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.
...and warmanistas (like Joe Romm) dismiss the "pause" by claiming surface temperatures are not the only metric.
So... Why are demagogues like Joe Romm now fighting to save the 2 degree (political) yardstick?????
So you must think the atmosphere is the only place that earth stores heat, right?
We have estimated an increase of 24 × 1022 J representing a volume mean warming of 0.09°C of the 0–2000 m layer of the World Ocean. If this heat were instantly transferred to the lower 10 km of the global atmosphere it would result in a volume mean warming of this atmospheric layer by approximately 36°C (65°F). This transfer of course will not happen; earth's climate system simply does not work like this. But this computation does provide a perspective on the amount of heating that the earth system has undergone since 1955. World ocean heat content and thermosteric sea level change (0–2000*m), 1955–2010 - Levitus - 2012 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library
One can only conclude from the above that the earth has not stopped heating...It is right there in the oceans.
So you must think the atmosphere is the only place that earth stores heat, right?
One can only conclude from the above that the earth has not stopped heating...It is right there in the oceans.
Ahhh yes, "the ocean ate my global warming" as it's been humorously referred to.
Why don't you ask yourself how the 97% consensus and all of these fantastic computer simulations TOTALLY MISSED that little development in their constant predictions of continued runaway warming for the last 25 years?
But wait!! I thought "The Science Was Settled" ?!?!?
Could it be that maybe we don't understand everything we THINK we understand about the Earth's climate and all of the factors that influence it?
Usually when reality differs so sharply from a predicated outcome it becomes time for a sober re-evaluation of the methodologies and mindset that lead you there in the first place!
Instead, you and your ilk want to simply retrofit this new development into the CAGW theory and continue blindly along.
Once again, this is the scientific process in REVERSE! All roads lead to CAGW, no matter what!
You start with a particular premise and every bit of data, evidence and observation is beaten, distorted, skewed and shoehorned into that premise.
God, it must be hard to be a global warming moonbat these days.
No, it's easy.... We post the science then get a big laugh when morons deny it....Too bad you have no science on your side, as you are missing out on a lot of fun. Deniers really are the laughing stock of this forum.
No, it's easy.... We post the science then get a big laugh when morons deny it....Too bad you have no science on your side, as you are missing out on a lot of fun. Deniers really are the laughing stock of this forum.
Except when science is posted that runs counter to your alarmist dogma, then it's always "paid for by big oil"
Except when science is posted that runs counter to your alarmist dogma, then it's always "paid for by big oil"
Listen.
If there was a major scientific break, if there was at least a sizable minority of scientists disputing the claims of global warming, you would have a point.
But that's not the case. It's almost considered scientific fact - it's become a political tool, where the Dems have made it their cause to champion and the Reps claim tat it's all a greenie ploy to destroy small business. There is close to a 97% majority among climatologists that agree global warming is a problem, the only dissension is actually how bad of a problem it's going to be. The other 3% are, more often than not, provably connected to big oil and big coal about their findings, whose businesses are know to have massive amounts of influence, where the greens don't. Certainly, the green business would benefit from championing global warming, but they have nowhere near the power and influence of businesses who stretch the country, rake in billions, and control a key resource that can crash the economy if revoked.
If there was a major scientific break, if there was at least a sizable minority of scientists disputing the claims of global warming, you would have a point.
But that's not the case. It's almost considered scientific fact - it's become a political tool, where the Dems have made it their cause to champion and the Reps claim tat it's all a greenie ploy to destroy small business. There is close to a 97% majority among climatologists that agree global warming is a problem, the only dissension is actually how bad of a problem it's going to be. The other 3% are, more often than not, provably connected to big oil and big coal about their findings, whose businesses are know to have massive amounts of influence, where the greens don't. Certainly, the green business would benefit from championing global warming, but they have nowhere near the power and influence of businesses who stretch the country, rake in billions, and control a key resource that can crash the economy if revoked.
The 97% consensus number is B.S. and has been debunked many times on these forums.
As for billions of dollars of influence, how much money do you think flows into AGW research and green initiatives that are all predicated on more alarmism?
The Global warming moonbats have been told by the environmentalist wackos to ditch temperature calculations when talking about climate change because it's not working, because it isn't happening. See, but they're not gonna give up the movement. They toe the rope for everyone who's making the money because they want a part of it---they're complete charlatans and frauds!
Don't you think humans affect this planet with all our pollution. Our pollution affects the air and earth. How can it not, it's just common sense. If you don't believe it then that's fine.....it's your opinion. But just think if it's true and how it would affect your grand kids and their kids. We are responsible to take care of our planet for them and future generations. Why are we so focused on ourselves in this day and age without regard to the future. Many don't care because they will be long gone.
The 97% consensus number is B.S. and has been debunked many times on these forums.
As for billions of dollars of influence, how much money do you think flows into AGW research and green initiatives that are all predicated on more alarmism?
Debunked?
"97% of the scientists surveyed agreed that global temperatures had increased during the past 100 years; 84% said they personally believed human-induced warming was occurring, and 74% agreed that "currently available scientific evidence" substantiated its occurrence. Catastrophic effects in 50–100 years would likely be observed according to 41%, while 44% thought the effects would be moderate and about 13 percent saw relatively little danger. 5% said they thought human activity did not contribute to greenhouse warming"
As I said, global warming is almost accepted fact. The only dissension is how bad it will be and whther humans cause it. Even then, only its affects have a very appreciable split.
Billions are poured into it because it is a policy issue. Scientists who would find out global warming isn't real wouldn't get fired. All they would have to do is quickly inform the media and their cause would be championed by the right-wingers. Most dissenters haven't done this and originated with big oil or big coal funds.
Except when science is posted that runs counter to your alarmist dogma, then it's always "paid for by big oil"
What science runs counter to AGW? I've never seen any. All I see from you people is crap from blogs like WUWT.
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.
Deniers really are the laughing stock of this forum.
