• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Climate change lies are exposed

Scarecrow Akhbar

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
CLIMATE CHANGE LIES ARE EXPOSED
A damming report has highlighted questions over the credibility of a leading climate change body
Tuesday August 31,2010
By Donna Bowater THE world’s leading climate change body has been accused of losing credibility after a damning report into its research practices.


A high-level inquiry into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found there was “little evidence” for its claims about global warming.

It also said the panel had emphasised the negative impacts of climate change and made “substantive findings” based on little proof.

The review by the InterAcademy Council (IAC) was launched after the IPCC’s hugely embarrassing 2007 benchmark climate change report, which contained exaggerated and false claims that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.

The panel was forced to admit its key claim in support of global warming was lifted from a 1999 magazine article. The report was based on an interview with a little-known Indian scientist who has since said his views were “speculation” and not backed by research.
Fancy that.

Here's another:

Himalayan glaciers melting deadline 'a mistake'
The UN panel on climate change warning that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035 is wildly inaccurate, an academic says.

J Graham Cogley, a professor at Ontario Trent University, says he believes the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years.

He is astonished they "misread 2350 as 2035". The authors deny the claims.

Leading glaciologists say the report has caused confusion and "a catalogue of errors in Himalayan glaciology".

The Himalayas hold the planet's largest body of ice outside the polar caps - an estimated 12,000 cubic kilometres of water.

They feed many of the world's great rivers - the Ganges, the Indus, the Brahmaputra - on which hundreds of millions of people depend.

'Catastrophic rate'

In its 2007 report, the Nobel Prize-winning Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said: "Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate.

It is not plausible that Himalayan glaciers are disappearing completely within the next few decades

"Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2035," the report said.

It suggested three quarters of a billion people who depend on glacier melt for water supplies in Asia could be affected.

But Professor Cogley has found a 1996 document by a leading hydrologist, VM Kotlyakov, that mentions 2350 as the year by which there will be massive and precipitate melting of glaciers.

"The extrapolar glaciation of the Earth will be decaying at rapid, catastrophic rates - its total area will shrink from 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2350," Mr Kotlyakov's report said.

Mr Cogley says it is astonishing that none of the 10 authors of the 2007 IPCC report could spot the error and "misread 2350 as 2035".
Al Gore should give back his Piece Prize.
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
53,324
Reaction score
21,343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
CLIMATE CHANGE LIES ARE EXPOSED

Fancy that.

Here's another:

Himalayan glaciers melting deadline 'a mistake'

Al Gore should give back his Piece Prize.
From the actual report:

http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/report.html

The Committee concludes that the IPCC assessment process has been successful overall and has served society well. The commitment of many thousands of the world’s leading scientists and other experts to the assessment process and to the communication of the nature of our understanding of the changing climate, its impacts, and possible adaptation and mitigation strategies is a considerable achievement in its own right. Similarly, the sustained commitment of governments to the process and their buy-in to the results is a mark of a successful assessment. Through its unique partnership between scientists and governments, the IPCC has heightened public awareness of climate change, raised the level of scientific debate, and influenced the science agendas of many nations. However, despite these successes, some fundamental changes to the process and the management structure are essential, as discussed in this report and summarized below.
Executive Summary
Climate change is a long-term challenge that will require every nation to make decisions about how to respond. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme to help inform such decisions by producing comprehensive assessments of what is known about the physical climate system, its global and regional impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation. Sitting at the interface between science and politics, the IPCC assessment process has sustained a working dialog between the world’s governments and scientists since its inception in 1988. Representatives of 194 participating governments agree on the scope of the assessment, elect the scientific leaders of the assessment, nominate authors, review the results, and approve the summaries written for policy makers. More than a thousand volunteer scientists evaluate the available scientific, technological, and socioeconomic information on climate change, and draft and review the assessment reports. The thousands of scientists and government representatives who work on behalf of the IPCC in this non-traditional partnership are the major strength of the organization.
Through its assessment reports, the IPCC has gained enormous respect and even shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for informing climate policy and raising public awareness worldwide. However, amidst an increasingly intense public debate over the science, impacts, and cost of climate change, the IPCC has come under heightened scrutiny about its impartiality with respect to climate policy and about the accuracy and balance of its reports. In response, the United Nations and the IPCC commissioned the InterAcademy Council to convene a Committee to review the processes and procedures of the IPCC.
The Committee found that the IPCC assessment process has been successful overall. However, the world has changed considerably since the creation of the IPCC, with major advances in climate science, heated controversy on some climate-related issues, and an increased focus of governments on the impacts and potential responses to changing climate. A wide variety of interests have entered the climate discussion, leading to greater overall scrutiny and demands from stakeholders. The IPCC must continue to adapt to these changing conditions in order to continue serving society well in the future. The Committee’s key recommendations for improving IPCC’s assessment process are given below.
Lolz.... read the report.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,227
Reaction score
32,368
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
At some point an article crosses from "spin" to "just straight up make **** up."
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,227
Reaction score
32,368
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You're right, the UN Reports are spin making **** up.
I mean the article's interpretation of the reports. But you know that. You just wanted to spout more baseless partisan nonsense.
 

