Heat goes on: Earth headed for warmest year on record

futurecurrents said:
You are an idiot..

1970s_papers.gif


Figure 1: Number of papers classified as predicting global cooling (blue) or warming (red). In no year were there more cooling papers than warming papers (Peterson 2008).

Scientific Consensus
In the 1970s, the most comprehensive study on climate change (and the closest thing to a scientific consensus at the time) was the 1975 US National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Report. Their basic conclusion was "…we do not have a good quantitative understanding of our climate machine and what determines its course. Without the fundamental understanding, it does not seem possible to predict climate…"

This is in strong contrast with the current position of the US National Academy of Sciences: "...there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring... It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities... The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action." This is in a joint statement with the Academies of Science from Brazil, France, Canada, China, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United Kingdom.

In contrast to the 1970s, there are now a number of scientific bodies that have released statements affirming man-made global warming. More on scientific consensus...

More...


Forty years from now scientists and their useful idiots will be rewriting the history of their involvement with global warming. Just like they're doing now with the global cooling scam of forty years ago.

Nobody believes the bs anymore. Check the polls Everyone knows it's a scam.

I, for one, couldn't be more pleased that science is being exposed for the political operation that it is. Global warming scientists are as believable as Levi Strauss scientists telling us they've discovered gray jeans.
 
Warmists who denied the pause now claim to explain it

I guess just the acknowledgement is progress, but I do think Matthew England at least owes an apology.

Matthew England contradicting former Senator Nick Minchin in April 2012:

NICK MINCHIN: ...Basically we’ve had a plateauing of temperature rise. I mean we are in a warming phase. The world is either warming or cooling. It never stops doing nothing. It’s either warming or cooling. We’ve had a warming phase since the end of the little ice age, 150 years ago. In terms of global average temperature it peaked 1998 and it is effectively stable now, despite the increase in CO2. So there is a major problem with the warmist argument because we have had rising CO2 but we haven’t had the commensurate rise in temperature that the IPCC predicted.


ANNA ROSE: That’s just not true, Nick…

MATTHEW ENGLAND: What Nick just said is actually not true. The IPCC projections of 1990 have borne out very accurately…

Matthew England in December 2012:


... we’re halfway through this projected period. And the warming to date is consistent with that [IPCC] projection.


And so anybody out there lying that the IPCC projections are overstatements or that the observations haven’t kept pace with the projections is completely offline with this. And so anybody out there lying that the IPCC projections are overstatements or that the observations haven’t kept pace with the projections is completely offline with this. The analysis is very clear that the IPCC projections are coming true.


But Matthew England today:

The near two-decade long “pause” in rising average global surface temperatures was a “distraction” that did not change long-term model predictions of a much hotter world this century, according to new research.


Climate scientists at University of NSW said “natural variability” could explain the slowdown or “hiatus” despite strongly rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere…

Research leader Matthew England said ... “It is simply due to decadal variability. Greenhouse gases will eventually overwhelm this natural fluctuation,” he said…

“Our research shows that while there may be short-term fluctuations … long-term warming of the planet is an inevitable consequence of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations,” he said.

“This much-hyped global warming slowdown is just a distraction to the task at hand”.


Maybe, maybe not. But this concession is interesting:


The paper also suggests that decadal climate oscillations were not pushing heat into the deep oceans, another explanation for the “missing heat” and absence of surface warming.

Also published now in Nature Climate Change, another paper trying to explain the pause that England once denied:

Despite a steady increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs), global-mean surface temperature (T) has shown no discernible warming since about 2000, in sharp contrast to model simulations, which on average project strong warming.
 
  • Flashback 1970: Earth Day Prof. Predicted A Super Ice Age Would Engulf The World
    “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” ecologist Kenneth Watt told an audience at Swarthmore College on April 19, 1970 around the time of the first Earth Day demonstrations.
    “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000,” Watt declared. “This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
 
It is nice to see that nature has forced these scammers scientists to admit the truth. What jerk that guy was stating that skeptics were liars for telling the truth. He should be fired. But at least he had to eat crow 2 years later.

So know we know only trolls still deny the pause and claim the models are still working.
 
Every major climate organization endorsed the ice age scare, including NCAR, CRU, NAS, NASA – as did the CIA.

screenhunter_127-feb-04-04-44.gif
 
The proof that they were all on board global cooling and they're lying about it now is irrefutable. Even though they can edit wiki to their heart's content, spew out more phony studies, they can't erase the articles that were written forty years ago. And not being able to censor and control the debate galls them no end.

Read the articles here
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/1970s-ice-age-scare/
and decide for yourself who's telling a pack of lies.
 
TooOldForThis said:
I didn't say that there was a "pause in the heat gain". I said there was a pause in the temperature rise. The fact that you don't know the difference but are still willing to debate the subject is hilarious!

But the heat gain arguments are a retreat from the claims of the past 30 years. Before, they were telling us that the (air) temperature of the planet was going to rise. This failed and while they did "adjust" the temperature records to show somewhat higher temperatures, they were unable to goose them enough to match the predictions.

So now they're talking about "heat" in the oceans instead of "temperature" in the air. This is more convenient because heat in the ocean cannot be measured accurately, LOL. Of course few people (other than the true believers) are faked out by this. And because the ocean is a huge heat sink, the change in ocean temperatures they're talking about are minuscule. Tiny fractions of a degree; these sorts of changes can't possibly influence the climate.



The reason your propaganda is so weak is that you don't understand the arguments of the other side. You're relying on emotion in your understanding and also in your assembly of the propaganda. The Nazis had the advantage of using professionals to create their propaganda. The Greenies don't have an Adolf so it's not possible for them to create effective propaganda; there's no chain of command. Any of them can say whatever they want. And it's too late to change this as you've got all your previous crap propaganda hanging around your neck. The IPCC can't do it because it has all the disadvantages of rule by committee.
More...


OK, your premise is still wrong and so I'm not going to read the rest of your post. There is no pause in temp rise of the planet.
 
fhl said:
Every major climate organization endorsed the ice age scare, including NCAR, CRU, NAS, NASA – as did the CIA.

screenhunter_127-feb-04-04-44.gif
More...

No they did not.

And try reading your above abstract again....

the last highlighted sentence is talking about what would happen with increasing aerosols. It is NOT making any predictions you moron.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top