Not 0.3% but 97% of the world's climatologists agree
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
Maybe its the record of the balance of your trading account but it's not the record of world temps over the last 130 years.
You are a fraud troll who posts irrelevant bullshit. You should be ashamed of yourself for being such a liar.
This is the temp record from the world's top climate data sources via NASA. Only an idiot would dispute this data. Cue jerm.
This is the temp record from the world's top climate data sources via NASA. Only an idiot would dispute this data. Cue jerm.
http://climate.nasa.gov
The sad thing is that jerm actually believes in AGW.
that chart does not purport to be, nor is it the typical land temps chart -- you lying fraud.
its probably has ocean temps in it or some sort of delayed average.
when a person like fraudcurrents lies about data, you have to worry about their sanity.
its probably has ocean temps in it or some sort of delayed average.
when a person like fraudcurrents lies about data, you have to worry about their sanity.
Maybe its the record of the balance of your trading account but it's not the record of world temps over the last 130 years.
You are a fraud troll who posts irrelevant bullshit. You should be ashamed of yourself for being such a liar.
This is the temp record from the world's top climate data sources via NASA. Only an idiot would dispute this data. Cue jerm.
This is the temp record from the world's top climate data sources via NASA. Only an idiot would dispute this data. Cue jerm.
http://climate.nasa.gov
The sad thing is that jerm actually believes in AGW.
this is the real chart... you are posting fraudlent crap... fraudcurrents.
This chart is a particular cherry picked time period and manufactured data set and is not even world temperatures. It is a total fabrication.
NASA NOAA The Met Service, they all show that global warming has not stopped at all nor has the trend been broken. The models predict this trend so the models are fine.
In fact, it's clear that the warming trend is actually accelerating, not slowing.
You can't post fraudulent charts and then change the subject. That chart and that data set is not questioned by any expert as legit and as close to all the other data sets as need be..
land temps have not warmed.
you have been posting lies and you have misrepresented charts.
Von Storch is a very high profile agw nutter...
http://www.spiegel.de/international...lems-with-climate-change-models-a-906721.html
SPIEGEL: Just since the turn of the millennium, humanity has emitted another 400 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, yet temperatures haven't risen in nearly 15 years. What can explain this?
Storch: So far, no one has been able to provide a compelling answer to why climate change seems to be taking a break. We're facing a puzzle. Recent CO2 emissions have actually risen even more steeply than we feared. As a result, according to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius (0.45 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 10 years. That hasn't happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) -- a value very close to zero. This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.
SPIEGEL: Do the computer models with which physicists simulate the future climate ever show the sort of long standstill in temperature change that we're observing right now?
Storch: Yes, but only extremely rarely. At my institute, we analyzed how often such a 15-year stagnation in global warming occurred in the simulations. The answer was: in under 2 percent of all the times we ran the simulation. In other words, over 98 percent of forecasts show CO2 emissions as high as we have had in recent years leading to more of a temperature increase.
SPIEGEL: How long will it still be possible to reconcile such a pause in global warming with established climate forecasts?
Storch: If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models. A 20-year pause in global warming does not occur in a single modeled scenario. But even today, we are finding it very difficult to reconcile actual temperature trends with our expectations.
SPIEGEL: What could be wrong with the models?
Storch: There are two conceivable explanations -- and neither is very pleasant for us. The first possibility is that less global warming is occurring than expected because greenhouse gases, especially CO2, have less of an effect than we have assumed. This wouldn't mean that there is no man-made greenhouse effect, but simply that our effect on climate events is not as great as we have believed. The other possibility is that, in our simulations, we have underestimated how much the climate fluctuates owing to natural causes.
land temps have not warmed.
you have been posting lies and you have misrepresented charts.
Von Storch is a very high profile agw nutter...
http://www.spiegel.de/international...lems-with-climate-change-models-a-906721.html
SPIEGEL: Just since the turn of the millennium, humanity has emitted another 400 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, yet temperatures haven't risen in nearly 15 years. What can explain this?
Storch: So far, no one has been able to provide a compelling answer to why climate change seems to be taking a break. We're facing a puzzle. Recent CO2 emissions have actually risen even more steeply than we feared. As a result, according to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius (0.45 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 10 years. That hasn't happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) -- a value very close to zero. This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.
SPIEGEL: Do the computer models with which physicists simulate the future climate ever show the sort of long standstill in temperature change that we're observing right now?
Storch: Yes, but only extremely rarely. At my institute, we analyzed how often such a 15-year stagnation in global warming occurred in the simulations. The answer was: in under 2 percent of all the times we ran the simulation. In other words, over 98 percent of forecasts show CO2 emissions as high as we have had in recent years leading to more of a temperature increase.
SPIEGEL: How long will it still be possible to reconcile such a pause in global warming with established climate forecasts?
Storch: If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models. A 20-year pause in global warming does not occur in a single modeled scenario. But even today, we are finding it very difficult to reconcile actual temperature trends with our expectations.
SPIEGEL: What could be wrong with the models?
Storch: There are two conceivable explanations -- and neither is very pleasant for us. The first possibility is that less global warming is occurring than expected because greenhouse gases, especially CO2, have less of an effect than we have assumed. This wouldn't mean that there is no man-made greenhouse effect, but simply that our effect on climate events is not as great as we have believed. The other possibility is that, in our simulations, we have underestimated how much the climate fluctuates owing to natural causes.
This chart is a particular cherry picked time period and manufactured data set and is not even world temperatures. It is a total fabrication.
NASA NOAA The Met Service, they all show that global warming has not stopped at all nor has the trend been broken. The models predict this trend so the models are fine.
In fact, it's clear that the warming trend is actually accelerating, not slowing.
Anyone trying to say that the warming trend has stopped should never trade stocks.
The rate of warming has not paused and has in fact accelerated.
The models have done an excellent job at predicting this warming.
All of this is quite clear to the objective observer. Of course this excludes you jem. You are as far from objective as could be. So much so that you are essentially a liar.
The rate of warming has not paused and has in fact accelerated.
The models have done an excellent job at predicting this warming.
All of this is quite clear to the objective observer. Of course this excludes you jem. You are as far from objective as could be. So much so that you are essentially a liar.
land temps have been cooling or zero since the turn of the century.
you have a split with reality. your models were not speaking of water temps.
you have a split with reality. your models were not speaking of water temps.