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.
... assuming increased CO2 does not lead to feedbacks which reduce to the amount energy received, such as increased reflectivity due to clouds. This cannot be assumed of course, which is why the relationship between increased CO2 and world temperatures cannot be pinned down to any precise number.
It's not happening though. Clouds aren't offsetting the effect of increased CO2 enough to prevent warming. We've had 1C of warming over the last century, with most of that warming occurring since 1980.
This is from the Japanese meteorology agency, they don't have an axe to grind on climate change politics. They are neutral.
The chart clearly shows the Earth has indeed warmed over the last 10 years, the last 20 years and all the way back to 1890. Sure, in the short term, temperatures bounce around a little. The long-term upward trend couldn't be more clear.
... As the chart says, it shows a trend of .72 degrees per century. The only way you can SEE climate change is with such a scale. It's like have a speedometer that only registers speeds between 66 and 68 MPH.
Really. .72 degrees? Over the whole planet?! In 100 years?!
I don't care whether it's man-caused or not. It's not enough to worry about.
... As the chart says, it shows a trend of .72 degrees per century. The only way you can SEE climate change is with such a scale. It's like have a speedometer that only registers speeds between 66 and 68 MPH.
Really. .72 degrees? Over the whole planet?! In 100 years?!
I don't care whether it's man-caused or not. It's not enough to worry about.
That's another favorite trick. Magnify the scale of the graph enough and you can make a flatline look like Mount Everest. Statisticians have a bad habit of doing that; climate scientists have taken it to thousandfold extremes.
As a climatologist, I do. I wounder what everyone else thinks. Please provide evidence to you claim.
Yes.
It's basic physics. Carbon reflects sunlight in such a way that should more of it be present in the atmosphere, more heat would then get trapped causing temperature changes which would effect the climate at large.
Has there ever been a topic where so many people who know almost nothing are so certain they know the truth?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDusty
Yes.
It's basic physics. Carbon reflects sunlight in such a way that should more of it be present in the atmosphere, more heat would then get trapped causing temperature changes which would effect the climate at large.
This sounds serious...where do I send all my money?
Don't worry. As you know it gets stolen from you. No need to voluntarily send it in.
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.
