Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no such cooling trend. Here's what the Met Office had to say:
Quote:
This document provides a short synthesis of that global picture as it stands today. A fuller briefing is produced in conjunction with vast numbers of scientists each year, and published in a Special Supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS) (Blunden and Arndt, 2013).
The observations show that:
A wide range of climate quantities continue to show changes. For instance, we have observed a continued decline in Arctic sea ice and a rise in global sea level. These changes are consistent with our understanding of how the climate system responds to increasing atmospheric greenhouse gases.
Global mean surface temperatures remain high, with the last decade being the warmest on record.
Although the rate of surface warming appears to have slowed considerably over the most recent decade, such slowing for a decade or so has been seen in the past in observations and is simulated in climate models, where they are temporary events.
Note that it discusses a slowed rate of warming, not a cooling trend. They did not report a cooling trend. You can dig up the Met Office's July 2013 report and read the other 27 pages if you like, but I just had to glance at the summary to be satisfied that you are, as the saying went, talking through your hat. A bit of googling (met office cooling trend) and poof! The July 2013 report on this pause of yours is at my fingertips and I can see for myself what the Met Office had to say.
Perhaps you got confused and read the weekly weather report for Exeter, where the Met Office's offices are located. It is winter, after all, so a cooling trend reported by the Met Office in that respect would be no surprise. I bet that's it.
I don't like Harlan Ellison's writing much, and I understand he's a bit of a grump, but he was right when he said "No, everyone is not entitled to an opinion. Everyone is entitled to an informed opinion." And you certainly aren't entitled to your own facts.
I'll never, ever understand how moon-hoax theorists and anti-vaccination nuts and science denialists come to be. It's all the same thing, only the object of the paranoid's focus is different. The refusal to believe facts that contradict current beliefs is pretty normal, but not when it comes to Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences vs. The Daily Mail, for the sake of Pete.
That's the point. Geologic scale is not human scale, nor living organism scale. The magnitude of the change is not the issue... the velocity of the change is.
Over the long-term there have been other periods of rapid cooling and warming. Before humans and fossil fuels. Explain.
How exactly did marco distroy Bill Nye? How does the moderator debating on one side make this a debate. How is the moderator being allowed to use video snipits to help one side a debate?
Lets not confuse a TV sideshow as real debate.
I asked myself that same question after every Obama and Biden debate.
you probably also think the 10+ year cooling trend recorded in the Met Office charts aren't real, either.
I know they aren't, any more than GMO foods are proof of Intelligent design...There has been no cooling trend...Globally the last decade was the warmest ever recorded.
Over the long-term there have been other periods of rapid cooling and warming. Before humans and fossil fuels. Explain.
Educate yourself on climate forcings... Climate changes prior to the Industrial Revolution can be explained by natural causes, such as changes in solar energy, volcanic eruptions, and natural changes in greenhouse gas.....Recent climate changes cannot be explained by natural causes alone, so that leaves AGW.
It has certainly become about that yes. Thank you deniers. But that was not my point either.
It has nothing to do with the earth since the earth is non sentient, does not care, and will recover just as it has from previous insults to the atmosphere and biosphere.
It is about human beings and the impact of AGW on our lives, our life styles and our capacity to flourish.
We certainly won't flourish if we freeze to death without fossil fuels, or starve to death without fossil fuels, or can't work because we can't use fossil fuels.
Thousands of government funded studies that require the correct outcome to receive additional funding.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you probably also think the 10+ year cooling trend recorded in the Met Office charts aren't real, either.
