What could be the cause for sixteen years of no increase in global temperatures but an increase in carbon dioxide ? Are the climate models the problem or is there another cause ?
HERE]'s the most recent chart:
I don’t think it could accurately be described as “sixteen years of no increase in global temperatures”. What it is is random motion around a general, strong statistical uptrend.
What could be the cause for sixteen years of no increase in global temperatures but an increase in carbon dioxide ? Are the climate models the problem or is there another cause ?Climate is a function of several factors over many years. Temperatures for any given years are subject to the vagaries of statistical probability. There is no problem with the theory, only with the question, which misapprehends climate change. The question is like asking what caused heads to come up three times in a row in a series of coin flips.
What could be the cause for sixteen years of no increase in global temperatures but an increase in carbon dioxide ? Are the climate models the problem or is there another cause ?As mentioned already, the climate models are fine, the question is the problem. The climate denial think tanks have done an excellent job of spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt, as they planned all along. In this case they cherry picked 1998, a statistical outlier, as their baseline for saying the climate is no longer warming. The fact is the first decade of the 21st Century was the warmest on record by a good margin. Until that became widely known the climate change deniers were saying the Earth was cooling. They changed their meme when it became impossible to explain how the Earth was cooling when we kept setting temperature records year after year. I wonder what they'll be saying in 10 years when the U.S. Midwest record heat wave of 2012 becomes the norm.
At some point they will admit that the climate is warming because it will be too hard to deny any longer. At that point they wil switch their message to their current backup plan… that the earth is warming but it has nothing to do with man, its just part of a natural cyclical process that the climate has gone through in the past. Unfortunately its a lot easier to perpetuate that concept since its harder to disprove with 100% certainty.
What could be the cause for sixteen years of no increase in global temperatures but an increase in carbon dioxide ? Are the climate models the problem or is there another cause ?What make you claim "global temperatures" have seen no global increase? Are you claiming the physics behind atmospheric greenhouse gases is something that can be disregarded? - PS. Here's some excellent educational information regarding our warming planet.
From SkepticalScience.com David Rose Hides the Rise in Global Warming] Posted on 19 March 2013 by dana1981, John Russell, John Mason Watts Interview – Denial and Reality Mix like Oil and Water] Posted on 14 March 2013 by dana1981 Drost, Karoly, and Braganza Find Human Fingerprints in Global Warming] Posted on 11 March 2013 by dana1981
What could be the cause for sixteen years of no increase in global temperatures but an increase in carbon dioxide ? Are the climate models the problem or is there another cause ?There are 6 billion human beings on earth, every one of them burning something. You figure it out. ....
What could be the cause for sixteen years of no increase in global temperatures but an increase in carbon dioxide ? Are the climate models the problem or is there another cause ?This is simply untrue; the facts speak from themselves: Ten Charts That Make Clear The Planet Just Keeps Warming By Joe Romm on Oct 15, 2012 at 6:46 pm http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/15/1014151/ten-charts-that-make-clear-the-planet-just-keeps-warming/ http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/10/15/fox-falls-for-tabloid-science/190630 http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-temps.html
http://www.skepticalscience.com/david-rose-hides-rise-global-warming.html David Rose Hides the Rise in Global Warming Posted on 19 March 2013 by dana1981, John Russell, John Mason It seems like we have to debunk this myth on a weekly basis, as it keeps popping up in the mainstream media. So, yet again, this is global warming: The overall warming of the Earth over the past 15 years was larger than over the previous 15 years. Global warming has not stopped; it's not even slowed down. A leading purveyor of the myth to the contrary is journalist David Rose, of the British tabloid The Mail on Sunday and Vanity Fair. We've previously pre-bunked and debunked his articles on the subject, but he appears oblivious to any criticism of his work. "No, the world ISN'T getting warmer (as you may have noticed)," wrongly begins an article published in last week's Mail on Sunday. Try saying 'there's no noticeable warming' to the Australians and Americans who suffered the greatest run of heat waves ever recorded; or the British or New Yorkers who were flooded out of their homes during 2012.
New Research Confirms Global Warming Has Accelerated]
A new study of ocean warming has just been published in Geophysical Research Letters by Balmaseda, Trenberth, and Källén (2013). There are several important conclusions which can be drawn from this paper. Completely contrary to the popular contrarian myth, global warming has accelerated, with more overall global warming in the past 15 years than the prior 15 years. This is because about 90% of overall global warming goes into heating the oceans, and the oceans have been warming dramatically.Read the article completely. As always, the AGW deniers cherry pick evidence and ignore the total picture when they say the rate of warming has slowed.
New Research Confirms Global Warming Has Accelerated]A new study of ocean warming has just been published in Geophysical Research Letters by Balmaseda, Trenberth, and Källén (2013). There are several important conclusions which can be drawn from this paper. Completely contrary to the popular contrarian myth, global warming has accelerated, with more overall global warming in the past 15 years than the prior 15 years. This is because about 90% of overall global warming goes into heating the oceans, and the oceans have been warming dramatically.Read the article completely. As always, the AGW deniers cherry pick evidence and ignore the total picture when they say the rate of warming has slowed.
Figure 1: Ocean Heat Content from 0 to 300 meters (grey), 700 m (blue), and total depth (violet) from ORAS4, as represented by its 5 ensemble members. The time series show monthly anomalies smoothed with a 12-month running mean, with respect to the 1958–1965 base period. Hatching extends over the range of the ensemble members and hence the spread gives a measure of the uncertainty as represented by ORAS4 (which does not cover all sources of uncertainty). The vertical colored bars indicate a two year interval following the volcanic eruptions with a 6 month lead (owing to the 12-month running mean), and the 1997–98 El Niño event again with 6 months on either side. On lower right, the linear slope for a set of global heating rates (W/m2) is given.
Distilled to its essence, what this means is the next El Niño is going to cause substantial air temperature increases. Summer 2012 will not be the hottest on record in the U.S. for long.
sd reminds me of a certain sp over at SkepticForum, makes me want to share a recent post from over there:
sp/d - you continue to amaze with your ability to compartmentalize and isolate one issue from another. DIVIDE AND CONQUER! right, that's the strategy Manufacturing Doubt as opposed to struggling towards learning and understanding. ~ ~ ~ You know you're playing with quote mining and careful editing - that's the stuff of fiction writers and NOT of the scientific endeavor. Which is in a struggle with all the unknowns and confusion of real biosphere evidence... trying to extract some genuine usable knowledge. To youz all that's just a joke, to be derided and scorned - to me your attitude is a tragedy. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ sp/d, {do} you practice that denialist's art of compartmentalizing and pretending one matter/factor can be isolated from another. Does the term holistic mean anything to you? Biosphere? Web of existence?The AGW consensus is NOT formed by scientists. The AGW consensus IS compelled by the evidence. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ One Directional Skepticism Equals Denial http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=19847&start=40
The leopard will not change his spots…
pulling his tail is great sport…
The Warmists will continue to scream long after the ICE AGE has cooled the planet…you see colder temps mean that the planet is warming…
Give it up
You will be bigger people when you admit your errors…
The leopard will not change his spots.... pulling his tail is great sport.... The Warmists will continue to scream long after the ICE AGE has cooled the planet.....you see colder temps mean that the planet is warming...... Give it up You will be bigger people when you admit your errors.....Trolling is against the rules. Acting contrary to stated rules may get you banned. Thanks for understanding.
The leopard will not change his spots.... pulling his tail is great sport.... The Warmists will continue to scream long after the ICE AGE has cooled the planet.....you see colder temps mean that the planet is warming...... Give it up You will be bigger people when you admit your errors.....So your original question was not a request for information, but rather slyly hidden bait. You are ignoring reality. Begone, troll. Edit: Doug beat me to it, and he has the power of the blue font.
I also noticed that sine dues failed to take into account the effect AGW has on animal life and not just extinction due to rapid climate change. Animals are evolving to accommodate to the shift in temperatures, e.g. The European black cap is now migrating into new areas with colder climates, such as England where they didn’t previously exist. Mating and migratory patterns are being altered as well as nesting sites and food sources as plant life disappears or alters to produce tougher seeds. Yet another example of proof that AGW is a fact.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060608-global-warming.html
Cap’t Jack
Not to mention that arguably an even larger threat than AGW is ocean acidification, also caused by increased CO2.
Not to mention that arguably an even larger threat than AGW is ocean acidification, also caused by increased CO2.Which also decimates sea life not to mention overfishing off the Grand Banks, Chesapeake Bay, and the Carolinas where hog waste has polluted the waters to create flesh eating bacteria spurred on by the ever warming ocean. And the facts keep stacking up as the deniers stick their heads deeper in the sand. Cap't Jack
I also noticed that sine dues failed to take into account the effect AGW has on animal life and not just extinction due to rapid climate change. Animals are evolving to accommodate to the shift in temperatures, e.g. The European black cap is now migrating into new areas with colder climates, such as England where they didn't previously exist. Mating and migratory patterns are being altered as well as nesting sites and food sources as plant life disappears or alters to produce tougher seeds. Yet another example of proof that AGW is a fact. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060608-global-warming.html Cap't JackFunny, I think yesterday I was dis'in USAToday, and today I found an impressive, nearly in-depth article. Frightening, yet timely.
Dan Vergano, USA TODAY | March 28, 2013 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/27/climate-change-seas/2024759/ "... The acidification taking place here guarantees the same for the rest of the world's oceans in the years ahead. This isn't the kind of acid that burns holes in chemist's shirt sleeves; ocean water is actually slightly alkaline. But since the start of the industrial revolution, the world's oceans have grown nearly 30% more acidic, according to a 2009 Scientific Committee on Oceanic Resources report. Why? Climate change, where heat-trapping carbon dioxide emitted into the air by burning coal, oil and other fossil fuels ends up as excess carbonic acid absorbed into the ocean. . ."
Here something to check out;