US seared during hottest year on record by far

[MarketMasher]

The problem is that an emerging economy like China is not going to stop dumping stuff into the water and air

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21005228

Their attitude is that the western industrialized countries polluted all they wanted to gain economic advantages, so trying to control it now is their attempt to stifle China's growth.

It is far more profitable to pollute unrestricted, since the costs of cleaning up are nil and you can socialize the mess to the government.

I vaguely remember a news story a long while ago where some factory near a state border was polluting too much from its smokestacks - so they built the smokestacks higher so the wind would carry the crap further until it landed in its neighboring state - more profit for the company execs and the bad effects and cleanup get pawned off on somebody else.

Since global warming is invariable linked with pollution, I figure something bad has eventually got to come from dumping crap for a century into the air and water. It's like dumping a pail of shit and piss over your fence every day into your neighbor's yard - your place is clean for a while and it's your neighbor's headache - until there's enough of it that you can't escape the stench of it anymore either.

 

[futurecurrents]

Yes the trend has leveled off. If trend is defined by a decade of data.

 

[jem]

We covered this.

The UK met data showed the warming trend was not statistically significant.


the "warminng" trend was less than on tenth of a degree and the margin for error is 1.5 tenths of degree.

your chart shows the warming trend has plateaued which is in major contrast to the the models.

Its why your UK climatologist were caught with emails fudging the data.







"The Skeptical Science temperature trend calculator can be used to test this question. The trend in the HadCRUT4 global surface temperature dataset since 1997 is 0.084 ± 0.152°C per decade (although we have not yet updated the HadCRUT4 data, the GISS and NCDC datasts show a similar warming trend since 1997). While the trend is not statistically significant, the central value is positive, meaning the average surface temperature has most likely warmed over this period."

Quote from futurecurrents:

Just read this

If you were engaging in social media this past weekend, you might have found an October 13, 2012 article suggesting that global warming stopped 16 years ago. The article is here. David Rose of the Daily Mail wrote it. The article says the UK Met Office sent out a news release release saying its data showed that global warming has stopped and that there is no “discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.” It now comes to light that this information is not true. The UK Met Office did not release a statement suggesting that “global warming stopped 16 years ago.” The UK Met Office, in fact, disavows any association with Mr. Rose and his article and says it was never asked any questions regarding the actual science of climate change and global warming by Mr. Rose. On October 14, 2012 – one day after Mr. Rose’s article appeared in the Daily Mail – the UK Met Office released its own blog post discussing the issues with the Daily Mail article. It’s very interesting reading.

The Daily Mail article carried this headline: Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released… and here is the chart to prove it The chart that supposedly “proves it” is below.

snip

So … it is still warming after all. In fact, in a report released by the National Climatic Data Center this week, global land and ocean surface temperatures for the month of September 2012 tied with 2005 as the warmest September on record, at 0.67 degrees Celsius (1.21 degrees Fahrenheit) above the 20th century average of 15.0 degrees Celsius (59.0 degrees Fahrenheit). It appears that the rate of warming has slowed slightly at this time; in other words, at the moment, it’s not increasing in warmth as fast as it was. Temperatures remain at all-time highs since records began, however, and our warming climate continues to break its own records.

Bottom line: On October 13, 2012, the Daily Mail posted an article crediting the UK Met Office with saying that global warming stopped 16 years ago. The article went viral this week. One day later, however, the UK Met Office disavowed the Daily Mail article, saying it did not say global warming had stopped and was not contacted by the article’s author. According to the UK Met Office and tens of thousands of other scientists worldwide, global temperatures are still rising.

full article....

http://earthsky.org/earth/uk-met-office-responds-global-warming-did-not-stop-16-years-ago

you still have not answered directly, is CO2 a greenhouse gas?

 

[jem]

I see you now understand.

we have not been warming and your 98 percent of climatoligist quote had nothing to do with CO2.

===========
so what length of time chart should we be looking at and why.


I have got the 15 year chart covered.
And I have the earth history chart from the ice cores covered.

Both show we are just bouncing around in the temperature range.

Quote from futurecurrents:

Yes the trend has leveled off. If trend is defined by a decade of data.

 

[jem]

comment in the mail article.
---


The Met Office response is quite inadequate. It has not gotten any warmer for 16 years (and has cooled considerably over the last 10). And if you start in 1999, as they suggest, you'd be in the pit of a really nasty La Nina, and starting in 1997 is before the severe peak of 1998. There has not been statistically significant warming since around 1995, in any case. (So much for end point fallacy.) They fail to explain why warming was as (or more) rapid from 1910 to 1940 as it was from 1980 - 2010, in spite of the fact that CO2 did not begin really to take off until after 1950. (Both were positive PDO periods). They also fail to account for microsite (or even mesosite), but instead "homogenize" the few well sited stations away. (This is four times as bad as failing to account for TOBS -- but in the opposite direction.) So, yes, there is warming. But it appears to be highballed by a factor of two. You can't run away from the data.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...y-released--chart-prove-it.html#ixzz2HuSdkSKu
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[futurecurrents]

jem, you STILL have not answered my question, is CO2 a greenhouse gas?

