Solar was increasing until about 1970. Since then it has been declining while temps continue to rise.
Aside from the eleven year cycles there not much that can be predicted as far as solar as far as I know.
Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
Solar was increasing until about 1970. Since then it has been declining while temps continue to rise.
Aside from the eleven year cycles there not much that can be predicted as far as solar as far as I know.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/...ed-world-for-the-forces-of-nature/#more-98544
HARRIS and KHANDEKAR: Blaming the developed world for the forces of nature
Posted on December 4, 2013 by Guest Blogger
By Tom Harris and Madhav Khandekar
Originally published in The Washington Times Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Bad science puts rich nations on the hook for trillions in climate liabilities
Delegates at the recent U.N. climate conference in Warsaw decided that $1 billion a day, the amount currently being spent across the world on âclimate financeâ, is not enough. Far greater funding is needed to save the world from what U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon calls the âgreatest threat facing humanity.â That climate science is highly immature and global warming actually stopped 17 years ago was never mentioned.
Hereâs what our representatives just agreed to:
Starting in 2014, the U.N.âs Green Climate Fund, a plan to divert an additional $100 billion per year from the treasuries of developed countries to those of developing nations to help them âtake action on climate change,â will commence operation. The heads of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are scheduled to take part in a launch ceremony for the GCF headquarters in South Korea on Wednesday.
A timetable was accepted to pave the way toward the establishment of a new international treaty in 2015 that will force developed countries to spend untold billions more to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. The fine print in the negotiating text includes an escape clause for developing nations, indicating that carbon-dioxide emission targets their governments agree to will not be enforced. Deve
HARRIS and KHANDEKAR: Blaming the developed world for the forces of nature
Posted on December 4, 2013 by Guest Blogger
By Tom Harris and Madhav Khandekar
Originally published in The Washington Times Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Bad science puts rich nations on the hook for trillions in climate liabilities
Delegates at the recent U.N. climate conference in Warsaw decided that $1 billion a day, the amount currently being spent across the world on âclimate financeâ, is not enough. Far greater funding is needed to save the world from what U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon calls the âgreatest threat facing humanity.â That climate science is highly immature and global warming actually stopped 17 years ago was never mentioned.
Hereâs what our representatives just agreed to:
Starting in 2014, the U.N.âs Green Climate Fund, a plan to divert an additional $100 billion per year from the treasuries of developed countries to those of developing nations to help them âtake action on climate change,â will commence operation. The heads of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are scheduled to take part in a launch ceremony for the GCF headquarters in South Korea on Wednesday.
A timetable was accepted to pave the way toward the establishment of a new international treaty in 2015 that will force developed countries to spend untold billions more to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. The fine print in the negotiating text includes an escape clause for developing nations, indicating that carbon-dioxide emission targets their governments agree to will not be enforced. Deve
I stopped at "global warming stopped 17 years ago". As soon as I see that I know the author is either stupid or a liar or both and to read further is a waste of time.
The truth is hard to accept, eh?
wow are you a propagandist fc. No one is talking about ocean temps.
The Hadley Centre/CRU records show no warming for 18 years (v.3) or 19 years (v.4), and the RSS satellite dataset shows no warming for 23 years (h/t to Werner Brozek for determining these values).
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/...achauri-acknowledges-no-warming-for-17-years/
The Hadley Centre/CRU records show no warming for 18 years (v.3) or 19 years (v.4), and the RSS satellite dataset shows no warming for 23 years (h/t to Werner Brozek for determining these values).
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/...achauri-acknowledges-no-warming-for-17-years/
First of all, to simply say that global warming has stopped 17 years ago is wrong. Period. The earth continues to rapidly gain heat.
Second, even if one were to say the atmosphere has stopped warming 17 years ago it is, if not outright wrong, is essentially meaningless given the overall warming trend has not been broken.
It is deception to say global warming has stopped, no matter what words follow.
Taken together, anyone who says such a thing is wrong. Intentionally so.
So anyone saying such a thing must be assumed to be either stupid or deceptive. I don't read authors who are stupid or deceptive.
This is the temperature of the earth. The atmospheric temperatures are just measures of the temperature of the air which is only 3% of the earth's heat. This is the measure of 94 %.
I have pointed this out to jerm multiple times and if he was at all intellectually honest he would agree.
But jerm is not intellectually honest. He is a crazed, mentally warped partisan who will essentially lie rather than admit the other side is right about something.
He will repeat the bullshit propaganda that the "earth" has stopped warming. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I have pointed this out to jerm multiple times and if he was at all intellectually honest he would agree.
But jerm is not intellectually honest. He is a crazed, mentally warped partisan who will essentially lie rather than admit the other side is right about something.
He will repeat the bullshit propaganda that the "earth" has stopped warming. Nothing could be further from the truth.
1. For decades for agw nutters it was co2 causes air temps to rise. When air temps stop rising you can't just switch to ocean temps and act like those who state global warming stopped are lying.
It is liars like you who are changing the subject
2. Is your argument co2 makes oceans temps go up?
Oceans release co2 when they warm. Change in ocean temps are leading change in co2 levels almost perfectly.
Oceans are warming... then you have then explained why co2 is going up right behind them.
http://notrickszone.com/2013/10/08/...emperature-is-driving-co2-and-not-vice-versa/
It is liars like you who are changing the subject
2. Is your argument co2 makes oceans temps go up?
Oceans release co2 when they warm. Change in ocean temps are leading change in co2 levels almost perfectly.
Oceans are warming... then you have then explained why co2 is going up right behind them.
http://notrickszone.com/2013/10/08/...emperature-is-driving-co2-and-not-vice-versa/
Quote from futurecurrents:
This is the temperature of the earth. The atmospheric temperatures are just measures of the temperature of the air which is only 3% of the earth's heat. This is the measure of 94 %.
I have pointed this out to jerm multiple times and if he was at all intellectually honest he would agree.
But jerm is not intellectually honest. He is a crazed, mentally warped partisan who will essentially lie rather than admit the other side is right about something.
He will repeat the bullshit propaganda that the "earth" has stopped warming. Nothing could be further from the truth.
