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.
Yes, they do. Your ignorance is beyond comprehension. Scientists do not dispute the fact that the warming has paused. That science is settled. They are now debating WHY it has paused and dozens of theories have been proposed. That science is still up for debate and no answer will ever be proven.
July 2013 - Global mean surface temperatures rose rapidly from the 1970s, but have been relatively flat over the most recent 15 years to 2013. The recent pause in warming - Met Office
In popular science journalism the latest is always the best. With all the explanations for the “pause” in global surface temperatures since 1997 – there are now over 30 of them – it is always the most recently published one that is the “answer.”
Following rapid warming in the late 20th century, this century has so far seen surprisingly little increase in the average temperature at the Earth’s surface. At first this was a blip, then a trend, then a puzzle for the climate science community.
More than a dozen theories have now been proposed for the so-called global warming hiatus, ranging from air pollution to volcanoes to sunspots. New research from the University of Washington shows that the heat absent from the surface is plunging deep in the north and south Atlantic Ocean, and is part of a naturally occurring cycle. The study is published Aug. 22 in Science.
The 17-year pause in global warming is likely to last into the 2030s and the Arctic sea ice has already started to recover, according to new research.
A paper in the peer-reviewed journal Climate Dynamics – by Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology and Dr Marcia Wyatt – amounts to a stunning challenge to climate science orthodoxy.
Not only does it explain the unexpected pause, it suggests that the scientific majority – whose views are represented by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – have underestimated the role of natural cycles and exaggerated that of greenhouse gases.
Yes, they do. Your ignorance is beyond comprehension. Scientists do not dispute the fact that the warming has paused. That science is settled. They are now debating WHY it has paused and dozens of theories have been proposed. That science is still up for debate and no answer will ever be proven.
July 2013 - Global mean surface temperatures rose rapidly from the 1970s, but have been relatively flat over the most recent 15 years to 2013. The recent pause in warming - Met Office
In popular science journalism the latest is always the best. With all the explanations for the “pause” in global surface temperatures since 1997 – there are now over 30 of them – it is always the most recently published one that is the “answer.”
Following rapid warming in the late 20th century, this century has so far seen surprisingly little increase in the average temperature at the Earth’s surface. At first this was a blip, then a trend, then a puzzle for the climate science community.
More than a dozen theories have now been proposed for the so-called global warming hiatus, ranging from air pollution to volcanoes to sunspots. New research from the University of Washington shows that the heat absent from the surface is plunging deep in the north and south Atlantic Ocean, and is part of a naturally occurring cycle. The study is published Aug. 22 in Science.
The 17-year pause in global warming is likely to last into the 2030s and the Arctic sea ice has already started to recover, according to new research.
A paper in the peer-reviewed journal Climate Dynamics – by Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology and Dr Marcia Wyatt – amounts to a stunning challenge to climate science orthodoxy.
Not only does it explain the unexpected pause, it suggests that the scientific majority – whose views are represented by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – have underestimated the role of natural cycles and exaggerated that of greenhouse gases.
"Stopped" not a word that is used. What's more none say that the process of climate change has stopped as you imply.
Whether it has stopped, paused or slowed down the REAL question to be asking is how come no one within the alarmist AGW crowd has predicted this?
If there is this huge, overwhelming consensus, all of these great computer models and we keep hearing that "the science is settled", how come they missed such a HUGE turn of events?
The bigger question is why should we continue to afford them any credibility when they simply move the goalposts and point to another nebulous time period in the future in much the same way that the preachers who predict the coming rapture have done time and time again?
But yeah... if the science is so infallible, so obvious and so bulletproof as your side has been claiming for years now, it pretty much means your side is wearing a significant amount of egg on it's face the more we become aware of this pause.
If one looks at the data you can see the period from 1940 through the 1970 when overall there wasn't temperature increase. It is the nature of the process. Nothing in the theory suggests the warming will be monotonic. Looking at 100 year timeframe we can see the direction we are headed.
"Stopped" not a word that is used. What's more none say that the process of climate change has stopped as you imply.
This is just another case of deniers grasping for straws...To them slowed means stopped...To them the fact that the ocean continues to absorb heat, and rise and ice continues to melt means nothing.... Global Warming: 2014 Articles, Facts, Causes & Effects
This is just another case of deniers grasping for straws...To them slowed means stopped...To them the fact that the ocean continues to absorb heat, and rise and ice continues to melt means nothing.... Global Warming: 2014 Articles, Facts, Causes & Effects
I am astounded at the ignorance until I reflect on how many people don't believe in evolution. It is a sad comment on our school system that so few have the basic scientific understanding to understand climate change.
As long a Hillary is our next president all is good.
Lets assume for the sake of argument that she is the (D) nominee. Is she in your estimation really the best candidate and most qualified to be president in the (D) party?
I was not a big Bush fan and felt his younger brother Jeb who was a good governor in FL would have been better. Clearly he has more experience and is more qualfied than Hillary, and can get along with moderate(D's) as well as his base. So he would be more likely to get things accomplished with Congress than she would as such a polarizing person.
Still I would not want him to get the (R) nomination as we do not need dynastic political families in our system of government.
Though off the subject, I'd like to hear your take?
In keeping with the subject, man-made global warming is still being shown to be theory, conjecture and at times outright falsification. Yet those on the bandwagon refuse to even acknowledge such, even though your overall belief is still in tact. My question in that regard is why.
Myth of arctic meltdown: Stunning satellite images show summer ice cap is thicker and covers 1.7million square kilometres MORE than 2 years ago...despite Al Gore's prediction it would be ICE-FREE by now
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.
