Earth (since the origin of life) is stated to be 20C, currently it is only 14.5C! So we still have a lot to catch up on!
2/ The greatest flourishing of life on Earth was, for example, in the Mesozoic era, only thanks to two reasons - higher temperature and multiple amounts of CO2!
3/ Rapid temperature reversals always occurred and often many times faster!
4/ Let's be happy that it's getting warmer, when it got cold the last time 90% of people in Europe died out!
5/ There is only 0.04% CO2 in the air. When CO2 drops to 0.02%, life on Earth will completely disappear. Of course, with 2-3x the amount of CO2, the diversity and productivity of life on Earth will increase!!
- árboles + gente = + co2 + calor... solo se desequilibro
I miss the 10000 years before!😮
You can find that data if you bother to look.
@@lrvogt1257 are you stupid or so?
What did happen in the 1940's?
the second world war lol
@@yourbirthcertificate yes, but why it was hotter
brilliant can you go back further?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record
Is this using accurate data or the false data you have admitted to using in the past?
We’re funked
Final view should show historic data until way before 1800 to show how brutal the climate change is.
No then it would show we are in a normal hearing cycle which has happened 5 times in earths history and is nothing new. Then they could scare people into believing if we give all our money to the govt to make them rich and their friends companies and consultancy rich everything will be fine. Yeah right. Fact is they are lying and there is no man made climate change. You can look up the earths 500,000 year temperature graphs yourself.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record
hope this process can be accelerated
What are we going to do about it? Absolutely nothing!
And we start.... soon!
We should begin to start thinking about the possibility of potentially one day maybe or maybe not beginning to worry.
Wow, amazing.
I reposted this on my channel too 😀
interesting... from the "GIF" it looks like 1.8 degree increase in 140 years
Look how bad WW2 was for the warming, a clear early outlier
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Correlation does not imply causation. 1941 was the worst winter in Eastern Europe in 140 years. It helped stop the nazi advance in Russia. It would be interesting to know the actual cause of the warm blip in the 1940s.
What is actually these values mean? Where and how are they measured?
Where and when was origin "zero"?
The circular motion is measuring time, and the inward and outward distances measure temperature. There is not a zero reference point, the data is being shown from 1880 through the present.
@@tinetannies4637 Thank you cpt. Obvious for your useless answer.
Its in the description. Zero is the average from 50s to 80s.
@@binarium You are right: the data clearly shows that we need to abolish capitalism.
Brilliant
So how are you creating this? Average earth temp? What adjustments were made? You can make a pretty representation of the data. But where did the data come from? What’s your supporting evidence?
Maybe check the links in the description?
These are not the gotcha questions you may think they are. I recommend you google them as the all the information is readily available.
@@lrvogt1257 I wasn’t trying to get anything but truth
@@larkljc : Very good then. It's just a typical tactic to ask questions that imply a problem assuming the ones asked have no answer... but these are easily accresable. NASA has a good site that explains how they do measurements and collect data as well as their Vital Signs portal.
@@lrvogt1257 I always ask for sources. It helps me learn
Data is clearly misrepresented and chart is misleading. +1 circle has 4 times more surface area than -1 circle. So comparison between two is incorrectly represented.
The size of each circle is irrelevant. It's just demonstrating change. Graphs are usually limited to a part of a scale. Temperature could run from absolute zero to the heat of a super nova and anything on Earth would look like a flat line... but we can only survive within a very small limited range of a few degrees.
what happened to the huge worldwide heat wave you can still read about in 1921 ? pretty graph tho .
with enuf homogenization, cherry picking , adjustments , infills and spotty data you can prove anything with statistics
Exponential
data cleaning at its best
Ahhhhh... we're all going to die 😱
Yes, that’s a given!
"The word “crisis” is too optimistic; as if someone realized there’s a problem."
"Fear means you're smart. You understand the risks."
What is to become of us?
Alas, we are undone!
Ok so I’ve been reading Jane Austen, and that is how I talk now. 🙄
Bruh, why speak in Riddles?
The Climate has changed dramatically over millenia , and will continue , with or without our help ..But excessive Co2 and Methane need to be brought down ..No such thing as zero Carbon emissions. Impossible.
Please tell me what happened to the temperature that the ice age ended?
More than that, to be honest. This simulation ranged from 1880, but they skipped the part or failed to acknowledge that the earth was once hot as hell, and then frozen like ice cube, flooded to brim. This "climate change" is a cyclic event.
Where was the data obtained? Phoenix Airport runway?
LOL
onononono
You scientists should probably tell Ronald Reagan about this so that policy to stop it is put in place before it gets out of control!
Now, apart from that info, what other info suggest that the rise in temperature is human made?
To start, more co2 = earth hotter bc co2 is a greenhouse gas yadda yadda i’m assuming you learned that part in school unless you havent which feel free to ask about it.
