Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

[edthecynic]

You see the graph. The climb is steady. There are ups and downs, but the trend is clear.

The earth is getting warmer.

2010 is tied for the warmest year on record.

WASHINGTON -- Global surface temperatures in 2010 tied 2005 as the warmest on record, according to an analysis released Wednesday by researchers at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.

The two years differed by less than 0.018 degrees Fahrenheit. The difference is smaller than the uncertainty in comparing the temperatures of recent years, putting them into a statistical tie. In the new analysis, the next warmest years are 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007 and 2009, which are statistically tied for third warmest year. The GISS records begin in 1880.

The analysis found 2010 approximately 1.13 F warmer than the average global surface temperature from 1951 to 1980. To measure climate change, scientists look at long-term trends. The temperature trend, including data from 2010, shows the climate has warmed by approximately 0.36 F per decade since the late 1970s.

"If the warming trend continues, as is expected, if greenhouse gases continue to increase, the 2010 record will not stand for long," said James Hansen, the director of GISS.

NASA - NASA Research Finds 2010 Tied for Warmest Year on Record

This is NASA data. We can agree that this is a solid source of factual data, and that 2010 is tied for 2005 for the warmest year on record, and that six other years out of the last 14 are tied for third.

This means that the earth is definitely getting warmer, and we have a credible source saying so, right?

Look at the bottom graph. That is from BEST. It clearly shows a levelling off of global temps starting in the late 90's. The upper graph shows the overall rise in temperatures that began the most recent time in the 1850s with the end of the Little Ice Age. The point of the two graphs is yes the planet is warming and has been for the last hundred and fifty years (with 30 or so year cool downs in between) and the warming obviously happened long bfore man could have had any impact on the climate.

CON$ are pathological liars. That graph is NOT from BEST!!! It is from the Right-wing Global Warming Policy Foundation, a CON$ervative think-tank founded by denier Lord Lawson of Blaby.

And there were no cool downs in between, the warming leveled off but didn't cool. If you look at the lows from the last 30 year flat "cool down" from 1950 to 1980, none of the lows were as low as the last flat "cool down" from 1890 to 1920. Something is interfering with the natural cool down cycles between the warming cycles.

 

[skookerasbil]

You see the graph. The climb is steady. There are ups and downs, but the trend is clear.

The earth is getting warmer.

2010 is tied for the warmest year on record.

NASA - NASA Research Finds 2010 Tied for Warmest Year on Record

This is NASA data. We can agree that this is a solid source of factual data, and that 2010 is tied for 2005 for the warmest year on record, and that six other years out of the last 14 are tied for third.

This means that the earth is definitely getting warmer, and we have a credible source saying so, right?

Look at the bottom graph. That is from BEST. It clearly shows a levelling off of global temps starting in the late 90's. The upper graph shows the overall rise in temperatures that began the most recent time in the 1850s with the end of the Little Ice Age. The point of the two graphs is yes the planet is warming and has been for the last hundred and fifty years (with 30 or so year cool downs in between) and the warming obviously happened long bfore man could have had any impact on the climate.

CON$ are pathological liars. That graph is NOT from BEST!!! It is from the Right-wing Global Warming Policy Foundation, a CON$ervative think-tank founded by denier Lord Lawson of Blaby.

And there were no cool downs in between, the warming leveled off but didn't cool. If you look at the lows from the last 30 year flat "cool down" from 1950 to 1980, none of the lows were as low as the last flat "cool down" from 1890 to 1920. Something is interfering with the natural cool down cycles between the warming cycles.

LOL.....you can always tell the knuckleheads who never had a course in research methodology.................

Yo s0n.......you know, you can crunch the dates of that graph even closer together and make the rise look meteroic!!! Put 1900 and 2011 just 4 inches apart and you got a real winner!!!


Go.......go.........go

 

[edthecynic]

One thing at a time. We agree that the world is getting warmer, right?

I'll agree that we are warmer lately than 1800.

Now, show the science demonstrating the sgnificance and magnitude of man made CO2 on warming.

One thing at a time. We agree that the world is getting warmer, right?

