Latest Data Shows Global Climate Continues Warming Trend

by Nancy Atkinson on January 21, 2014

Want to stay on top of all the space news? Follow @universetoday on Twitter

Chart of the temperature anomalies for 1950-2013, also showing the phase of the El Niñ0-La Niña cycle. (Image Credit: NASA/GSFC/Earth Observatory, NASA/GISS)

Chart of the temperature anomalies for 1950-2013, also showing the phase of the El Niñ0-La Niña cycle. (Image Credit: NASA/GSFC/Earth Observatory, NASA/GISS)

The latest statistics are in from 2013 and both NASA’s and NOAA’s measurements of global temperatures show Earth continued to experience temperatures warmer than those measured several decades ago.

NASA scientists say 2013 tied with 2009 and 2006 for the seventh warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures, while NOAA – which uses a different method of analyzing temperature data – said that 2013 tied with 2003 as 4th-warmest year globally since 1880.

“The long-term trends are very clear, and they’re not going to disappear,” said climatologist Gavin Schmidt from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). “It isn’t an error in our calculations.”

Land and ocean global temperatures in 2013 from both NASA and NOAA. Via NASA.

Land and ocean global temperatures in 2013 from both NASA and NOAA. Via NASA.

NASA data shows that since 1950, average temperatures have increased 1.1°F to an average of 58.3° in 2013.

NOAA data shows the average temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.12 degrees above the 20th-century average. This is the 37th consecutive year that the annual temperature was above the long-term average.

This coincides with another recent study that showed the so-called “pause” in global warming is not happening, and that the temperatures over the past 15 years are still on the rise.

Both NASA and NOAA scientists say the increase in greenhouse gas levels continue to drive the temperature increase.

Additionally, with the exception of 1998, the 10 warmest years in the 134-year record all have occurred since 2000, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the warmest years on record.

NASA says the average temperature in 2013 was 58.3 degrees Fahrenheit (14.6 Celsius), which is 1.1 F (0.6 C) warmer than the mid-20th century baseline. The average global temperature has risen about 1.4 degrees F (0.8 C) since 1880, according to the new analysis. Exact rankings for individual years are sensitive to data inputs and analysis methods.

“Long-term trends in surface temperatures are unusual and 2013 adds to the evidence for ongoing climate change,” GISS climatologist Gavin Schmidt said. “While one year or one season can be affected by random weather events, this analysis shows the necessity for continued, long-term monitoring.”

Scientists emphasize that weather patterns always will cause fluctuations in average temperatures from year to year, but the continued increases in greenhouse gas levels in Earth’s atmosphere are driving a long-term rise in global temperatures. Each successive year will not necessarily be warmer than the year before, but with the current level of greenhouse gas emissions, scientists expect each successive decade to be warmer than the previous.

More from NASA:

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that traps heat and plays a major role in controlling changes to Earth’s climate. It occurs naturally and also is emitted by the burning of fossil fuels for energy. Driven by increasing man-made emissions, the level of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere presently is higher than at any time in the last 800,000 years.

The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere was about 285 parts per million in 1880, the first year in the GISS temperature record. By 1960, the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, measured at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii, was about 315 parts per million. This measurement peaked last year at more than 400 parts per million.

While the world experienced relatively warm temperatures in 2013, the continental United States experienced the 42nd warmest year on record, according to GISS analysis. For some other countries, such as Australia, 2013 was the hottest year on record.

The temperature analysis produced at GISS is compiled from weather data from more than 1,000 meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea-surface temperature, and Antarctic research station measurements, taking into account station history and urban heat island effects. Software is used to calculate the difference between surface temperature in a given month and the average temperature for the same place from 1951 to 1980. This three-decade period functions as a baseline for the analysis. It has been 38 years since the recording of a year of cooler than average temperatures.

The GISS temperature record is one of several global temperature analyses, along with those produced by the Met Office Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom and NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. These three primary records use slightly different methods, but overall, their trends show close agreement.

You can read NASA’s press release here, and NOAA’s here. Here is a link to a presentation of the data released today from Gavin Schmidt of NASA and Tom Karl, director of NOAA’s Climatic Data Center.

Editor’s note: First quote from Gavin Schmidt is from Jacob Ward on Twitter.

About 

Nancy Atkinson is Universe Today's Senior Editor. She also works with Astronomy Cast, and is a NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador.

dusanmal January 21, 2014 at 5:08 PM

Yes, warming continues and good, single source, long term data (Greenland and Antarctic ice core) supports that statement for last 200 years or so…

What we and author forget is to ask are 2 crucial questions (maybe even 3):

1) From what temperature level have this warming started? – Same trusted, published, peer reviewed sources supporting 200 years of warming say… from the coldest period in last 10000 years. Also known as a “Little Ice Age”. Not from some long term average. From the coldest temperatures in human history.

2) OK, but we are warming up for 200 years, aren’t we now in a very hot period? – Same trusted, published, peer reviewed sources supporting 200 years of warming say… – No. Despite 200 years of warming we are still in the coldest 10% years in the last 10000 years. We are not even near average, normal Earth temperature in the last 10000 years.

Scientists who are not asking these two questions and who blindfold themselves to obviously known “Little Ice Age” period preceding this warming are not completely honest.

3) Third question is more social and is not scientifically needed but is very socially important: OK, but is warming detrimental to humanity? – Overlay of human ups and downs over above mentioned ice core temperature records point to exact opposite: cultural booms and human prosperity happen at the temperature peaks, wars, decay, dark ages,… in cold periods. Minoans, hot; Egyptians; hot; Greece and Rome – hot; … fall of Rome – cold; medieval boom – hot; Napoleon, Hitler, terrorism – coldest 10%. Humanity prospers in warm periods. Whatever causes global warming, it is a) Bringing us back toward normal, average Earth temperature over human history and b) It is good for us.

Attached one of many Greenland ice core Earth temperature data graphs with human growth/decay periods overlaid…

Coacervate January 21, 2014 at 10:16 PM

The answer to your questions is physics. You would do well to learn some.

zlop January 22, 2014 at 1:35 AM

Without a PHD in Global Warming,
Stupid dunderhead Serfs, think it is cooling.

zlop January 22, 2014 at 1:18 AM

GISP2 records ended in1855 (1950 was year zero).
In the past, the 1,050 year cycle peak was ~16 years long.
It has split in 2, conductions have changed.
Indicating end of interglacial effects, the 4,500 year cycle is missing.
It is an inter-modulation problem – more complex than a diode mixer.

AABAR January 22, 2014 at 12:14 PM

GISP2 data ends at 1905 – year 0 is 2000 AD: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/metadata/noaa-icecore-2475.html – if you read the paper there’s 1% uncertainty, bear in mind it’s reconstructed – the newest NASA/NOAA results show almost 1 degree C in around 60 years, whereas GISP2 show around 0.5 degree in 200 years since the little ice age, seems we are warmer than the middle ages now, hence our growth – if you want to go further back, are you just relying on GISP2, what about other measurements? Anyway, if its not hot enough where you are, you can move to warmer parts of the world, see if it makes you more productive…

zlop January 22, 2014 at 1:22 PM

“GISP2 data ends at 1905″ — Someone quoted an email from Alley stating that year Zero was 1950 — there are several others claiming that 1855 is the last data year.

Would be interesting to correlate several previous
Vostok inter-glacials, to determine nonlinear mixing.
(similar to a diode producing harmonics and intermod)

“what about other measurements?”
Polar regions non-linearly magnify global averages.

“you can move to warmer parts of the world”
I live on top of unconsolidated Glacial debris.
Agenda 21 is slower implemented here.

AABAR January 22, 2014 at 7:41 PM

Is GISP2 not polar enough? 72 North

Anyway I am from 2 North, prob never had glaciers here (no mountains either). I need more air conditioning! Too bad there’s not enough resources for 7 billion people to live like Americans….

Shootist January 22, 2014 at 7:18 PM

Dairy farms in Greenland c. 850CE-1200CE
Grape vines in Caledonia. 100CE-400CE, 1250CE <–Letters from Britain to Rome, Doomesday book (King John).

We are most assuredly NOT warmer than that 350 year period centered around 1000 CE.

AABAR January 22, 2014 at 7:39 PM

You’re comparing regional with global temperatures?

Anyway, by the logic of you guys, just raise the temperature a bit & then we’ll have farms in Greenland & vines in Scotland. Too bad about the equatorial regions (where I am)

JohnJubly January 21, 2014 at 10:21 PM

Um. To my untrained eye that graph still looks like no warming for a decade and a half.

John Don January 21, 2014 at 11:34 PM

Uh dusanmal aren’t you worried about runaway greenhouse gas warming,you know like Venus.We’ll just discount a few factors to make it seem equitable……Good points,more people die from cold than heat as a rule and it makes sense that civilizations would blossom as a result. I believe the temp has only risen by .8 of a degree since 1880,however gloom and doom sells so follow the money.

Din Sel January 22, 2014 at 2:34 PM

Of course rising sea levels taking over the habitat of a large % of the population is of no concern

GunillaBx January 22, 2014 at 4:07 PM

Here in Sweden we are lowering the piers where passenger ferrys dock. There has been too many incidents where people break their legs when they are jumping from the piers into the ferry. When the piers were made about 100 years ago the were level with the decks of the ferry. (The ferrys are the same and kept as sort-of museums for nostalgic reasons). But pay no attention to this minor discrepancy between myth and reallity…

AABAR January 22, 2014 at 8:43 PM

People in Bangladesh shouldn’t worry then…

GunillaBx January 23, 2014 at 10:38 AM

If you have an archipelago, and one island is disappearing, the most likely thing is that the island is sinking. It happens all the time. It is VERY unlikely, to say the least, that the water is rising around that island only, don’t you agree? If you don’t, try to make a hill of water in your bathtub.

There are hundres or thousands of coral reefs in the pacific that extends just a few feet above the surface. They seem to do just fine, and people are building hotels and airports on some of them.

GunillaBx January 23, 2014 at 10:49 AM

Sorry to make you disspointed about the Maldives (or the Malvinas as your president called them).

This what the worlds leading scientist on sea level change, Nils Erik Morner, says about the Maldives and sea level:
——————————————————

Scientist Nils Morner also gave a few summarized facts in the Maldives:

(1) In the last 2000 years, sea level has oscillated with 5 peaks reaching
between 0.6m to 1.2 m above the present sea level

(2) From 1790 to 1970 sea level was about 20 cm higher than today

(3) In the 1970s, sea level fell by about 20 cm to its present level

(4) Sea level has remained stable for the last 30 years, implying that there
are no traces of any alarming on-going sea level rise.

(5) Therefore, we are able to free the Maldives (and the rest of low-lying coasts and island around the globe) from the condemnation of becoming flooded in the near future.

Din Sel January 23, 2014 at 5:04 PM

All the available records show that Sea levels are on the rise since 100 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Trends_in_global_average_absolute_sea_level,_1870-2008_(US_EPA).png

It has risen by 6 inches in the last 100 years. So these Docks in Sweden if they were built 100 years ago, then the sea level then would have been 6 inches (15 cm) lower.

No doubt such a small change would not account for “too many incidents where people break their legs when they are jumping from the piers into the ferry”

There is something called “Tides”, a seasonal change of Sea level brought on by gravitational pull of the Moon.

To use that line about people breaking legs to say that 100 years ago the Sea levels were higher is beyond idiotic.

All the measured data by respected institutions show otherwise. Where do clowns like you come from.

Craig Tevis January 25, 2014 at 8:29 PM
GunillaBx January 26, 2014 at 4:35 AM

Actually, all avaiable records show that the sea levels has been rising for the last 20 000 years. The reason we have to lower the piers in sweden is land rise. Sweden has been rising relative to the sea level about 90 cm the last century. This combined with a high pressure over Stockholm and boarding the “Djursholm ferry” becomes a dare devil act. My point is that “sea level change” is a little bit more complicated than what you may have thought.