1. Carbon dioxide concentration in atmosphere normally increases by about 100 ppm every 50-200k years (really slow). From the 2nd industrial revolution to now, co2 levels have gone up over 200ppm, in less than 200 years (really really REALLY fast - never been this fast before in earths history).
2. The type of carbon in Co2 in the atmosphere used to be largely C13 before the industrial revolution, (which plants like to use better) and now there is a large influx of C12 levels and a decrease in C13 levels. C12 is the type of carbon mainly used in fossil fuels.
Moving the goalpost.
Our orbit and tilt has some to do with this. I would like to see a comparison of the two.
We are traveling a path through Space. Two hundred and fifty million years to complete one cycle.
Our orbit is almost circular this would be the best scenario to witness regular seasons (not too hot summers and not too cold winter)
We are warming the planet while orbital parameters are optimal
We are past the point of no return
Our moving of billions of tons of carbon from underground into the atmosphere has a lot more to do with this.
They are called Milankovitch cycles and explain the cycles of glaciations. This current warming trend is counter to natural cycles.
You can actually see when we started aggressively using fossil fuels.
No what you see is a normal effect of Milankovitch cycles and the 6th increase of temperatures to this level (well we still aren’t as hot as the other 5 yet) in that time frame.
@@rogerc23😂 No, the current rapid warming cannot be explained by orbital forcing.
@@QT5656 Yes it can because it happened several other times in history. Can you even read ?
@@rogerc23 😂 Yes, I can read, can you? Sorry to destroy your comforting fiction but the current rapid warming *cannot* be explained by orbital forcing. Climate scientists understand the timing of the orbital cycles very well and scientists know the position of the Earth and where we are along the cycles. The warming from the last ice age levelled off about 6000 yeas ago and it's not expected to get cold again for another 16000 years. The current relatively rapid warming is due to anthropogenic CO2 as predicted by many scientist since 1896 (including Exxon's own scientists in the 1970s). We know atmospheric CO2 has increased because it can be measured, and we know that the extra CO2 is due to burning fossil fuels (not volcanoes) because the isotope ratio has shifted towards C12. Moreover, if the warming was due to orbital or solar cycles we wouldn't be experiencing stratospheric cooling which we are. Some example references for you to read:
- Lacis et al. 2013. The role of long-lived greenhouse gases as principal LW control knob that governs the global surface temperature for past and future climate change. Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 65(1), p.19734.
- Osman et al. 2021. Globally resolved surface temperatures since the Last Glacial Maximum. Nature, 599(7884): 239-244.
- Ramaswamy et al. 2006. Anthropogenic and natural influences in the evolution of lower stratospheric cooling. Science, 311(5764):1138-1141.
- Supran et al. 2023. Assessing ExxonMobil’s global warming projections. Science, 379(6628), p.eabk0063.
@@QT5656 😂😂😂 Are you just being this dense on purpose ? Firstly, Milankovitch cycles refer to variations in Earth's orbit, axial tilt, and precession. You try to misdefine it and its importance by referring to it as a. Orbital cycle without defining it and most people will think you mean a monthly cycle like your period.
.
These cyclic changes influence the amount and distribution of solar radiation reaching the Earth. Changes in the eccentricity of Earth's orbit can affect the amount of sunlight received during different seasons,
For instance, changes in the eccentricity of Earth's orbit can affect the amount of sunlight received during different seasons, contributing to long-term temperature variations.
Hence the purpose of referring to the earths That even a child could recognize the 100% consistent pattern of warming and cooling and the 6 major heating events in that time. And as stated .
These 6 major warming events in Earth's history are commonly referred to as interglacial periods.
The most recent one, is known as the Holocene epoch. It characterizes the current relatively stable and warm period between glacial cycles.
That is 100% why the earth has been heating in perfect consistency to the other 5 times in the last 500,000 years.
Now some scientists, and fools, suggest that human activities, particularly the increased concentration of greenhouse gases, are influencing the climate and may impact the typical patterns associated with interglacial periods.
Secondly, Axial tilt, or obliquity, is the angle between Earth's rotational axis and its orbital plane. A greater tilt results in more extreme seasonal temperature variations, while a smaller tilt leads to milder seasons. These variations and contribute to the overall climate dynamics on Earth.
Thirdly, Precession involves the gradual shift in the orientation of Earth's rotational axis. This shift influences the timing of the seasons and affects the distribution of solar radiation.
That’s why the interplay
1940년대까지는 유럽 때문일 것이고
1980년대까지는 미국 때문일 것이고
1980년대부터는 중국 때문일 듯..
It would be nice if the correct data was presented. No sign of the dustbowl period?
The Dustbowl affected what, an area half the size of Continental US? So, an area about 0.5% of the surface of Earth? And it wasn't even CAUSED by weather or climactic conditions. It was primarily caused by over plowing after overplanting. Years of soil degradation. Compounded by a LOCAL DROUGHT. The video shows TEMPERATURE which is different than precipitation.
The dust bowl would not have been a dust bowl if so many farmers hadn't lost their farms and forced to move away, leaving their fields bare. All these factors just snowballed.
Which , ironically, is what the Earth's climate is doing now. It's called a feedback loop. The global temperature rises in this climatic change we're experiencing. That rise is experinced much more at the poles. The North Pole is covered in ice. It's a huge ocean that has - historically - been white with snow and ice, which reflects the sun's rays instead of absorbing it. When there's no sea ice, the sun's energy hits very dark sea water, which absorbs that energy. So - over time over many years, over several decades, the water temp slowly rises, meaning less white, more black. Which makes it warmer, leading to more open ocean and less white sea ice. That's one feedback loop.
The warming also thaws permafrost that's been frozen for hundreds of thousanbds of years. A good chunk of land on earth is in Siberia and Canada. It's permafrost. Int aht permafrost is all this dead, decomposed grass abd plants and also trapped gases like methane and CO2. As the permafrost thaws, that gas gets released and more grasses that died 100k years ago decompose releasing more and mroe. Methane is much more potent greenhouse gas tahn CO2. All those gasses cause more warming, which thaw more permafrost, releasing/crating more gasses, leading to more thawed permafrost, etc.
Nature's check on this runaway system is that the higher CO2 levels are like steroids for plants. The deserts recede. The jungles expand. producing more O2 as the plants breathe in that CO2. That and/or a giant volcano goes off or a meteor hits, which blocks the sun for a few years, hitting reset. Such an event would kill billions.
And the desserts are actually expanding, and jungles are receding so that isn't happening.
You might not believe me but I agree taht we need to question what they tell us. No matter who they are but especially when it's the govt. QUESTION EVERYTHING. I do. I have. I've independently convinced myself over and over of the inescapable truth.
But that doesn't mean they're right about everything. I'm sure there are aspects to Climate Change they have wrong
Science is a process of doubting your colleagues and trying to prove them wrong. Kinda.
Climate Change science has been doubted by the best for decades. The counter research has ben icnredibly well funded. The science has refined. Strengthing it's case.
Regardless, the arguments I hear from rando keyboard warriors and my more conservative , rural friends don't hold water. They're pretty thin. They tend to sound like a old country bumpkin from West Virginia Senator giving his spiel on the Senate floor.
Now some of these people I've debated are incredibly smart. Some are engineers at my old company. But most have little to no scientific training or education. Generally speaking, the more science/STEM education some one has, the less likely they are to be on that side of the argument.
And I'm saying this after working in Engineerning for 15 yrs. Before which i attended an agricultural college. Learnign enviro sci and ag engineering but from farmers
@@burtan2000 Thank you for your reply. I should have been more exact with my comment. What I was referring to is the temperature spike that occurred during the time of the dustbowl. (1930s) It doesn't appear on the spiral. It is a matter of historic record, written about and, reported all over the world. Everything you described has happened many times before and, we're still here. No one can deny that the climate of the planet is in a constant state of flux. No one can deny that computer modelling of weather is still in it's infancy. Most of the theories presented are derived from models. You are very correct to mention government influences. How does this one strike you? "DANGER! DANGER! The climate is dangerous and could kill us all, but WE, the government will tell ye all what to believe and what to do."......meanwhile, back at the ranch, " Right people, we have them all believing whatever we want, because they are afraid, so we can now control everything and force everybody to do as we say, now let's charge everybody air tax for the air they breathe. We can describe this new tax as a carbon tax and, head over to Asia on a junket and have great time and, set up a protocol, where folks can pay for air tax credits, but we will call it carbon tax." It is worth re-examining the movie by Al Gore, called An inconvenient truth from the 1990s, just to see how many of the predicted catastrophes actually occurred. Actually, none, is the answer. Indeed,one of the players in said movie actually bought a property in one of the endangered places. I think you will agree, too many people are telling lies, regarding climate, particularly the timelines that are presented. For me, I think it's a, "THE END IS NIGH" scenario.
Nor did it show the time period, during global warming, from the 1930s (the period I believe you referred to) to the 70s-80s era when temperatures were getting colder, so much so that numerous scientists were concerned about entering another ice age, again, during global warming.
@@seancassidy4812 Don't look up!
@@burtan2000 *"The Dustbowl affected what, an area half the size of Continental US? So, an area about 0.5% of the surface of Earth?"* At this point in time approximately 80% of all temp data was collected in the U.S.. Roughly 15% across Europe and Scandinavia and 5% for the rest of the world. 1930's temp data is regularly called "global" temp data. This temp data hardly represents the global average. It was quite some time before any temp data was even taken in Africa.
