Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.

[Ricter]

Quote from fhl:

CO2 still going up, but temperature not following the same trend

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/...but-temperature-not-following-the-same-trend/

2013 Likely To Be One Of The Hottest Years Ever As Warming Trend Continues, WMO Says
Reuters | Posted: 11/13/2013 4:30 am EST | Updated: 11/13/2013 6:41 pm EST

By Alister Doyle and Michael Szabo

"WARSAW, Nov 13 (Reuters) - This year is the seventh warmest since records began in 1850 with a trend to weather extremes and the impact of storms such as Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines aggravated by rising sea levels, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said on Wednesday.

"A build-up of manmade greenhouse gases in the atmosphere meant a warmer future was now inevitable, WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said in a statement on the sidelines of U.N. climate talks among almost 200 nations in Warsaw.

"The WMO, giving a provisional overview, said the first nine months of the year tied with the same period of 2003 as seventh warmest, with average global land and ocean surface temperatures 0.48°C (0.86°F) above the 1961-1990 average.

"This year once again continues the underlying, long-term trend," towards higher temperatures caused by global warming, Jarraud said. The WMO said it was likely to end among the top 10 warmest years since records began in 1850.

"Among extremes have been super typhoon Haiyan, one of the most intense storms in history that smashed into the Philippines last Friday.

"President Benigno Aquino said local officials had overstated the loss of life, which was closer to 2,000 or 2,500 than the 10,000 previously estimated. His comments, however, drew scepticism from some aid workers.

"AUSTRALIA HEATWAVE

"Other extremes this year have included record heatwaves in Australia and floods from Sudan to Europe, the WMO said. Japan had its warmest summer on record."

More>>

 

[fhl]

Quote from futurecurrents:



fhl? Are you able to admit any scientific fact at all to do with AGW?

The person who won't even admit that the earth has not warmed for the last fifteen years as co2 has gone up asks me if i will admit to any scientific facts about blah, blah, blah.

I suppose to you, the earths temperature and the levels of co2 in the atmosphere are not real scientific facts. They're just some kind of religious faith. But your models are scientific facts, right.

I'm done with you.

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from fhl:

The person who won't even admit that the earth has not warmed for the last fifteen years as co2 has gone up asks me if i will admit to any scientific facts about blah, blah, blah.

I suppose to you, the earths temperature and the levels of co2 in the atmosphere are not real scientific facts. They're just some kind of religious faith. But your models are scientific facts, right.

I'm done with you.

So let me get this clear.

You are denying the simplest most proven fact about the nature of CO2 ?

Just please tell me you understand and accept the simple fact that CO2 absorbs and re-radiates heat energy.

That's ALL I'm asking about right now. This plain little fact.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from futurecurrents:


Just please tell me you understand and accept the simple fact that CO2 absorbs and re-radiates heat energy.

Sounds "zero sum" to me. Unless you can turn the sun off.

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from Lucrum:

Sounds "zero sum" to me. Unless you can turn the sun off.

Think about the direction that the heat is coming from the earth's surface, after being heated by sunlight that has passed through the CO2 unimpeded, because sunlight is a higher wavelength than infrared, which CO2 absorbs and then re-radiates..

Sunlight comes onto the earth at higher wavelengths which then become lower wavelengths when changed to "heat" by the earth's surface. These lower wavelengths then are intercepted by CO2 and some of that is re-radiated back onto the earth and the surrounding atmosphere. Like glass in a greenhouse.

And/or re-read piezoe's post. Because you and your righty friends are STILL confused about this.

Again, this concept is absolutely key to understanding AGW.

 

[gwb-trading]

Quote from futurecurrents:

Think about the direction that the heat is coming from the earth's surface, after being heated by sunlight that has passed through the CO2 unimpeded, because sunlight is a higher wavelength than infrared, which CO2 absorbs and then re-radiates..

Sunlight comes onto the earth at higher wavelengths which then become lower wavelengths when changed to "heat" by the earth's surface. These lower wavelengths then are intercepted by CO2 and some of that is re-radiated back onto the earth and the surrounding atmosphere. Like glass in a greenhouse.

And/or re-read piezoe's post. Because you and your righty friends are STILL confused about this.

Again, this concept is absolutely key to understanding AGW.

I would urge you to watch the last 20 minutes of this video so you will have a clear understanding of how CO2 works in the environment. Obviously you are STILL confused about this.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/2ROw_cDKwc0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from futurecurrents:

....Again, this concept is absolutely key to understanding AGW.

In which case you may want to argue your nonsense on another message board.
You don't seem to be making in "progress" here.

 

[futurecurrents]

Salby is a joke so of course you quote him. He's as confused as you turds are. That's the general consensus among real climate scientists. Salby is not respected. He is one of the 3%.

If you want we can into the details of why is wrong but let's try to concentrate on the simple science of CO2 properties.

So everyone understands that -to make it simple - CO2 is like the glass in a greenhouse right?

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from Lucrum:

In which case you may want to argue your nonsense on another message board.
You don't seem to be making in "progress" here.

Well when the first simple demonstrable fact in an explanation is denied, it makes it tough to continue.

 

[jem]

1. there is no 97% that is a complete lie.

even cook who paper was shown to be fraudulent claimed it was 97% of the 34% who supported the agw.

there is no consensus with real scientists with real degrees.

2. Deal with the science not the messenger... this leftist ad hom crap is sub moron argumentation.

Quote from futurecurrents:

Salby is a joke so of course you quote him. He's as confused as you turds are. That's the general consensus among real climate scientists. Salby is not respected. He is one of the 3%.

If you want we can into the details of why is wrong but let's try to concentrate on the simple science of CO2 properties.

So everyone understands that -to make it simple - CO2 is like the glass in a greenhouse right?