Kapitalist January 22, 2014 at 12:14 AM

Ehm, no!
The graph obviously shows that there was a temporary warming in the 1970s-1990s, but that the level was flat both before and after that period.

zlop January 22, 2014 at 1:06 AM

62 year cycle peaked in 2002. 200 year cycle in decline since 2010.
Scary is the splitting of the 1,050 year cycle peak.
1930 and 2000 year decades were high.
Ice Age Doom is coming soon.

Kapitalist January 22, 2014 at 1:15 AM

Anyone can find “cycles” in any amount of data about anything. Without theory to explain them, such findings are useless for the purposes of prediction and understanding.

zlop January 22, 2014 at 1:26 AM

Systems have innate characteristics.
Temperatures do not repeat the past, only rhyme with it.

Kapitalist January 22, 2014 at 3:47 AM

I don’t understand why this blog lets itself to controversial political climate propaganda. Shouldn’t it instead be on the topic of astronomy and space exploration?

Dav_Daddy January 22, 2014 at 5:09 AM

Agreed. If someone is trying to say the average temperature is higher now I would have to agree.

If the statement is it is continuing to hotter right now. Well the data doesn’t seem to agree with that assumption.

For the record we still need to cut down on CO2 pollution. The elephant in the room everyone overlooks is that the seas are becoming more acidic by taking up all this carbon. Considering how much of humanities food comes from the ocean this could be a very big very real problem at some point in the near future.

zlop January 22, 2014 at 8:44 AM

“we still need to cut down on CO2 pollution”?
CO2 is not pollution — “Julia Gillard Assification”

“reservoir or pipe? do we need to treat the CO2 in air as a reservoir or as a pipe connecting all living things?” — CO2 bubbles and oozes out of the Ocean floor, even near Coral Reefs, nothing abnormal.

Zoutsteen from Holland January 22, 2014 at 5:14 AM

could someone translate those tiny fractions of degrees into Energy Joules?

zlop January 22, 2014 at 8:53 AM

IPCC informs that there is not enough data to determine the temperature of the missing heat, hiding in the Ocean Deep “Climate change report: science fiction”

Zoutsteen from Holland January 22, 2014 at 10:00 AM

Deep ocean and ice melt hide total Joules needed for the temperature increase.
So I don’t think you need to worry that the surplus in Energy will be off scale in the wrong direction.

zlop January 22, 2014 at 10:12 AM

AS proof of Deep Ocean Warming, IPCC failed to display,
cooked Deep Sea Monsters.

Zoutsteen from Holland January 22, 2014 at 7:17 PM

Okay, i finally understand what you’re saying. Than we should hurry to spill oil first and wait for fried fish. But that’s my taste buds speaking.

Shootist January 22, 2014 at 7:19 PM

Could someone tell me how whole planet fractional temperatures fit within the Standard Error of Measurement?

Dyson says the climate statistics are pooched. I agree.

Jason Blankenship January 22, 2014 at 12:31 PM

I used to be a firm believer in man-made global warming, now I have some doubts. Where I live, it was the 4th coldest summer since records started, Alaska had their shortest and coldest summer on record, both poles are experiencing record ice sheet coverage, and globally, there were more cold records set in 2013, than warm records set. So, after all that is considered, how can it be that the year was one of the warmest ever? It makes no logical sense.

Olaf2 January 22, 2014 at 1:31 PM

I will use your mindset and confuse local weather with global climate to debunk you.

2013 Alaska Heat Wave: Record-Breaking Temperatures Bake 49th State
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/19/baked-alaska-unusual-hea_n_3463563.html

U.S. Heat Wave 2012: What’s Behind The Hot Weather?http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/03/us-heat-wave-2012-hot-weather_n_1646462.html

Brutal July heat a new U.S. recordhttp://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/08/us/temperature-record/index.html

Record heat in Australia fuels wildfires as temperatures soar over 100ºF

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/record-heat-in-australia-fuels-wildfires-as-temperatures-soar-over-100f/2013/01/08/fcf8f04a-59a0-11e2-88d0-c4cf65c3ad15_blog.html

Jason Blankenship January 23, 2014 at 9:20 AM

And yet… http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/09/28/shortest-summer-on-record-in-alaska/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/And-global-COOLING-Return-Arctic-ice-cap-grows-29-year.html

I’m not confusing “local weather” with anything, I’m just showing examples from various places that show things like more cold records than warm, a growing of the ice sheets, and short summers, to merely pose the question of whether there is actual warming occurring.