To compare any of this data to today's satellite data is ludicrous.
I want to see data regarding the medieval warm period c. 950 to c. 1250 and also the nationwide heatwave from 1936.
If you take the time to look it up you'll find that those were regional events and not globally warmer.
Lead by example
Soon to be updated with a + 2.0 C ring.
Before the present time.
i wish i get the raw data
data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.csv
That's in the description. I assume it it the raw data.
Using a sample of 29 years from anywhere but the middle allows for skewed results. I have to assume the portion selected, was selected because any other selected portion would not have produced the desired result.
But really interesting representation.
Yeah, what a bunch of dummies. I wonder what their scientific background is? not like a bunch of... oh, idk ROCKET SCIENTISTS and physicists. What are your PhD's in?
I concluded during the Iraq war and Bush/Cheney's boondogle that only the most irrefutable and thoroughly-corroborated evidence from the most respected of sources would convince the new class of ignorami. Either that or their ignorant opinions are eventually lost to the inevitable march of history built on established, widely accepted facts curated by experts in each respective field. More and more people - with the benefit of hindsight - see the more obvious facts and generally accept what we know happened. Sometimes the topics are too complex for that and the story is too intricate, like say the Iran Contra scandal. People remember generally that Reagan et al did something bad involving Iran and Nicaragua, maybe some cocaine and guns. I'm okay with that. I was okay with that paradigm.
But now we are in an era where a sizeable portion of the American public will - at times - refuse to accept objective fact when it's just too inconvenient or would require them to change their world view, admit they were wrong, or worse, admit the egghead experts in their ivory towers were right.
I mean it can be filmed live by hundreds of people. Dozens of diehard Right Wing conservatives widely respected can stand up and repeatedly say "yup, the blue rectangle was in fact a Blue rectangle and NOT a red circle."
Nope. The earth's tilt is moving AWAY from the sun and therefore we should be getting COLDER but instead we're getting HOTTER. That is what the data is showing and that is scientific consensus.
@@suicune2001 your reply doest actually address my post and science isn't a matter of consensus.
@@plunderfull6305 You basically said they cherry-picked this data in order to fool everyone into believing what they want us to believe. But from 1880 to present is the most reliable data we have.
@@suicune2001 My problem is that they selected 29 years on the back quarter of the time chart to represent the temperature average for the entire graph. Without bothering to crunch the numbers, I can tell sliding that 29 years either way would give a dramatically different representation.
:(
It would be more interesting if they could do this for the last 11000 years. Of course this would spoil the illusion and the misinformation. Some of you need to check the history of the full holocene.
There is no more to say!👍🏻
Can't do that, termometer didn't exist 150years ago
ok can you do the same but go back at least 300k years ?
Thats 1 way to show are effect on earth.
Question why don't they have the news play this video
That 3D printer is broken.
Really scary. o_o
Ok, where is the data?
you maybe new to YT, but there is that thing under the video call "Description". You can read it, and find the datas they use.
You're welcome
"These temperatures are based on data from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). Anomalies are defined relative to a base period of 1951 to 1980. The data file used to create this visualization can be accessed here: data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.csv. "
@@stephaner9493 LOL...the link for the data is gone, maybe you should comprehend the question before commenting.
@@DeltaSierra181 its a ".csv" document, not a html page.. like you can see at the end of the link..
it' mean you have to download the datas and open them with Excel or a software like that..
Works perfectly fine for me.
maybe you should try before commenting 😉
and if you want more that just raw data of the temperature and the dates?
I know he can be hard but you can use that new "google" thing and try typing "Nasa GISS" (like in the description) and you get every datas, publications, simulations, softwares, and all the things you wanted^^
@@stephaner9493 The data has been manipulated anyways, so the graphic is pointless.
Does a good job but most people don’t understand the context of it considering we were in a freezing period ie a miniature Ice Age till 1850.
The rapid change since the release of fossil fuel emissions is 10s of times more rapid than a post glacial warming and contrary to natural cycles. SEE: 2degrees institute climate dashboard. (in menu, upper right of first graph.).
What a pretty picture. So what?
No contextual data over the millennia. And no dispositive info on data provenance!
Nothing about bird migration either. Not every video is about every subject.
So 4 1/2 billion years and we draw a conclusion based on 137 year segment?
Industrialization comes with extra co and co2 from factories, refineries, generators, vehicles... These extra source of co2 messed balance of co2 trapped in earth's atmosphere. Usually the ocean will absorb most of the co2 and leave a super delicate balance off 0.3 ppm co2 in the air. Those leftover co2 trapped heat energy radiated from the sun in the atmosphere, and keep earth in a ideal temperature for living things to grow. Back to what matter, surely, our co2 emission is just a fraction of the earth's natural emission but only 40% of those extra co2 is absorbed by the ocean. And again, because co2 is heat retentive, extra co2 = extra heat. Therefore, the temperature increases. Through out recent million of years, change of 0.1ppm of co2 usually happens slowly and gradually over a few thousand years. And we managed to do so in just 120 years post industrialization. A rapid change like that is absolutely can cause harm to a lot of species, including human.
Yes! which is like 5 minutes!
Please explain with your vast knowledge how 98% of the scientists working on the climate are wrong.
@@Bobywan75 Ok, that's easy. You can't produce the list of 98% of scientists that are in agreement.....especially CLIMATE scientists!! No?
Humans weren't around 4.5 billion years ago.
The truth which is denied due to egocentric reasons.
Temperature: raises by less than 1 degree celsius from the industrial revolution, 2 world wars, nuclear testing hundreds of atomic bombs and world population increase by 6 billion.
NASA employee 1: "its not scary enough"
NASA employee 2: "make the line a red colour"
Best comment ever 👍🏻
@@gelberalterdoppeldecker7142 thank u sir
“Fear means you're smart. You understand the risks.”
Looks like ww2 made it increase alot!
This is absolute proof that the Earth spins around the sun...and that everything is perfectly normal. It's 53°F here and now. I guess 200 years in the future, it might be 54°F.
Due to displacement of the core in 1998 according to Medicin Italian center ., the planet's rotation accelarates , and its centrifugal force is growing.
For this reason magma sources in the mantle began to sharply rise to the surface ( imagine the washing machine) undermining and heating the lithosphere from the inside.
Consequently , magma rising in the area of lower pressure expands in volume and boils up. Its pressure on the earth's crust increases. The expansion of magma pushes apart the tectonic plates, increases volcanic and seismic activity across the planet and causes the number of cracks in the crust to grow rapidly.
Through these cracks , water from the surface escapes deep into the crust. The thin oceanic crust is ruptured by magma causing the ocean to heat up at the bottom. Rising magma leads to an increase in geothermal flow from the earth's bowels beneath the glaciers of West Antarctica and Central Greenland which melts glaciers from the bottom up.
Numerous facts of increasing geothermal anomalies : cases of water boiling in wells, permafrost melting at great depths, and methane explosions have been recorded. Further prediction of the trends of rapid geodynamic and climatic changes indicates that in the coming decades due to the rise of magma, a massive melting of glaciers will begin along with the rise in sea level. Increasing the number and the power of disastrous earthquakes, typhoons and hurricane winds, stratovolcanoes will erupt, which will lead to a long volcanic winter and disappearance of most life forms including humans. Based on objective forecast, we have only five or ten years at most. Changes similar to what we now see occured before the peak of the crushing disaster just about 12,000 years ago. Those events are called The Allerød oscillation and the Younger Dryas glaciation that followed.
12,800 years ago global temperatures rose as much as 15 degrees Celcius within just a few years. Most of the ice sheets suddenly melted. And the earth emerged from a full Ice Age. At that time, there were extreme floods and other natural disasters along with an intense sea level rise. The Gulf Stream stopped at that time just as it is happening nowadays. Scientists from the university of Kansas have proven that about 12,800 years ago there was a giant fire on earth that covered a tenth of the entire planet's surface. Other researchers have also found that large fires raged in Siberia 12,000 years ago. Similarly, nowadays, there are more and more large scale fires that cannot be extinguished. ( for example Lahaina , Hawaii, August 2023) Based on an analysis of satellite images , scientists have discovered that 10,000 to 13,000 years ago the largest known dunes formed in the Sahara Desert and other regions indicating the enormous strength of winds during the Younger Dryas. A short term intensification of winds during that period has also been documented from Greenland ice cores data and research in Alaska. Nowadays, the same phenomena are happening on earth as during the Younger Dryas. We see winds, hurricanes , typhoons and tornadoes intensifying and destroying entire cities razing them to the ground.
Right at the cycle change, 12,000 years ago, there was a very intensive seismic activity. This is indicated by radio carbon data as well as paleographic reconstructions of the Younger Dryas. During the same time period, more than 12,000 years ago as well as now, there was a drastic weakening of the magnetic field and a pole shift , which was called The Gothenburg Excursion.
The reason for all these abrupt changes was an abnormal magmatic activity caused by changes in the core. This was expressed in large scale volcanic eruptions that scientists recorded in the Younger Dryas by dust and traces of acid rain in glacial cores. Analysis of sediments found in Hauls cave points to voclanic eruptions that caused a volcanic winter about 13,000 years ago and glaciation across the globe.
After the sudden warming in the Younger Dryas an equally abrupt cooling occured. This event caused a mass extinction of megafauna. Thousands of frozen mammoths and other mammals were found in the ice on the northern slopes of Siberia. There happened a drastic decline in the human population including extinction of the Cro-Magnon.
All of those catastrophic events occured within just a few decades.
The same catastrophic events occured on the planet not only 12,000 years ago but also earlier. Taking into account errors in dating , this cycle is very well traced in the geological data. Catastophists among scientists wrote about it independently of each other in their books and works.
Holy fuck that's terrifying
weird to choose a circle to represent it, its going to look much more sporadic as the temp increases because its in the outer diameter of the circle
More like "impossible spiral" as most of the Earth didn't have any temperature recordings before the 1950s.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_temperature_record
@DSAK55 There will be huge parts of the globe where no measurements will have been taken until the advent of satellite technology towards the end of the 70s. During the latter half of the nineteenth century reliable records are only really available from parts of Europe, USA and eastern Australia, with a very small number of reliable stations outside of that. Even before 1950 there are essentially no GHCN-Daily stations in South America, India, S. E. Asia, China, Africa, or around the Poles.
Your beloved spiral is a fabrication.
And what's written on Wikipedia is not evidence.
How many times in the past our planet have warmed and cooled again ?
Don t be afraid of anything, this is a normal procedure with just a little more speed.
At least the previous times that have happened this, people weren't forced to pay taxes for that.
Greetings from Athens !!!
Nikolas
Taxi driver
With "a little more speed" your taxi would be going 2,000 km/hr. How safe would that be?
@@Malpheron study the past 500,000 years Earth's temperature graphs and see the natural cycles of glacial and interglacial periods.
These temperature variations are primarily driven by changes in Earth's orbit and axial tilt, known as Milankovitch cycles.
Data from ice cores and sediment layers, indicate that Earth has experienced multiple ice ages and warm periods.
During glacial periods, large ice sheets extend over much of the northern hemisphere, while interglacial periods, like the current one, are characterized by warmer conditions with smaller ice sheets.
The current period of Earth's climate is commonly referred to as the Holocene epoch. It is an interglacial period between ice ages when the climate warms, and ice sheets and glaciers retreat.
The Holocene epoch, which began around 11,700 years ago, is an example of an interglacial period. These natural variations in Earth's climate are influenced by factors like orbital changes, solar radiation, and axial tilt.
It's worth noting that within the Holocene, the fluctuations in temperature we are seeing now, are not as high as at the peaks of other interglacial periods these are normal fluctuations and variations in earth’s climate and man made climate change is a myth being manipulated to take more money out of the hands of the common people
The good news about global warming is that it’s not being caused by increasing solar output or any other natural uncontrollable cause - and also that mankind generally understands that it’s the ‘amplified greenhouse effect’ which is responsible for increasing global temperatures. With this in mind, it behooves us to rapidly advance and apply our scientific and technological knowledge to the point that the burning of fossil fuels to produce electricity will become as antiquated as the burning of whale oil for light.
Quote: “Anxiety must go. It must be replaced by faith and solemn confidence in the outworking of the divine plan.”
Note: As sunlight (photons) is warming the surface of the world, surface heat energy is also radiating away from our planet in the form of ‘infrared radiation’ which passes freely thru the atmospheric gases of nitrogen and oxygen which do not absorb heat. Indeed, if it weren’t for greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide that ‘do interact’ strongly with infrared energy and ‘impede the escape’ of Earth’s radiant heat, then the planet would be perpetually frozen solid. Thankfully, even though greenhouse gases comprise only 4/10ths of one percent of the atmosphere, they are so powerful that they maintain a ‘blanketing effect’ by constantly ‘absorbing and releasing’ infrared heat energy over and over, again and again. In doing so, they gyrate wildly, thus causing them to vigorously collide with other atmospheric molecules which, in turn, collide with other air molecules, imparting the kinetic energy of motion throughout the atmosphere - and this vibratory state registers as temperature.
For the big picture, search:
Marcott reconstruction chart
For more, search:
‘CO2 infrared radiation quantum level’
‘Amplified greenhouse effect’
‘Doable drawdown solution global warming’
Ted Cruz can't read this graph... in spite of two college degrees. Or does the oil conglomerate have him under their thumb, and he is a paid participant?
WHO BELIEVES NASA AND THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT? 😂
Doesnt look as horrible as hippies says
The temperature around here varies 80 or 90 degrees over the course of a year. Everyone and everything seems to have few problems adapting. A degree per century seems trivial compared to all the other problems we have.
"A degree per century seems trivial"
The key word here is SEEMS.
2 things... A. this visualization is in 'C. not 'F, and B. This is a global average. Meening that many already hot places see a much greater Max temp - which likely leads to a loss in arable land, and water security issues in those regions.
But sure, where I live would probably see few disruptions even with a +2' temp rise.
@Matthew Morycinski We'll increase a degree in a shorter time next time we reach that milestone. And a shorter time still the time after that.
It’s not the people who can’t adapt. It’s the flora and fauna. And if these die en masse in forest fires, droughts, diseases and change of local climate there will be no food and water for us.
So yeah, then we are stuck with soilent green?
Just imagine how much extra energy it takes to warm the whole planet for 2 degrees and so fast. All that extra energy will have some effects in our environment.
Dr Roy Spencer, the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on NASA's Aqua satellite, described this graph as "very deceptive".
Anthony Watts did some work on Hawkin's spiral to demonstrate the deception:
1) It gives post 1950 data far more visual weight due to increased line length and surface area of pixels that make up those lines. When the spiral is tipped sideways at the end of the video you can see the deception more easily - it's obvious the latest years have the longest line length.
2) The colour scale choice visually weights the present data far more than the older data, shrinking it’s impact. Humans don't perceive colours linearly.
3) The longer lines near the edge of the circle. Because they are longer, it makes it appear in the animation as if they are moving faster due to the increased length (accelerating).
As far as I can tell (having no access to the visualization data) neither line width nor speed at which the spiral is traveling carry any specific weight/ meaning in regards to the depiction of data; calling it a deception assumes that these effects skew the data being presented. They do not. As for the color choice, the color scale is only one part of how this visualization is communicating data. The circle diameter also tells a similar story. It could have been any number of colors (or even monochrome) and would have had much the same impact. Watt's criticism lies largely in that he didn't like the color scheme. Are there issues with depicting the data this way? Yes. But the same can be said for ANY visualization (traditional line and bar graphs included). That does not mean they're deceptive, it means the onus is on us to better understand what is being presented.
@@coledenisen520 Well, I can see you're not very good with mathematics. You might want to stop there before you make a fool of yourself.
@@fixie1238 That's a pretty large logical leap from one data point, and I made no such claims of being 'good with math'. Mathematics itself is a pretty wide-ranging field. Considering you are relying on other people's arguments, your capabilities have also yet to be demonstrated. I was simply pointing out that Watt's argument does not demonstrate a deception of any kind, and, in fact, relies largely on questioning how the data may be perceived rather than issues with the data itself. Deception implies intent. Data visualization is inherently imperfect. An imperfect depiction does not mean deception has occurred or is occurring. Perhaps you would like to explain your position further, or even actually give your position, considering you have yet to do so.
@@coledenisen520 Explain my position? Well, my position is that CAGW is a hopelessly useless hypothesis, particularly when you bear in mind that the absorption abilities of CO2 are logarithmic. The fact that CO2 levels have been much higher in the past when life flourished, rather than burning to a crisp, is tangible proof that CO2 levels have a minimal effect on the climate. There is no empirical proof of CO2 causing CAGW. Absolutely none. Nada. Zilch. Just a load of hopelessly wrong models that produce junk results.
There ya go.
@@fixie1238 So you're not necessarily opposed to the data depiction, rather, you are challenging the assumptions and science behind the data. Sound about right?
While a dramatic presentation, the presentation form is inherently prejudiced and misrepresentative. Specifically, positive deviation has significantly higher visual impact than negative deviation. This is largely because outward (warmer) deviation has greater diameter/path length, but also because inward (cooler) deviation is hidden by crowded / compressed presentation space. I love this presentation because it is so dramatic. I think it represents the truth - but does it with a lie. Global warming is an issue too important to be represented with lies...
Have you reviewed the earths 500,000 year temperature graphs?
😄 They forget to mention they Corect their measurments with about +1,5 degree.
Give and take +- 2 degrees accuracy.
Activists... anyone can name his channel as "Nasa something".
TH-cam accepts propaganda.
CO² is 100% recyclable.
Where are these temperatures measured?
How this "average" is composed?
I know this is long, but bear with me:
How are we getting global temperature data points from the 1880's? You're saying this is showing anomalies from an average? It's rather convenient that the average is taken from the coldest period ever recorded in recent times. We did not have a global network of temperature data points to know what was average back in the 1880's. The only places that have long term daily temperature records is the United States, Europe, and parts of Japan, and those data points show a substantial increase in temperature during the 1930's (Dust Bowl era) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_North_American_heat_wave - Shown as but a blip on this graph. As well as showing substantial cooling during the 60's and into the early 70's - www.sciencenews.org/sn-magazine/march-1-1975 - (Again this is where they are getting their "average" from) It is not possible to accurately plot global monthly temperature variations that far back (1880's) when there wasn't a global network of weather stations on earth back then. We only started recording temperatures and the south pole in the late 50's. Which by the way "a South Pole weather station recorded six months of record cold temperatures in 2021", which will be dismissed as "simply weather", but any 3 day span with record heat anywhere on the planet is more proof of disastrous climate change.