hazlnut

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
You're right, the UN Reports are spin making **** up.
Not according the report. Maybe you should read it before opening your mouth.

Obviously some writer at Express.uk has an agenda and put her own little spin on the report. Anybody who took one minute to read the actual report could see that.

The article is over-the-top laughably bias and full of misinformation and spin.

What's really funny is how hard you partisan deniers will work to find one writer, one op-ed piece that you can use. You will search and search until you find writer with an agenda willing write a b.s. misleading article. Doesn't that tell you something?

The only thing the OP confirms is that a few so-called reporters have their own agenda. Thank you, we already know that.

Thankfully, the scientific community IPCC, NASA, the majority of researchers in climate related fields are all still in agreement.
 

damianvincent

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
93
Reaction score
42
Location
Houston, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.

No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases.

DailyTech - Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
53,324
Reaction score
21,343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Promoting a hoax is "serving society well"?

Since when?
Well it seems that you have no interest in actually reading the report and would rather debate headlines. Not something I'm interested in. When you're ready to get destroyed in a debate about the actual report from your link, you're more than welcome to return to the thread. Until then, be gone troll.
 

hazlnut

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
Do you understand that everything you just listed is very disturbing evidence of Global Warming?

I don't know if you're new to this subject or what, but let me explain a few things:

Global Warming does not mean the end of Winter or cold weather. It actually means longer, colder winters.

All temperature, ice storms, snow, blizzards, freezing cold weather is a function of one thing... Heat.

Also, check your sources when you read about 'Global Cooling' - you're usually two clicks away from an industry front group financing fake 'science' websites to confuse voters/consumers.

Stick with the real scientists:

Climate Change: NASA's Eyes on the Earth
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
53,324
Reaction score
21,343
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.

No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases.

DailyTech - Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling
Oh no, a global cooling article.

DailyTech - Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

The graph for HadCRUT (above), as well as the linked graphs for RSS and UAH are generated month-to-month; the temperature declines span a full 12 months of data. The linked GISS graph was graphed for the months of January only, due to a limitation in the plotting program. Anthony Watts, who kindly provided the graphics, otherwise has no connection with the column. The views and comments are those of the author only.
Short Sharp Science: Who sparked the global cooling myth?

They say that in the 1970s, climate scientists claimed that we were headed for a mini ice-age. They then point out that this never happened, and so question the strength of current predictions that the globe will be between 2 and 5 °C warmer by 2100.

Fair enough. But was there ever a consensus over global cooling in the 1970s?

A few climate scientists have now scanned through the research literature of the time. For 1965 to 1979, they found seven articles that predicted cooling, 44 that predicted warming and 20 that were neutral. The results are being published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.
You can also read summaries on RealClimate and on ScienceNews, though if you're interested in how the myth of global cooling was turned on its head, it is well worth reading the researchers' own version, which is freely available (as a PDF).

In other words, it appears there was not a scientific consensus over global cooling. So what created the fuss?

Possibly a careful selection of news items by certain politicians. According to the version of the study currently available online:
When the myth of the 1970s global cooling scare arises in contemporary discussion over climate change, it is most often in the form of citations not to the scientific literature, but to news media coverage. That is where US Senator James Inhofe turned for much of the evidence to support his argument in a Senate floor speech in 2003 (Inhofe 2003). Chief among his evidence was a frequently cited Newsweek story: "The Cooling World" (Gwynne 1975).
 
