Global Warming

[Jasonofabitch]

Ha! More like 'Common Sense' - don't need 'Science' to work out the very obvious.

[IQS.RLOW]

Of course you don't need science.
People with religion rarely do.

[Rorschach]

Once more for SN who seems to have forgotten how to read due to climate change hysteria.

BTW no need for the ridicule... unless you want it back.

Now that was an interesting Map right SN?
Now having read the following... I would like to state for the record, it is a fairly accurate summary of my thoughts on the Climate Change/Global Warming hysteria. I have highlighted the facts I feel are relevant.

Link between climate and CO2 is far from clear
by Patrick Moore
News Weekly, October 25, 2014

The emergence of climate change as a pivotal global issue has brought with it an array of assumptions and predictions, many of which evoke fear and guilt.

In my opinion, there is no conclusive proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof, it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists.

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states: “It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”

“Extremely likely” is not a scientific term but rather a judgment. The IPCC defines “extremely likely” as a “95-100 per cent probability”. But upon further examination it is clear that these numbers are not the result of any mathematical calculation or statistical analysis.

These judgments are based almost entirely on the results of sophisticated computer models designed to predict the future of global climate. A computer model is not a crystal ball.

Perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of “extreme certainty” is to look at the historical record. When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at that time.

Then an ice age occurred 450 million years ago when CO2 was still about 10 times higher than today. There is some correlation, but little evidence, to support a direct causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature through the millenniums. The fact that there were both higher temperatures and an ice age at times when CO2 levels were 10 times higher than they are today fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the primary cause of climate change.

Today’s average global temperature is 14.5ºC. This compares with a low of about 12ºC during the periods of maximum glaciation in this ice age, to an average of 22ºC during the greenhouse ages, one of which occurred prior to the most recent ice age.

During the greenhouse ages, there was no ice on either pole, and all the land was tropical and sub-tropical. As recently as three million years ago the Canadian Arctic islands were forested.

Today, we live in an unusually cold period and there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be detrimental for humans and the majority of other species. There is reason to believe that a sharp cooling of the climate would be disastrous for human civilisation.

The IPCC states that humans have been the dominant cause of warming “since the mid-20th century”. From 1910 to 1940 there was an increase in global average temperature of 0.5ºC. There was then a 30-year “pause” until 1970, followed by an increase of 0.57ºC during the 30-year period from 1970 to 2000. Since then there has been no increase in average global temperature. This, in itself, tends to negate the validity of the computer models, as CO2 emissions have continued to accelerate during this time.

The increase in temperature between 1910 and 1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970 and 2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910-1940 to “human influence”. They are clear in their belief that human emissions impact only the increase “since the mid-20th century”.

It is important to recognise, in the face of dire predictions about a two-degree C rise in global average temperature, that humans are a tropical species. We evolved at the equator in a climate where freezing weather did not exist.

The only reasons we can survive these cold climates are fire, clothing and housing. It could be said that frost and ice are the enemies of life, except for those relatively few species that have evolved to adapt to freezing temperatures.

It is “extremely likely” that a warmer temperature than today’s would be far better than a cooler one.

If we wish to preserve natural biodiversity, wildlife and human well-being, we should simultaneously plan for both warming and cooling, recognising that cooling would be the more damaging of the two trends.

We do not know whether the present pause in temperature will remain for some time, or whether it will go up or down in the near future. What we do know with “extreme certainty” is that the climate is always changing, between pauses, and that we are not capable, with our limited knowledge, of predicting which way it will go next.

Patrick Moore, PhD (ecology), has been a leader in the international environmental field for more than 40 years. He was a co-founder of Greenpeace, and for seven years was a director of Greenpeace International. His book, Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist (2011), is available from Freedom Publishing Company books. He is the chairman of environmental studies at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy (FCPP), an independent Canadian public policy think-tank. This article is printed with the FCPP’s permission.

Dr Moore is visiting Australia on a speaking tour during October and November 2014.

http://www.newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=56748

You're argument is drowning in the FACTS BTW.

[AiA in Atlanta]

The dreaded Polar Vortex of 2014 is predicted to make a return to North America this winter ...

[IQS.RLOW]

The New Consensus

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor ... ng-crisis/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

How long will you religionists and global warming fanbois try and hold out against the science and rational thought?

[Jasonofabitch]

Yep, the Scientists are separating into their own groups like Religion did with Judaism, Christianity & Mohommedism and then those three separate into their own little agreements & dissagreements like Protestantism, Catholicism & Orthodox.
Some are in it for the money, other's the pussy and some just want both.

[Super Nova]

Ummm.... maybe my religion needs a reformation.

No... mine is the one true science god. You worship false idols.

However I offer you some fuel or it could be seen as the risk is growing as the pause hides the long term consequences of our inaction.

I have looked at your post and link Roach. Some of it is quite compelling..... I don't have time to find the counter evidence.