 

[futurecurrents]

Oh, I get it jem, the 98% don't say CO2, they use the blanket term greenhouse gasses or human activity. Darn, got me. Good lawyering there


The scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is more than 90% certain that humans are causing it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.[1][2][3][4] This scientific consensus is expressed in synthesis reports, by scientific bodies of national or international standing, and by surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their peer-reviewed publications, and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys.

National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 which states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[5]
The main conclusions of the IPCC on global warming were the following:

The global average surface temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and 0.17 °C per decade in the last 30 years.[6]
"There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities", in particular emissions of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane.[7]
If greenhouse gas emissions continue the warming will also continue, with temperatures projected to increase by 1.4 °C to 5.8 °C between 1990 and 2100. Accompanying this temperature increase will be increases in some types of extreme weather and a projected sea level rise.[8] On balance the impacts of global warming will be significantly negative, especially for larger values of warming.[9]
No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.[10][11] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions.

 

[futurecurrents]

A survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused (Oreskes 2004). 75% of the papers agreed with the consensus position while 25% made no comment either way (focused on methods or paleoclimate analysis).


Subsequent research has confirmed this result. A survey of 3146 earth scientists asked the question "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" (Doran 2009). More than 90% of participants had Ph.D.s, and 7% had master’s degrees. Overall, 82% of the scientists answered yes. However, what are most interesting are responses compared to the level of expertise in climate science. Of scientists who were non-climatologists and didn't publish research, 77% answered yes. In contrast, 97.5% of climatologists who actively publish research on climate change responded yes. As the level of active research and specialization in climate science increases, so does agreement that humans are significantly changing global temperatures.

Anderegg 2010
This overwhelming consensus among climate experts is confirmed by an independent study that surveys all climate scientists who have publicly signed declarations supporting or rejecting the consensus. They find between 97% to 98% of climate experts support the consensus (Anderegg 2010). Moreover, they examine the number of publications by each scientist as a measure of expertise in climate science. They find the average number of publications by unconvinced scientists (eg - skeptics) is around half the number by scientists convinced by the evidence. Not only is there a vast difference in the number of convinced versus unconvinced scientists, there is also a considerable gap in expertise between the two groups.


Scientific organizations endorsing the consensus
The following scientific organizations endorse the consensus position that "most of the global warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities":

American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO
British Antarctic Survey
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Environmental Protection Agency
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
Federation of American Scientists
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA)
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Royal Meteorological Society
Royal Society of the UK
The Academies of Science from 19 different countries all endorse the consensus. 13 countries have signed a joint statement endorsing the consensus position:

Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academie des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias (Mexico)
Russian Academy of Sciences
Academy of Science of South Africa
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (USA) (12 Mar 2009 news release)
A letter from 18 scientific organizations to US Congress states:

"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver. These conclusions are based on multiple independent lines of evidence, and contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science."
The consensus is also endorsed by a Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC), including the following bodies:

African Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Madagascar's National Academy of Arts, Letters and Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Academy of Science of South Africa
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Other Academies of Sciences that endorse the consensus:

Australian Academy of Science
Royal Society of New Zealand
Polish Academy of Sciences




However, a lawyer named jem fervently disagrees that there is a consensus......... So we can't be sure. LOL

 

[jem]

Quote from futurecurrents:

jem, you STILL have not answered my question, is CO2 a greenhouse gas?

I told you on previous threads.
then you come back with non sequitors about CO2 trapping heat.. which then I give you and ricter metaphors... such as a mom throwing a blanket on a child at night.
is the blanker responsible for the warming or mom.

and you now have weakened you case further since since you admit that the earth can outgas CO2.

 

[jem]

you are such a troll.
the poll was not about CO2 or greenhouse gasses... can't you fricken read your own materials.

Had I been asked I would have said yes just like the 82 percent of scientists. I suspect man is contributing to warming.

You are pretending the polls means something... when it did not even address CO2.

Quote from futurecurrents:

Oh, I get it jem, the 98% don't say CO2, they use the blanket term greenhouse gasses or human activity. Darn, got me. Good lawyering there


The scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is more than 90% certain that humans are causing it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.[1][2][3][4] This scientific consensus is expressed in synthesis reports, by scientific bodies of national or international standing, and by surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their peer-reviewed publications, and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys.

National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 which states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[5]
The main conclusions of the IPCC on global warming were the following:

The global average surface temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and 0.17 °C per decade in the last 30 years.[6]
"There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities", in particular emissions of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane.[7]
If greenhouse gas emissions continue the warming will also continue, with temperatures projected to increase by 1.4 °C to 5.8 °C between 1990 and 2100. Accompanying this temperature increase will be increases in some types of extreme weather and a projected sea level rise.[8] On balance the impacts of global warming will be significantly negative, especially for larger values of warming.[9]
No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.[10][11] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions.