Top physicist on climate change....

[gcthomas]

Oh, where to begin! The evidence that although CO2 keeps increasing, satellite measurements show no global warming for over 18 years, the backing off of all their predictions, which are notoriously wrong, the rebuttal of the hockey stick, the unmasking of the obvious agenda and politicization of the climate "industry", the actual decrease in severe weather rather than increase, the quick manufactured covering of bases to explain all the record cold, and on and on.

No, not getting warmer at all over the last 18 years.

Spoiler

 

[brewmama]

No, not getting warmer at all over the last 18 years.

Spoiler

You do know what satellite measurements are, don't you?

 

[brewmama]

“Pauses as long as 15 years are rare in the simulations, and ‘we expect that [real-world] warming will resume in the next few years,’ the Hadley Centre group writes…. Researchers … agree that no sort of natural variability can hold off greenhouse warming much longer.”

– Richard Kerr, Science (2009)

That’s Richard A. Kerr, the longtime, award-winning climate-change scribe for Science magazine, the flagship publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The article, “What Happened to Global Warming? Scientists Say Just Wait a Bit,” was published October 1, 2009.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/14/no-matter-if-its-a-climatic-pause-or-jolt-still-no-warming/

 

[Quetzal]

You do know what satellite measurements are, don't you?

Boy, do I!

 

[brewmama]

The Top Ten Reasons global temperature hasn’t warmed for the last15years
w=720

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/...mperature-hasnt-warmed-for-the-last-15-years/

 

[brewmama]

 

[brewmama]

...

 

[GuySmiley]

Boy, do I!

Now how about an 18 year time period?

 

[Quetzal]

Now how about an 18 year time period?

I am having a hard time understanding why everyone is trying to cherry pick a small range of data in a model that is hundreds of years old?

 

[ok doser]

... a model that is hundreds of years old?

:freak:

which model is that?

 

[brewmama]

I am having a hard time understanding why everyone is trying to cherry pick a small range of data in a model that is hundreds of years old?

To show that increase in CO2 is unrelated to overall global temps. The opposite of the cagwista doctrine.

 

[Quetzal]

:freak:

which model is that?

Not exactly hundreds, but it's roughly 160 years old.

 

[Quetzal]

To show that increase in CO2 is unrelated to overall global temps. The opposite of the cagwista doctrine.

To be fair, it is just a theory. But do you really think the industrial revolution increasing our CO2 output and the gradual raise in global temperature is a coincidence?

 

[ok doser]

as a scientist, my first reaction to that is "how good is the data, especially the data to support values from 1850?"

my second thought is why does everybody always assume that a best fit line is appropriate?

 

[Quetzal]

as a scientist, my first reaction to that is "how good is the data, especially the data to support values from 1850?"

my second thought is why does everybody always assume that a best fit line is appropriate?

You could even truncate from 1950 on and it tells the exact same story.

 

[ok doser]

You could even truncate from 1950 on and it tells the exact same story.

another thing that occurs to me is that it may well be inappropriate to look that closely at the data - that what you see as a trend may well be normal variation

 

[Quetzal]

another thing that occurs to me is that it may well be inappropriate to look that closely at the data - that what you see as a trend may well be normal variation

A risky gamble. You can rationalize it however you want. But in my mind there isn't any reason not to invest into other forms of energy to help reduce CO2 emissions. Even if they came out tomorrow and said "Yep, sorry, botched it all" my opinion on funding renewable energy would be the same.

 

[gcthomas]

You do know what satellite measurements are, don't you?

Yes, and they show a warming trend like everything else. Unless you have a cite for a recent study that conflicts?

 

[Quetzal]

Yes, and they show a warming trend like everything else. Unless you have a cite for a recent study that conflicts?

I have been asking for this for weeks. Good luck, mate.

 

[brewmama]

To be fair, it is just a theory. But do you really think the industrial revolution increasing our CO2 output and the gradual raise in global temperature is a coincidence?

Since temps have been warming since the end of the Little Ice Age, and the warmest records are in the 1930s, and there are loads of other factors more important and influential on climate than CO2 that are not included in the cagwistas models because they want it to be CO2, I guess the answer is yes.
Not to mention that the hype and fear-mongering and politicization of the warmists is totally dishonest,unprecedented, and as you might say, shameful.