I'm not saying we can't improve our planet, but we will kill 100’s of millions of people by exposure and starvation if we simply flip the switch to a non-fossil fuel power source. Look at what's happening in Germany right now with the potential loss of gas and oil supplies from Russia. There is real concern about people suffering - and again the poor will suffer the most. We are not yet ready to make that change globally. The poorest of countries and poorest of people will suffer the greatest if we make that switch too soon. And there is nothing green about mining the cobalt, nickel, and lithium needed for the EV revolution. We will be emitting as much if not more greenhouse gases switching to renewables and have done nothing to lower global temperatures. Which I question our ability to do that any ways. The medieval warming period happened without increased CO2 and the oceans have risen 400 feet in the last 8000 years. There are so many things that influence our global climate, not just CO2.
If we really are this certain of a planetary disaster, then why aren't we showing it by our actions? Why are coastal properties still so desirable? Why are we buying cars? (and I mean any car - EV or ICE - they both contribute substantially to our carbon footprint). Perhaps we see that the earth isn't really falling apart as "they" say. We've been told the "end is near" since I was in junior high in the 1980's
dailycaller.com/2018/09/21/maldives-global-warming-sea-level/
We were told that we will see a 10-30 foot sea level rise by the year 1990 . . . 2000 . . . 2010 . . . 2020 . . . but the reality is that we aren't seeing that kind of increase, not by a long shot. Miami isn't covered by 20 feet of ocean, it's still just as desirable a place to live as it was 40 years ago.
Let's not allow manipulated graphs and sketchy data points to lead us down an accelerated path that will create more damage and more suffering than if we allow the natural order of change to take place and make sure the poor do not suffer because of fear of not doing enough - fast enough, when what we are seeing in the real world doesn't match what the alarmist are showing with their graphs. Unfortunately money has become the driving force, not rational, logical science.
news.yahoo.com/fighting-climate-change-a-150-trillion-battle-bank-of-america-report-163422676.html
You some oil industry simp
Why average people aren't doing anything about it definitely isn't because it's not real. There's so many things we're apathetic to....
Just wondering - could you do a spiral graph like this for the last 10,000 years? You could easily use the Vostok Ice core data for the recreation. Whoops, forgot - you're trying to push a narrative, and the construction for the last 10,000 years has already been done. It shows that we are significantly cooler now than 10,000 years ago. Hopefully someone in your organization brave enough to stand the inevitable slurs could put out the data on this - but I am skeptical.
Just wondering if they move the goalposts for you where you will want to move them next. Just wondering.
@@choochtrain This guy is right, just go look at the average global temp from the greenland ice cores and see for yourself. This is nothing but a storm in a tea cup. Any man foolish enough to believe he can contorl the earth tempreture is an egotistical maniac of the highest order.
@@dronezone2955 Really? Thank you so much for your expert opinion. Are you a climate scientist? I didn't see any "lee B" listed under WikiPedia's "List of climate scientists." Did they miss you in the list? Where did you get your PhD?
And how does it help us that it was cooler back then when our usual crop is not growing anymore and the sea floods the cities?
@@mightypirat9875 You are mistaken - it is cooler now, not cooler back then. The sea is NOT flooding cities, tidal gauges show the same yearly sea level rise as has occurred over the last 200 years with almost no variation. Satellite images clearly show that there has been significant 'greening' of the world because CO2 is plant food, not pollution. The DATA show modest warming over the last 50 years but nothing out of the ordinary and the world has been warmer in the past, as I stated above.
Oh no... 1 degree c over 142 years. Scary stuff...
or over 20 years? Hahha its exponentialy growing btw.
@@andrewsneacker1256 Not for our lifetime. And it's still not a danger to the world. Humans, maybe. But not the world.
@@deatheb lol we are talking about humans. who the heck talks about "the world". You watched george carlin too much smh
@@deatheb well...since we ARE humans then it seems like we should be worried then lol
@@radscorpion8 I'm not worried. Humans don't deserve the world anyways.
Earth's temp started to rise right when emission controls went on cars: 1973. So, emission controls on cars is causing the Earth's temp to rise?
stop smoking crack and postion on the internet. pls
@@andrewsneacker1256 What does postion mean? Stop smoking crack.
@somedeveloperblokey It is kinda funny though. that the temp started rising right when emission controls went on cars, and continued to go up as emission controls got tighter.
To be related to the size of the global car fleet between 1973 and today.
And concerning the technical constraints of gas emission control, where I live, they were effective in 1992. With a level of tolerance that didn't change until 2019.
Cars are not the main cause.
Back to school for you…
No. 1930' s were highest temperatures. Randall Carlson, you tube freemasonry member. Concludes the highest temperatures were in the 1930- 1940. Our temperatures today are not recent highs.
Different metric. Sounds like he was talking of record high temperatures (Summer in day time). True, that is more impactful. The metric plotted is a globally and annually averaged air temperature. As example, California has warmed much less than that average and has been from warmer nights, not hotter days.