Olaf2 January 23, 2014 at 12:52 PM

And I am shooting down every single cold claim with a record breaking heat wave claim. Nothing more than using the same technique you are using to show that it is getting colder.

Just Google “record breaking heat wave”.

In other words, cherry picking cold places as proof does not work. Because I can cherry pick hot places.

Craig Tevis January 25, 2014 at 8:36 PM

“… both poles are experiencing record ice sheet coverage…”
Sorry, but the Arctic is a long way from record coverage. The current sea ice extent is well below the 1981 – 2010 average.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

Craig Tevis January 25, 2014 at 8:50 PM

Where did you get your info on the Alaska summer? NOAA shows the state average for June 2013 was 3.99°F above the 1971-2000 average. July was 1.70°F above that average and August 2.07°F above. For the year Alaska was 1.79°F over that average.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/alaska/tmp/ytd/12

Aqua4U January 22, 2014 at 3:29 PM

STILL part of the 99.99%… How’s about you?

Kapitalist January 22, 2014 at 8:47 PM

How rare was Galileo? One in a million?
Well, one’s enough if you’re right. He sent telescopes to princes so that they could see for themselves what he had discovered. Maybe someone should send thermometers to ministers and journalists today?

Stoner January 22, 2014 at 8:27 PM

Looks like Ms. Atkinson got the White House memo to move global warming into the light again.
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/195436-sanders-major-tv-networks-must-stop-ignoring-climate-change.
Most people have far more important things going on, like shoveling snow There must be far better things to spend NASA (and my) money on. But if it advances an agenda and gives them a reason to go to work I guess that’s good enough. (sarcasm)

Shootist January 22, 2014 at 8:28 PM

Waiting to grow oranges in Alaska.

AABAR January 22, 2014 at 8:49 PM

You can always import if you’re not satisfied with what you can grow locally: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardening_in_Alaska

Too bad where I am (equator) it’s not cold enough to grow some of those (except in highlands)

Aqua4U January 23, 2014 at 2:22 AM

Surfing in Anchorage?

AABAR January 24, 2014 at 7:28 AM

lol I want to surf in the Artic sea from Canada to Russia over the North Pole…

zlop January 23, 2014 at 1:29 AM

“Climate Continues Warming Trend”
And the data adjusting continues.
(Indicating cooling, clouds are 40 meters lower this century)

Aqua4U January 23, 2014 at 2:52 AM

The trigger’s been pulled (Permafrost methane cap melted) so from now on we’re just going along for the ride. Hang on!. We are to expect continued record breaking temperatures high and low, storms and unusual atmospheric events throughout this century…. ACK! Looks like I’m gonna have to grow fins and go back in the water again! Tide’s coming in!

zlop January 23, 2014 at 6:20 AM

Satellite temperatures began in 1979 — comparisons here
http://www.climate4you.com/GlobalTemperatures.htm

AABAR January 24, 2014 at 12:45 PM

You like Humlum right? I wish I can be a climate scientist myself which he is expecting everyone to be: http://denierlist.wordpress.com/2012/11/29/dr-ole-humlum/

zlop January 24, 2014 at 2:46 PM

“Ole Humlum has become the deniers expert for – CO2 increases are natural” — CO2 seeps and bubbles from the bottom of the Ocean.

“reservoir or pipe? do we need to treat the CO2 in air as a reservoir or as a pipe connecting all living things?” http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/acid2.htm

Shootist January 22, 2014 at 8:26 PM

No I’m not, and if you had studied this you know I’m not. Crop records exist from Europe (Iceland to Italy) and China showing the long growing seasons, for both the Roman and Medieval Climate Optimums (notice the term, “optimum”).