Yes, to a point. Currently it appears that global temperatures have actually levelled off. There has been no measurable increase in global temps since 1998. The temps that have supposedly risen since then are well within the error bands of the statistical analysis which means that if there is a temp increase it is so small that it can't be measured.

This follows a period of around 20 years of global warming. Prior to that there was a period of global cooling that had lasted approximately 30 years. It now appears (based on solar research data) that we will be once again entering into a cooling phase.

Well we are making some progress. Deniers agree that there have been periods of global warming, and that there should be 30 year periods of global cooling after each warming period. But there were no global cooling periods. The warming leveled off at a higher level than the last leveling off period that should have been a period of global cooling.

I would suggest that the difference between the lows of the flat periods of expected cooling is the man made contribution to global warming. So assuming we are in a new flat period for this last decade, it appears man's contribution to global warming is increasing as the difference from the last flat cooling period's lows to the present flat cooling period's lows is greater than the previous differences.

 

[gslack]

You dumb fuck. LOL. The 400-800 year lag in temperture rise was during the warmup 14,000 years ago, and is well explained by science. It has nothing whatever to do with anybodies hockey stick graph. Are you ever going to research something before you flap yap? Silly question.

Oh Please explain that bit of utter nonsense to us oldsocks.... If the CO2 lags the temps its not lagging the temps because of what happened 14,000 years ago? Please explain that to me....

So no response on all l the rest of those I mentioned?

So then the sea levels are still going to rise like he claimed?

Lol you are soo full of it socks... man it must suck to be this wrong so often...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You see the graph. The climb is steady. There are ups and downs, but the trend is clear.

The earth is getting warmer.

2010 is tied for the warmest year on record.

NASA - NASA Research Finds 2010 Tied for Warmest Year on Record

This is NASA data. We can agree that this is a solid source of factual data, and that 2010 is tied for 2005 for the warmest year on record, and that six other years out of the last 14 are tied for third.

This means that the earth is definitely getting warmer, and we have a credible source saying so, right?

Look at the bottom graph. That is from BEST. It clearly shows a levelling off of global temps starting in the late 90's. The upper graph shows the overall rise in temperatures that began the most recent time in the 1850s with the end of the Little Ice Age. The point of the two graphs is yes the planet is warming and has been for the last hundred and fifty years (with 30 or so year cool downs in between) and the warming obviously happened long bfore man could have had any impact on the climate.

CON$ are pathological liars. That graph is NOT from BEST!!! It is from the Right-wing Global Warming Policy Foundation, a CON$ervative think-tank founded by denier Lord Lawson of Blaby.

And there were no cool downs in between, the warming leveled off but didn't cool. If you look at the lows from the last 30 year flat "cool down" from 1950 to 1980, none of the lows were as low as the last flat "cool down" from 1890 to 1920. Something is interfering with the natural cool down cycles between the warming cycles.

Planet Neptune was discovered in 1848...coincidence? Not if I get "peer review" that the discovery of Neptune was responsible for the "rise"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

One thing at a time. We agree that the world is getting warmer, right?

I'll agree that we are warmer lately than 1800.

Now, show the science demonstrating the sgnificance and magnitude of man made CO2 on warming.

One thing at a time. We agree that the world is getting warmer, right?

Yes, to a point. Currently it appears that global temperatures have actually levelled off. There has been no measurable increase in global temps since 1998. The temps that have supposedly risen since then are well within the error bands of the statistical analysis which means that if there is a temp increase it is so small that it can't be measured.

This follows a period of around 20 years of global warming. Prior to that there was a period of global cooling that had lasted approximately 30 years. It now appears (based on solar research data) that we will be once again entering into a cooling phase.

Well we are making some progress. Deniers agree that there have been periods of global warming, and that there should be 30 year periods of global cooling after each warming period. But there were no global cooling periods. The warming leveled off at a higher level than the last leveling off period that should have been a period of global cooling.

I would suggest that the difference between the lows of the flat periods of expected cooling is the man made contribution to global warming. So assuming we are in a new flat period for this last decade, it appears man's contribution to global warming is increasing as the difference from the last flat cooling period's lows to the present flat cooling period's lows is greater than the previous differences.

Deniers agree that there have been periods of global warming

Hell, deniers agree there were periods of warming before we added significantly to the CO2 levels. Before we even existed as a species.

and that there should be 30 year periods of global cooling after each warming period.

Bzzzzt. Please do not pass go, do not collect $200.
Who agreed to that? Where? When?

I would suggest that the difference between the lows of the flat periods of expected cooling is the man made contribution to global warming.

Your suggestion and $5 will get you a nice cup of coffee at Starbucks.

 

[Si modo]

If I am a denier, what the hell am I denying?

 

[edthecynic]

If I am a denier, what the hell am I denying?

The obvious!

Just like you are dodging the fact that the "cooling" periods are really leveling off periods, and the difference in the lows for each leveling off period are the empirical values for man's contribution to global warming. And those values are increasing.

 

[Si modo]

If I am a denier, what the hell am I denying?

The obvious!
....

The obvious?

There is no science demonstrating the significance and/or magnitude of the contribution of man made CO2 to any warming.

That surely is obvious.

.... Just like you are dodging the fact that the "cooling" periods are really leveling off periods, and the difference in the lows for each leveling off period are the empirical values for man's contribution to global warming. And those values are increasing.

As I haven't ever commented on that, it is impossible that I ever denied or confirmed it.

 

[edthecynic]

If I am a denier, what the hell am I denying?

The obvious!
....

The obvious?

There is no science demonstrating the significance and/or magnitude of the contribution of man made CO2 to any warming.

That surely is obvious.

.... Just like you are dodging the fact that the "cooling" periods are really leveling off periods, and the difference in the lows for each leveling off period are the empirical values for man's contribution to global warming. And those values are increasing.

As I haven't ever commented on that, it is impossible that I ever denied or confirmed it.

Thank you for confirming that you are dodging the observation that the difference in the lows of each leveling off period quantifies man's contribution to global warming.

 

[Si modo]

The obvious!
....

The obvious?

There is no science demonstrating the significance and/or magnitude of the contribution of man made CO2 to any warming.

That surely is obvious.

.... Just like you are dodging the fact that the "cooling" periods are really leveling off periods, and the difference in the lows for each leveling off period are the empirical values for man's contribution to global warming. And those values are increasing.

As I haven't ever commented on that, it is impossible that I ever denied or confirmed it.

Thank you for confirming that you are dodging the observation that the difference in the lows of each leveling off period quantifies man's contribution to global warming.

It does correlate with it, but correlation is not causation.

Thus, my lack of comment.

 

[SAT]

The EPA link states definitively that the current warming trend is linked to human activity.

Here's the thing about science-when you radically change a situation, you are going to see a reaction.

To think that we can begin to put ever increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere and see no changes in the environment is stupid.

It's like claiming that you go from eating 1,500 calories a day to eating 4,000 and you won't see any change in your weight. That claim would be stupid.

From the link:

Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.

State of Knowledge | Science | Climate Change | U.S. EPA

Do you see where it says "well understood"?

That means that it's not a mystery to scientists what will happen if you increase greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It's like boiling an egg. You know what will happen in you put an egg in hot water for 20 minutes. The egg will change. To claim that the egg will not change, even though it is in hot water is stupid. We understand perfectly well what will happen to the egg.

The warmest years on record are 2005 and 2010. Then six years are tied for third place, and they have all occurred since 1998.

The earth is unequivocally in a warming trend. The NASA data shows that.

They aren't altering the Y axis on the NASA graph to make a point. They just show the temperatures increasing, and they state that the warmest years on record have occurred since 1998.

So the Earth is getting warmer, right?

Ummmm, no they're not. Well let me correct myself, they are now. Now that Hansen and Co. went into the historical record AND ALTERED IT! They made the decade of th 1930's cooler then it actually was to try and reinforce the fiction that this last decade is the warmest.

When you remove the shenanigans that the warmests are doing all this hyperbole is exposed for what it is. Horse manure.

2010 record temperature

From the link:

Geneva, 20 January 2011 (WMO) - The year 2010 ranked as the warmest year on record, together with 2005 and 1998, according to the World Meteorological Organization. Data received by the WMO show no statistically significant difference between global temperatures in 2010, 2005 and 1998.

Look at the bottom graph. That is from BEST. It clearly shows a levelling off of global temps starting in the late 90's. The upper graph shows the overall rise in temperatures that began the most recent time in the 1850s with the end of the Little Ice Age. The point of the two graphs is yes the planet is warming and has been for the last hundred and fifty years (with 30 or so year cool downs in between) and the warming obviously happened long bfore man could have had any impact on the climate.

CON$ are pathological liars. That graph is NOT from BEST!!! It is from the Right-wing Global Warming Policy Foundation, a CON$ervative think-tank founded by denier Lord Lawson of Blaby.

And there were no cool downs in between, the warming leveled off but didn't cool. If you look at the lows from the last 30 year flat "cool down" from 1950 to 1980, none of the lows were as low as the last flat "cool down" from 1890 to 1920. Something is interfering with the natural cool down cycles between the warming cycles.

LOL.....you can always tell the knuckleheads who never had a course in research methodology.................

Yo s0n.......you know, you can crunch the dates of that graph even closer together and make the rise look meteroic!!! Put 1900 and 2011 just 4 inches apart and you got a real winner!!!

Go.......go.........go

Yea, that was my point. You can stretch or shorten the Y axis and make changes look different.

The NASA graph shows the trend of the last 130 years. If you cherry pick a couple of months out of that, you can make the trend look different, but an honest look shows the upward trend.

 

[Si modo]

The EPA link states definitively that the current warming trend is linked to human activity.
....

No, they do not.

 

[SAT]

The EPA link states definitively that the current warming trend is linked to human activity.
....

No, they do not.

Yes, it does.

Scientists know with virtual certainty that:

Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

 

[daveman]

The EPA link states definitively that the current warming trend is linked to human activity.
....

No, they do not.

Yes, it does.

Scientists know with virtual certainty that:

Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

That statement doesn't mention warming.

Warming being cause by CO2 is a matter of faith for AGW cultists, but it is not supported by reality.

 

[SAT]

No, they do not.

Yes, it does.

Scientists know with virtual certainty that:

Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

That statement doesn't mention warming.

Warming being cause by CO2 is a matter of faith for AGW cultists, but it is not supported by reality.

No, it's a matter of scientists understanding what happens when greenhouse gases are put into the atmosphere. As the quote says, the process is well understood. This causes climate instability. We see tremendous effects in the polar regions right now.

 

[Si modo]

The EPA link states definitively that the current warming trend is linked to human activity.
....

No, they do not.

Yes, it does.

Scientists know with virtual certainty that:

Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

That says that CO2 increases are a result of man.

And, somehow YOU think that means warming is caused by man, is that right?

 

[Si modo]

Yes, it does.

That statement doesn't mention warming.

Warming being cause by CO2 is a matter of faith for AGW cultists, but it is not supported by reality.

No, it's a matter of scientists understanding what happens when greenhouse gases are put into the atmosphere. As the quote says, the process is well understood. This causes climate instability. We see tremendous effects in the polar regions right now.

So, what you are saying is because man has increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, man is causing warming, right?

 

[SAT]

No, they do not.

Yes, it does.

Scientists know with virtual certainty that:

Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

That says that CO2 increases are a result of man.

And, somehow YOU think that means warming is caused by man, is that right?

That statement doesn't mention warming.

Warming being cause by CO2 is a matter of faith for AGW cultists, but it is not supported by reality.

No, it's a matter of scientists understanding what happens when greenhouse gases are put into the atmosphere. As the quote says, the process is well understood. This causes climate instability. We see tremendous effects in the polar regions right now.

So, what you are saying is because man has increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, man is causing warming, right?

It's what the EPA is explaining. Increasing levels of CO2, from industrial activity, have changed the atmosphere, which alters the climate.

 

[Si modo]

Yes, it does.

That says that CO2 increases are a result of man.

And, somehow YOU think that means warming is caused by man, is that right?

No, it's a matter of scientists understanding what happens when greenhouse gases are put into the atmosphere. As the quote says, the process is well understood. This causes climate instability. We see tremendous effects in the polar regions right now.

So, what you are saying is because man has increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, man is causing warming, right?

It's what the EPA is explaining. Increasing levels of CO2, from industrial activity, have changed the atmosphere,


....

That is true. The EPA said that.

... which alters the climate.

The EPA did not say that.