However I thought the article below would be of interest.

IPCC Climate Scientist: Global Warming ‘Pause’ Could Last 30 Years
4:45 PM 10/27/2014

Global warming? Maybe not anytime soon, according to a top United Nations scientist.

Dr. Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences told Bavarian Radio that the so-called “pause” in global warming could continue for another three decades.

Currently, satellite datasets show that the average global temperature has not warmed in more than 18 years. Latif told BR that temperatures would start accelerating between 2020 and 2025, meaning global warming could be on pause or slowed down for the next 6 to 11 years. This could put the total time of the pause between 24 and 29 years.

Latif, who is also a top scientist with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the pause in warming was no surprise to him since he predicted the warming hiatus back in 2008.

“That does not surprise climate scientists like me at all, as for us this is completely normal,” Latif told BR. “When one takes a look at the development since 1900, that is the last 110 years, then we see that it has not always gone up. Rather it has progressed in waves. This is why it is necessary to look at long time periods.”

“If we look at the entire time period, then it is impossible to miss seeing the rise,” Latif added. “In 2008 in the journal ‘Nature’ I myself predicted the pause… Back then it created a huge echo in the global media. I’m wondering why all of this seems to have been forgotten in the meantime.”

Latif is referring to a study he did back in 2008 that found the world could be entering an era of cooler temperatures, one that could last a decade or two. But liberal pundits pointed out that Latif’s forecast only went to 2015 — everything beyond was too hard to predict (kind of makes you wonder about other century-long climate predictions).

“The reaction went in every direction. The reaction was, as you just formulated: ‘Everything can’t be so bad!” Latif said.

Think Progress’s Joe Romm wrote in 2009 that, “No, Latif does not ‘anticipate’ maybe even two decades of cooling. He doesn’t even predict it. Again, as Latif will happily tell anyone who asks, ‘my only forecast is to 2015.’”

But now that it’s 2014, Latif seems to be reiterating what people (except Romm) thought he was saying in his 2008 study: the pause could last another decade.

“In this study I expressly said that it does not mean that it’s all over, but that the temperature increase will rise even faster – starting in 2020, 2025,” Latif told BR.

Interestingly enough, a recent study by Latif made a similar veiled prediction that temperatures would cool over the next decade due to natural oceanic cycles in the North Atlantic.

“Our model tells us that the phase with a rather high surface temperatures in the North Atlantic will continue also over the coming decade, however with a slightly negative trend,” Latif and fellow scientists wrote in a study published last month.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/27/ipcc- ... -30-years/

[Rorschach]

Ummm.... maybe my religion needs a reformation.

No... mine is the one true science god. You worship false idols.

However I offer you some fuel or it could be seen as the risk is growing as the pause hides the long term consequences of our inaction.

I have looked at your post and link Roach. Some of it is quite compelling..... I don't have time to find the counter evidence.

However I thought the article below would be of interest.

IPCC Climate Scientist: Global Warming ‘Pause’ Could Last 30 Years

I will read it SN, but from the title.... that's what they were saying very early on... just like when they changed; Global warming to Global cooling to Global dimming to Global warming to Climate Change.

[Rorschach]

Latif, who is also a top scientist with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the pause in warming was no surprise to him since he predicted the warming hiatus back in 2008.

Agrees with what I said. Actually someone else mentioned it much earlier, closer to just after the pause started.

Latif is referring to a study he did back in 2008 that found the world could be entering an era of cooler temperatures, one that could last a decade or two. But liberal pundits pointed out that Latif’s forecast only went to 2015 — everything beyond was too hard to predict (kind of makes you wonder about other century-long climate predictions).

Yep.

“In this study I expressly said that it does not mean that it’s all over, but that the temperature increase will rise even faster – starting in 2020, 2025,” Latif told BR.

YET...

Interestingly enough, a recent study by Latif made a similar veiled prediction that temperatures would cool over the next decade due to natural oceanic cycles in the North Atlantic.

And...

“Our model tells us that the phase with a rather high surface temperatures in the North Atlantic will continue also over the coming decade, however with a slightly negative trend,” Latif and fellow scientists wrote in a study published last month.

And we all know how accurate those models have been right... GIGO.
We'll just have to wait and see... I'm still in agreement with Patrick Moore, or should I say he's in agreement with me.

[IQS.RLOW]

It's official SN, you have a psychiatric condition known a pre-traumatic stress syndrome. That is, the traumatic stress you suffer when nothing traumatic happens

http://grist.org/climate-energy/climate ... scientist/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lise Van Susteren, a forensic psychiatrist based in Washington, D.C. — and co-author of the National Wildlife Federation’s report — calls this emotional reaction “pre-traumatic stress disorder,” a term she coined to describe the mental anguish that results from preparing for the worst, before it actually happens.

Nothing a few months in a straight jacket wouldn't fix.