Crop records also exist showing the failures of crops, both in 525CE coinciding with the beginning of the dark ages in Europe and in ~1300 corresponding with the beginnings of the Little Ice Age. Did you know that the pack ice descended from the North Polar regions c. 1350CE and cut Iceland from the sea, year around, for a number of years?

I’m still waiting to open a vineyard in Scotland.

“The polar bears will be fine.” – Freeman Dyson.

AABAR January 22, 2014 at 8:45 PM

You’re a bit late: http://food.list.co.uk/article/39157-the-scottish-vineyard-making-its-own-wine/

China is doing good by being top CO2 producer (not top per capita yet) – Dyson should be happy with them

zlop January 22, 2014 at 10:19 PM

Limited by development, not resources.
Universe has a tendency towards development, not Entropy death (Second Law Violation trumps Malthusian Sophistry)

AABAR January 22, 2014 at 10:34 PM

So we can ignore the second law? Good news for the developing world. Lets hope on life extension so that we can see galactic scale energy used in a few centuries: http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/07/galactic-scale-energy/

zlop January 23, 2014 at 1:18 AM

“So we can ignore the second law?”
Second Law is not a Law, but the solution to homogeneous direction independent random. See “Modified Feynman ratchet”
Simple example is lapse difference exploitation.

There are limits to energy density,
but what are limits to development?

AABAR January 24, 2014 at 12:06 PM

Duh, do you know what is a scientific law or even maths for that matter? Of course I know thermodynamics is statistical. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s what your fridge, internal combustion/turbine/jet engine are based on. Are you going to tell me we can ignore quantum mechanics because its based on probability? Too bad that’s what made the electronic revolution possible. Good luck in getting your modified Feynman ratchet/Maxwell demon to work, perhaps we don’t have to worry about resources then. I’m sure you’re more clever than Hawkings.

P.s. If I google I only get your previous comments, please give me a website/paper – if you’re so clever you can write your own one

AABAR January 24, 2014 at 12:37 PM

Is that Nils Axel Morner? World’s leading scientist from your country!

Do you have any comment on this paper? “Have there been large recent sea level changes in the Maldive Islands?”

This is his friend: http://www.skepticalscience.com/Cliff-Ollier-Swimming-In-A-Sea-of-Misinformation.html – I’m sure you know the complexity of sea level like the temperature…

Btw, I’m not from Maldives. Photo below is last month near my grandmas house (about same latitude as Malé). I’ll keep your comments in mind next time this happen (I’m with anyone worldwide who have been devastated by extreme weather, I would err on the side of caution on our understanding of the climate)

AABAR January 24, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Do you know why tides differ worldwide?

Anyway, I’d like to go to an island nation when I have more income like most of the developed world. Then I can check things first hand: http://www.skepticalscience.com/Whats-Happening-To-Tuvalu-Sea-Level.html

zlop January 24, 2014 at 2:57 PM

“Good luck in getting your modified Feynman ratchet/Maxwell demon to work, perhaps we don’t have to worry about resources then” — Lapse exploitation will be practical for tall buildings, and powering deep canyon settlements on Mars.

No Demons of Maxwell employed, just Lapse differences.
For example, Xenon Cp=0.16 Lapses 60 K/kn

Din Sel January 26, 2014 at 6:36 AM

When I said Sea levels rise could threaten a big % of the World population you replied that I was ignoring reality, it was all myth.

You gave Sweden rising above Sea Level as an example.
No doubt due to tectonic plate movements some parts of Earth are rising..
Africa is moving towards Europe at 1cm every year for example.
But how does that make my statement false or a myth? Which part of my statement did you disagree with?

Why give Sweden as an example anyway?

What % of the World Population lives in Sweden?

London has more population than entire Sweden, and yet the Thames Barrier is struggling to keep off the North Sea high tide at bay, and with current Sea Level rise projections this barrier will be obsolete in as little as 30 years. So a new bigger multi-billion sterling barrier will need to be erected.

Din Sel January 26, 2014 at 6:52 AM

Why did you quote Nils-Axel Morner, a scientists who is a critic of the notion that the sea level is rising, and a supporter of dowsing?

You say sea levels have been rising for the last 20 000 years.

You need to make up your mind.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: