Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 97 to 120 of 184

Thread: Climate Alarmists Foiled: No US Warming Since 2005

  1. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    What EXACTLY do 97% of scientists agree on?
    Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.

  2. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Many of these scientists tried to have their names removed from the consensus list. IPCC said that they were the minority opinions in individual reports, so that they were still part of favourable reports, hence the definition of a consensus: amongst a consensus, there are always those that disagree within that group.

    In any case, scientific progress is never based on consensus or polling. That's because innovative scientific progress happens with those who dispute the status quo. Many scientists are professors, and when they've been teaching stuff for decades, and some upstart comes up with research that contradicts that, there's always the cries of 'preposterous!' or 'nonsense!'

    Case in point was the discovery of the cause of peptic ulcers. The traditional consensus was that excess acid was produced by strees, and relief was to drink milk. Then, 20 years ago, come 2 Australian doctors who discovered that ulcers were caused by bacteria, and a simple antibiotic could cure it. The idea was so radical that they couldn't get published by any respectable medical journal. Now, treatment of helico bacter with antibiotics is routine in the case of peptic ulcers.

    If scientific progress was limited by consensus, the world would still be flat, and doctors would still be bleeding patients.

    The IPCC is a government funded project, and if climate change/global warming was accepted as not happening, or not caused by human activity, there would be no point for governments to fund it along with the thousands of climatologists that it employs. They would all lose their jobs. That's why they're always tweaking their datasets and mathematical prediction models, that have proven to be spectatularly over stated in the last 30 years.
    It is the consensus until it is not. Notwithstanding all of the "science" you and the deniers have been spouting for years the consensus has not changed.

  3. #99
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,470
    Quote Originally Posted by toguy5252 View Post
    Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.
    That’s all rear view mirror.

    No call to action there.

    Do 97% agree on how much warming there has been?


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  4. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    That’s all rear view mirror.

    No call to action there.

    Do 97% agree on how much warming there has been?
    The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.4 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months.

    The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.


    The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost an average of 286 billion tons of ice per year between 1993 and 2016, while Antarctica lost about 127 billion tons of ice per year during the same time period. The rate of Antarctica ice mass loss has tripled in the last decade.

    Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.


    Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and that the snow is melting earlier.

    Global sea level rose about 8 inches in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century and is accelerating slightly every year.

    Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.

    The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.

    Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.13,14 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.

  5. #101
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    27,679
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post

    Do 97% agree on how much warming there has been?
    It is not a matter of degree.

    It is a matter of degrees that are rising. That is the 97% consensus.

  6. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by toguy5252 View Post
    The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century,
    This sound like it could be right. 1 degree c per century
    We are coming out of an ice age & it was warmer in the medieval warm period

    a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.
    This is the theory. However proving this empirically is actually quite difficult
    there are also other theories including natural variability, solar variability, ocean multidecadal oscillations etc

    4 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months.
    why was 2017 & 2018 not warmer than 2016?
    We put more CO2 in the air.
    Obviously not an explicitly iron clad linear relationship


    The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.
    This I question as accurately mapping the temperature of the oceans is extremely problematic. The oceans are huge
    Any data from the 1960s -1990s will definitely be spotty, error prone and of questionable quality for making such a claim
    There is a new Argo system which is likely far more reliable, however I do not think it has a long history 10-15 years maybe


    The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost an average of 286 billion tons of ice per year between 1993 and 2016, while Antarctica lost about 127 billion tons of ice per year during the same time period. The rate of Antarctica ice mass loss has tripled in the last decade.
    Ice does tend to melt after an ice age

    What is your source for the antarctic claim?
    I have read the antarctic is actually increasing in ice mass

    Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.
    Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and that the snow is melting earlier.
    Ice does tend to melt after an ice age


    Global sea level rose about 8 inches in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century and is accelerating slightly every year.
    How many millimeters per year? Head for the hills !!!!
    a lot of sea level rise is actually settling of the land or erosion

    Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.
    In the summer
    what happens in the winter

    The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.
    record temperatures How odd? The record is less than 200 years old. records will continue to be made
    How many were in ever growing cities with more & more asphalt and other sources of heat vs say farmland, mountains scrub land or the forests?
    Just about all of them I guess as there are not many weather stations set up in farmland, scrub land or the forests, despite them representing the vast majority of the land area

    Intense rainfall??? , odd as rain tends to cool things down

    Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.
    Careful with this claim
    ph is logarithmic & you are measuring extremely dilute hydrogen ion concentrations
    a 30% change as you describe is moving the ph from 8.37 to 8.24
    I bet the ph meters used for most of those measurements are accurate to i decimal place

    The oceans are filled with salts (borates ,carbonates, NaCl etc) these act as natural buffers to ph change (do you recall grade 12 chemistry?)
    I am not saying the ph has not changed, but the oceans will never become acidic despite some claims/ (scare tactics- acid? oh that is bad) by alarmists

    13,14 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.
    The amount depends on who is calculating the carbon balance
    The IPCCs numbers indicate an absorption time of 50 to 100 years (I can't recall exactly,but it a big double digit number)
    Murray Salby & Hermann Hynde (spelling?) think it is closer to 5 years.
    if it is 5 years the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere which is man made is about 4%


    BTW Murray Salby did a lot of the good work to help stave off Ozone depletion by CFCs

    Oceans / water release CO2 with higher temperatures
    The ice core studies show temperature increase before the CO2 increase in the past- That is a problem for alarmists

    The IPCC predicts armageddon based upon computer models which produce predictions which have consistently overstated the actual temperature changes

  7. #103
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,470
    Quote Originally Posted by toguy5252 View Post
    The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.4 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months.

    The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.


    The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost an average of 286 billion tons of ice per year between 1993 and 2016, while Antarctica lost about 127 billion tons of ice per year during the same time period. The rate of Antarctica ice mass loss has tripled in the last decade.

    Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.


    Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and that the snow is melting earlier.

    Global sea level rose about 8 inches in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century and is accelerating slightly every year.

    Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.

    The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.

    Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.13,14 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.
    97% of scientists agree on all of this?


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  8. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    97% of scientists agree on all of this?
    absolutely not
    what they might agree upon is there has been some warming
    a smaller number will agree humans are contributing to this warming
    a far smaller number agree that it is dangerous

    Again, science is not settled by opinion poll or consensus

    EUGENICS: WHEN SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS LEADS TO MASS MURDER
    https://www.thegwpf.com/eugenics-whe...o-mass-murder/

    The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/...as-not-a-myth/

  9. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    ...

    Do 97% agree on how much warming there has been?
    Only 3% say there's no warming like the OP claimed. That's pretty significant.

  10. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnLarue View Post
    absolutely not
    what they might agree upon is there has been some warming
    a smaller number will agree humans are contributing to this warming
    a far smaller number agree that it is dangerous
    ...
    Where did you come up with this bullshit?

    Here's a quick summary of the studies on support in the scientific community.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey...climate_change

    Almost all agree there is warming.
    Depending on the poll, between 66 and 97% of the scientific community says human impact contributes at least half the warming.
    Up to 25% believe humans are having an impact but that impact represents less than half the warming.
    1 or 2% believe humans are not having an impact and a similar claim there is no warming.

  11. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by basketcase View Post
    Where did you come up with this bullshit?

    Here's a quick summary of the studies on support in the scientific community.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey...climate_change

    Almost all agree there is warming.
    Depending on the poll, between 66 and 97% of the scientific community says human impact contributes at least half the warming.
    Up to 25% believe humans are having an impact but that impact represents less than half the warming.
    1 or 2% believe humans are not having an impact and a similar claim there is no warming.
    None of which contradicts what I stated
    what they might agree upon is there has been some warming
    a smaller number will agree humans are contributing to this warming
    a far smaller number agree that it is dangerou

    Depending on the poll as you say

    http://www.petitionproject.org/
    31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
    including 9,029 with PhDs

    Purpose of Petition

    The purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

    Publicists at the United Nations, Mr. Al Gore, and their supporters frequently claim that only a few “skeptics” remain – skeptics who are still unconvinced about the existence of a catastrophic human-caused global warming emergency.

    It is evident that 31,487 Americans with university degrees in science – including 9,029 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,487 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

    These scientists are instead convinced that the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity and that government action on the basis of this hypothesis would unnecessarily and counterproductively damage both human prosperity and the natural environment of the Earth.
    as best I can tell The source for the 97% was the clown John Cook
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/...-warming-meme/
    Skeptical Science conspiracy theorist John Cook runs another survey trying to prove that false "97% of climate scientists believe in global warming" meme
    Mr Cook committed a huge fraud. If you wrote a paper on climate you were counted in his 97 % regardless of your conclusion
    When asked for his working papers for an audit they disappeared
    he runs a well funded dis-information website
    https://skepticalscience.com/
    If you read the counter arguments carefully you will notice a pattern of deceit, defectionand in many cases avoidance of a direct answer

  12. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by basketcase View Post
    Only 3% say there's no warming like the OP claimed. That's pretty significant.
    the planet has a long history (billions of years) of warming and cooling with lots of up and down cycles within cycles
    we are still coming out of an ice age so some warming is to be expected
    the medieval warm period was warmer than the present, the little age which followed it was colder than the present
    the 1970s were colder than the 1930s

    Again facts settle science not opinion polls

  13. #109
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    13,400
    Blog Entries
    1
    The year 1934 was a very hot year in the United States, ranking sixth behind 2012, 2016, 2015, 2006, and 1998. However, global warming takes into account temperatures over the entire planet, including the oceans. The land area of the U.S. accounts for only 2% of Earth's total surface area. Despite the U.S. sweltering in 1934, that year was not especially hot over the rest of the planet, as you can see on the 1934 map below. Globally, 1934 temperatures were actually cooler than average for the 20th century.

    Climate change skeptics have pointed to 1934 in the U.S. as proof that recent hot years are not unusual. Choosing the year 1934 is an obvious example of "cherry-picking" a single fact that supports a claim, while ignoring the rest of the data. In fact they have to cherry pick both a location (the U.S.) and a year (1934) to find data that is far from the global trend. Globally, the years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019 are the hottest on record, so far.


    On ignore: Disrespectful Individuals!!

  14. #110
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnLarue View Post
    the planet has a long history (billions of years) of warming and cooling with lots of up and down cycles within cycles
    we are still coming out of an ice age so some warming is to be expected
    the medieval warm period was warmer than the present, the little age which followed it was colder than the present
    the 1970s were colder than the 1930s

    Again facts settle science not opinion polls
    Medieval warm period was a local event, not global.
    Get your facts straight.

    The planet has never been this warm in the history of humanity before and hasn't seen this high CO2 since the last time there was massive polar melts.
    To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle

  15. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by Frankfooter View Post
    Medieval warm period was a local event, not global.
    Get your facts straight.

    The planet has never been this warm in the history of humanity before and hasn't seen this high CO2 since the last time there was massive polar melts.
    Oh you are back
    That was a short little break for us

    The medieval warm period was not an local event

    The models of imminent doom have missed their predictions by a lot
    Dont bother with your silly little graph- Nobody trusts you

  16. #112
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnLarue View Post
    The medieval warm period was not an local event
    Indeed it wasnt (important parts in red): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period

    The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) also known as the Medieval Climate Optimum, or Medieval Climatic Anomaly was a time of warm climate in the North Atlantic region lasting from c. 950 to c. 1250.

    It was likely related to warming elsewhere while some other regions were colder, such as the tropical Pacific. Average global mean temperatures have been calculated to be similar to early-mid 20th century warming.