Last edited:

damianvincent

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
93
Reaction score
42
Location
Houston, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Do you understand that everything you just listed is very disturbing evidence of Global Warming?

I don't know if you're new to this subject or what, but let me explain a few things:

Global Warming does not mean the end of Winter or cold weather. It actually means longer, colder winters.

All temperature, ice storms, snow, blizzards, freezing cold weather is a function of one thing... Heat.

Also, check your sources when you read about 'Global Cooling' - you're usually two clicks away from an industry front group financing fake 'science' websites to confuse voters/consumers.

Stick with the real scientists:

Climate Change: NASA's Eyes on the Earth
I do know a little bit here in this regard, and I'll remind you it's NASA's own temperature monitors recording this data. You can't have your cake and eat it too, global warming doomsdayers argue that the increase in Co2 is warming the planet, in a greenhouse effect. Sure we can get real wild in hollywood type science fiction and talk about the injection of fresh waters into the conveyor belt, and it's effect upon norther hemisphere's temperatures, but if you'd argue we're far enough along this 'doomsday' scenario to have reached that point, clearly we're not going to agree. Point being that all four major temperature tracking outlets are showing a major dip in global temperatures on average. Another point is that there are far more forces at play than the global warming doomsdayers enter into their equations, like the sun spot count, last time we hit such a solar minimum we experienced what is known as the little ice age here on Earth.
 

Councilman

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
4,454
Reaction score
1,654
Location
Riverside, County, CA.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
From my perspective I see the "Environmental Movement" with three main thrusts.

#1. Governmental control, It's another slice off the loaf reducing your personal rights to decide. When the new electric meters go into effect the Gov. will tell you how much you can use.
#2. A ploy to raise taxes based on false claims because Liberals have unquenchable need to spend more on less for things we don't need.
#3. Environmental Groups keep the HOAX alive for profit. They may be non profit, however thos at the top make a great deal of money.

At the outset most of the environmental goals were worthy of note but that was years ago. It's like the March of Dimes when Polio was under control and they had to look around for a new cause or look for a real job.
 

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Not according the report. Maybe you should read it before opening your mouth.

Obviously some writer at Express.uk has an agenda and put her own little spin on the report. Anybody who took one minute to read the actual report could see that.

The article is over-the-top laughably bias and full of misinformation and spin.

What's really funny is how hard you partisan deniers will work to find one writer, one op-ed piece that you can use. You will search and search until you find writer with an agenda willing write a b.s. misleading article. Doesn't that tell you something?

The only thing the OP confirms is that a few so-called reporters have their own agenda. Thank you, we already know that.

Thankfully, the scientific community IPCC, NASA, the majority of researchers in climate related fields are all still in agreement.
Hazl, you get busted on a daily basis spewing... spin. Do you really think anyone READS what you post anymore?
 

damianvincent

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
93
Reaction score
42
Location
Houston, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Wow, are you trying to compare the hard data, to a newsweek article from the 70's? I'll agree with you that the Senator who used that article to argue anything a moron, but once more the data is the data, and the full years chart is right here...



Clearly it's hard to have a greenhouse effect going on, and see such sharp drops in temperatures, it erased the past 100 years of warming. Their are many more vehicles in this equation than the global warming alarmists are factoring in, such as extraterrestrial activity, and hopefully I don't need to clarify this but I will I'm talking about solar activity, magnetic field stability, not aliens.

My whole point with this is that the alarmist behavior from groups who survive off government grants and the likes, is clearly hyperbole. The entire picture is not being presented. Worst of all, we see things like cap and trade working it's way through the Congress based on such nonsense, which will cause serious damage to our already fragile economy.
 

damianvincent

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
93
Reaction score
42
Location
Houston, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
From my perspective I see the "Environmental Movement" with three main thrusts.

#1. Governmental control, It's another slice off the loaf reducing your personal rights to decide. When the new electric meters go into effect the Gov. will tell you how much you can use.
#2. A ploy to raise taxes based on false claims because Liberals have unquenchable need to spend more on less for things we don't need.
#3. Environmental Groups keep the HOAX alive for profit. They may be non profit, however thos at the top make a great deal of money.

At the outset most of the environmental goals were worthy of note but that was years ago. It's like the March of Dimes when Polio was under control and they had to look around for a new cause or look for a real job.
No it's definitely profit, most of the 'scientific' groups survive off government grants, how many billions do you think our government alone have thrust into them over this doomsday BS they've hoisted upon us?
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,227
Reaction score
32,368
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Wow, are you trying to compare the hard data, to a newsweek article from the 70's? I'll agree with you that the Senator who used that article to argue anything a moron, but once more the data is the data, and the full years chart is right here...



Clearly it's hard to have a greenhouse effect going on, and see such sharp drops in temperatures, it erased the past 100 years of warming. Their are many more vehicles in this equation than the global warming alarmists are factoring in, such as extraterrestrial activity, and hopefully I don't need to clarify this but I will I'm talking about solar activity, magnetic field stability, not aliens.

My whole point with this is that the alarmist behavior from groups who survive off government grants and the likes, is clearly hyperbole. The entire picture is not being presented. Worst of all, we see things like cap and trade working it's way through the Congress based on such nonsense, which will cause serious damage to our already fragile economy.
Did you seriously use one ****ing year as proof of a cooling trend?

2010 is, so far, the hottest on record ever. There's a reason people use decades when describing temperature trends: temperature is a very "noisy" signal. It varies a lot in the short term, you need a much longer period to establish a trend.

The trend is clearly up. Anyone who says otherwise is goddamned delusional.

Also, those other factors? Very clearly and specifically factored in. You're full of **** when you claim otherwise. You wouldn't even know about those other factors if it weren't for the works of these same groups of scientists.

Cap and trade didn't even make a floor vote. It's dead. But have fun with your conspiracy theories.
 
Last edited:

damianvincent

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
93
Reaction score
42
Location
Houston, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Did you seriously use one ****ing year as proof of a cooling trend?

2010 is, so far, the hottest on record ever. There's a reason people use decades when describing temperature trends: temperature is a very "noisy" signal. It varies a lot in the short term, you need a much longer period to establish a trend.

The trend is clearly up. Anyone who says otherwise is goddamned delusional.
I used it to show that nearly 100 years of warming was wiped out in one year, and to prove that their are more factors at play than the alarmists factor in, that's the third time I've had to say that.
 

damianvincent

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
93
Reaction score
42
Location
Houston, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Global Sea Surface Temps still headed down

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/sst_anomnight-current_081910.png

Still Cooling: Sea Surface Temperatures thru August 18, 2010

by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.


Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) measured by the AMSR-E instrument on NASA’s Aqua satellite continue the fall which began several months ago. The following plot, updated through yesterday (August 18, 2010) reveals the global average SSTs continue to cool, while the Nino34 region of the tropical east Pacific remains well below normal, consistent with La Nina conditions.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/AMSRE-SST-Global-and-Nino34-thru-Aug-18-2010.gif


Earth approaching sunspot records


The average person may not associate coolness with the sun. The sun releases energy through deep nuclear fusion reactions in its core and has surface temperatures as hot as 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to NASA's Web site.

Not cool at all.

But the sun's recent activity, or lack thereof, may be linked to the pleasant summer temperatures the midwest has enjoyed this year, said Charlie Perry, a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Lawrence. The sun is at a low point of a deep solar minimum in which there are few to no sunspots on its surface.

Perry said there is a feeling from some in the scientific community the Earth may be entering into a grand minimum, which is an extended period with low numbers of sunspots that creates cooler temperatures. The year without a summer, which was 1816, was during a grand minimum in 1800 to 1830 when Europe became cooler, Perry said. Another grand minimum was in 1903 to 1913.

http://cjonline.com/news/local/2009-09-20/earth_approaching_sunspot_records

What happened to global warming?

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998. But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures. And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man's influence on our climate is overstated, say they saw it coming. They argue that there are natural cycles, over which we have no control, that dictate how warm the planet is. But what is the evidence for this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm
 
Last edited:

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,227
Reaction score
32,368
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I used it to show that nearly 100 years of warming was wiped out in one year, and to prove that their are more factors at play than the alarmists factor in, that's the third time I've had to say that.
Global Sea Surface Temps still headed down

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/sst_anomnight-current_081910.png

Still Cooling: Sea Surface Temperatures thru August 18, 2010

by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.


Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) measured by the AMSR-E instrument on NASA’s Aqua satellite continue the fall which began several months ago. The following plot, updated through yesterday (August 18, 2010) reveals the global average SSTs continue to cool, while the Nino34 region of the tropical east Pacific remains well below normal, consistent with La Nina conditions.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/AMSRE-SST-Global-and-Nino34-thru-Aug-18-2010.gif


Earth approaching sunspot records


The average person may not associate coolness with the sun. The sun releases energy through deep nuclear fusion reactions in its core and has surface temperatures as hot as 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to NASA's Web site.

Not cool at all.

But the sun's recent activity, or lack thereof, may be linked to the pleasant summer temperatures the midwest has enjoyed this year, said Charlie Perry, a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Lawrence. The sun is at a low point of a deep solar minimum in which there are few to no sunspots on its surface.

Perry said there is a feeling from some in the scientific community the Earth may be entering into a grand minimum, which is an extended period with low numbers of sunspots that creates cooler temperatures. The year without a summer, which was 1816, was during a grand minimum in 1800 to 1830 when Europe became cooler, Perry said. Another grand minimum was in 1903 to 1913.

Earth approaching sunspot records | CJOnline.com

What happened to global warming?

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998. But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures. And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man's influence on our climate is overstated, say they saw it coming. They argue that there are natural cycles, over which we have no control, that dictate how warm the planet is. But what is the evidence for this?

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | What happened to global warming?
You still don't get it. You can't use one-year or less than one year periods to try to show temperature trends. It doesn't work that way.

Solar activity is at an extreme low and has just started rising again. That will spike the temperature back up again - on the short term. That's normal. The sun has a short-term 11-year (approximately) cycle. This is well known and well accounted for. You claim it's ignored. It isn't. By the way, the sun's long-term trend has been totally flat for about 50 years now.
Ocean cooling and warming over a 5-ish year cycle is the el-nino/la nina cycle. It's normal. You can't point at a cooling ocean and say the world's going to get cooler. This cycle is well known and well accounted for. You claim it's ignored. It isn't.

Nobody claims there are no natural climate forcings and nobody claims there are no natural cycles. Your entire post is a giant straw man.
 
Last edited:

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,227
Reaction score
32,368
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, colder temperatures are one of the most significant signs of global warming.
While I wouldn't call it "one of the most significant" signs, or even a particularly notable sign, the perverse reality is that higher global average temperatures can lead to more extreme cold weather events as well as warm weather events. More energy in the system, larger oscillations in both directions. It's actually not so much about the colder temperatures,/I] but rather severe snowstorms and such.

But you were gonna go with a sarcastic straw man, so we can run with that too I guess.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Did you seriously use one ****ing year as proof of a cooling trend?
It's nine years...and you people use the ten years preceding 1998 to establish your trend. So you can't reject the subsequent nine years that reverse that trend.

If you want it both ways, you have to pay extra.

2010 is, so far, the hottest on record ever.
Yeah, that's why it's something like the second coldest summer ever in Los Angeles, and why NASA is claiming a cooler globe this year. Now, that's the fact presented. Hence, claiming that the year is the hottest ever is simple psychological denial of the cited fact.

There's a reason people use decades when describing temperature trends:
There's a reason people use centuries to identify climate trends.

The trend is clearly up. Anyone who says otherwise is goddamned delusional.
The posted temperature plots say otherwise. They go up, they go down, and oh, by the way, 1998 was not the hottest year on record, one of the Dust Bowl Years from the '30's claims that distinction.

Cap and trade didn't even make a floor vote. It's dead. But have fun with your conspiracy theories.
That's good news.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
While I wouldn't call it "one of the most significant" signs, or even a particularly notable sign, the perverse reality is that higher global average temperatures can lead to more extreme cold weather events as well as warm weather events. More energy in the system, larger oscillations in both directions. It's actually not so much about the colder temperatures,/I] but rather severe snowstorms and such.

But you were gonna go with a sarcastic straw man, so we can run with that too I guess.



Naturally, what this means is that warmer global temperatures means that the earth is getting colder.
 
Top Bottom