    Possible causes of the Medieval Warm Period include increased solar activity, decreased volcanic activity, and changes to ocean circulation

  17. #113
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnLarue View Post
    Oh you are back
    That was a short little break forus

    The medieval warm period was not an local event

    The models of imminent doom have missed their predictions by a lot
    Dont bother with your silly little graph- Nobody trusts you
    Start with reading the wiki page on the period.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period

    As for the graph, I don't care if you trust me.
    This chart comes from Gavin Schmidt, the director of NASA's GISS program.
    https://www.giss.nasa.gov/staff/gschmidt/
    https://twitter.com/ClimateOfGavin?r...Ctwgr%5Eauthor

    Its the most current and the most legit chart around.
    The fact that you refuse to accept him as legit just cement's your 'science denier' title.

    You don't get more legit then the head of NASA's climate department.
    To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle

  18. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil C. McNasty View Post
    Indeed it wasnt (important parts in red): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
    From the wiki page you quoted but didn't understand:
    The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) also known as the Medieval Climate Optimum, or Medieval Climatic Anomaly was a time of warm climate in the North Atlantic region lasting from c. 950 to c. 1250.


    By the way, careful on your use of insults.
    I owe you one and will be watching.
    To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle

  19. #115
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,470
    Quote Originally Posted by Frankfooter View Post
    Medieval warm period was a local event, not global.
    Get your facts straight.

    The planet has never been this warm in the history of humanity before and hasn't seen this high CO2 since the last time there was massive polar melts.
    Given accurate measuring devices are less than 150 years old and 2/3 of the globe is covered in water, that’s a bold statement.


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  20. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnLarue View Post
    None of which contradicts what I stated ...
    What reality do you live in? Since when is well over 66% of scientists a "far smaller number"?

  21. #117
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnLarue View Post
    the planet has a long history (billions of years)...
    No shit.

    What you would notice that during those few changes that were as rapid as we are seeing we saw massive extinctions. In one of the ice ages the human population dropped from several hundred thousand to somewhere between 1,000 and 10,000. With modern technology that number would be far larger but the simple result (as has been seen in numerous periods of climactic change) is war and strife and is clearly no good for human society.

    One of the current leading theories about the bronze age collapse is that climate change caused the uprooting of people who became raiders and caused the destruction of 3 of the 4 major empires of the time (only the Egyptians survived and that is only because after a battle they bribed the sea people with control over Egyptian land in what is now Israel and Lebanon).

  22. #118
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    Given accurate measuring devices are less than 150 years old and 2/3 of the globe is covered in water, that’s a bold statement.
    Here.

    Last time CO2 levels were this high, there were trees at the South Pole
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/...climate-change
    To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle

  23. #119
    Quote Originally Posted by Frankfooter View Post
    Start with reading the wiki page on the period.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
    Wiki?
    Why note quote the Center for Ploicy alternatives or greenpeace
    Come on, I thought you were going to serious


    As for the graph, I don't care if you trust me.
    This chart comes from Gavin Schmidt, the director of NASA's GISS program.
    https://www.giss.nasa.gov/staff/gschmidt/
    https://twitter.com/ClimateOfGavin?r...Ctwgr%5Eauthor
    The same Gavin Schmidt who refuses to debate any real scientists ?
    He refused to be in the same interview with Roy spencer
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYKggC5VOzA
    If Gavin Schmidt is so sure of his position he should have no issue with a healthy debate with another scientist
    Apparently not


    Its the most current and the most legit chart around.
    The fact that you refuse to accept him as legit just cement's your 'science denier' title.

    You don't get more legit then the head of NASA's climate department.
    You just got banned for two days for insulting & you call me a science denier first chance you get?
    Are you sure that is a wise policy?

  24. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by basketcase View Post
    What reality do you live in? Since when is well over 66% of scientists a "far smaller number"?
    The last time I looked 66% is a far smaller number that 97%
    Is it not in your world?

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •