Global Warming Actually Still Accelerating - no "lull"

[CrusaderFrank]

We fed this data into our AGW models and found AGW

AGW is a cult, a death worshiping, deranged cult

"Global Warming is for real!!"

 

[skookerasbil]

You're a nut s0n........nobody cares about the science........





s0n.......you might as well be standing in the middle of Siberia butt naked baying at the moon.


Nobody cares.........

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[skookerasbil]

Don't stress Thunder. If it's real it won't matter. You'll be long since dead.

No, not at all. In 2000, had someone told me that the Arctic Sea Ice was going to be gone for part of the summer by 2020, I would have said that is way too fast. Reality is that the scientists have been far too conservative in judging the effects of the warming. From the increase in extreme wildfire events, to the extreme flood events, we are seeing consequences right now.

sorry Ray........extreme weather is not any new phenomenon like you suggest. Its one of the classic ruse strategies perpetuated by the AGW crowd.........

But a quick peek at the history of extreme weather indicates its ALWAYS been around.


Chronology of Extreme Weather

 

[RollingThunder]

Don't stress Thunder. If it's real it won't matter. You'll be long since dead.

That kind of sociopathic self-centeredness and disregard for the welfare and survival of future generations of us humans and all of the other creatures we share this planet with seems pretty typical of the rightwingnut retards who fill the ranks of this anti-science cult of AGW denial and serve as the "useful idiot" foot soldiers for the fossil fuel industry's continued profits from selling the stuff that is creating this climate change crisis. The Koch brothers and Exxon thank you for for being such a moronic dupe, Politiconned. Your descendants (if any) will curse you.

 

[Stephanie]

Don't stress Thunder. If it's real it won't matter. You'll be long since dead.

That kind of sociopathic self-centeredness and disregard for the welfare and survival of future generations of us humans and all of the other creatures we share this planet with seems pretty typical of the rightwingnut retards who fill the ranks of this anti-science cult of AGW denial and serve as the "useful idiot" foot soldiers for the fossil fuel industry's continued profits from selling the stuff that is creating this climate change crisis. The Koch brothers and Exxon thank you for for being such a moronic dupe, Politiconned. Your descendants (if any) will curse you.

omg, why the hell are we suppose to care about your survival.. talk about SELF CENTERED
you seem to know everything survive for yourself...and you talk about Exxon and the Koch brothers..just look at who you will follow off a cliff..Obama, and Albert the bore Gore who have no schooling in climate or weather and some site called, thinknoporgess..

good grief the friggen dramtics...you descendents WILL CURSE YOU...oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[RollingThunder]

Don't stress Thunder. If it's real it won't matter. You'll be long since dead.

No, not at all. In 2000, had someone told me that the Arctic Sea Ice was going to be gone for part of the summer by 2020, I would have said that is way too fast. Reality is that the scientists have been far too conservative in judging the effects of the warming. From the increase in extreme wildfire events, to the extreme flood events, we are seeing consequences right now.

sorry Ray........extreme weather is not any new phenomenon like you suggest. Its one of the classic ruse strategies perpetuated by the AGW crowd.........

But a quick peek at the history of extreme weather indicates its ALWAYS been

And there's kookles, once again demonstrating just how far he's managed to ram his head up his butthole.

[youtube]1p7YBXaJi3k[/youtube]

 

[Stephanie]

oh damn it's SUMMER and it's HOT...we are all GOING TO DIE...

 

[RollingThunder]

Don't stress Thunder. If it's real it won't matter. You'll be long since dead.

That kind of sociopathic self-centeredness and disregard for the welfare and survival of future generations of us humans and all of the other creatures we share this planet with seems pretty typical of the rightwingnut retards who fill the ranks of this anti-science cult of AGW denial and serve as the "useful idiot" foot soldiers for the fossil fuel industry's continued profits from selling the stuff that is creating this climate change crisis. The Koch brothers and Exxon thank you for for being such a moronic dupe, Politiconned. Your descendants (if any) will curse you.

omg, why the hell are we suppose to care about your survival..

I said nothing about you caring about MY survival, nitwit. Are you so retarded you can't even comprehend simple English?

oh damn it's SUMMER and it's HOT...we are all GOING TO DIE...

So yeah, you are THAT retarded.... and completely clueless about what is going on too....please try to jerk your head out of your butthole, Stupidanie, before your brain suffocates....oops, obviously already too late for that.....

 

[Stephanie]

That kind of sociopathic self-centeredness and disregard for the welfare and survival of future generations of us humans and all of the other creatures we share this planet with seems pretty typical of the rightwingnut retards who fill the ranks of this anti-science cult of AGW denial and serve as the "useful idiot" foot soldiers for the fossil fuel industry's continued profits from selling the stuff that is creating this climate change crisis. The Koch brothers and Exxon thank you for for being such a moronic dupe, Politiconned. Your descendants (if any) will curse you.

omg, why the hell are we suppose to care about your survival..

I said nothing about you caring about MY survival, nitwit. Are you so retarded you can't even comprehend simple English?

oh damn it's SUMMER and it's HOT...we are all GOING TO DIE...

So yeah, you are THAT retarded.... and completely clueless about what is going on too....please try to jerk your head out of your butthole, Stupidanie, before your brain suffocates....oops, obviously already too late for that.....

oh little child..go back to thinkprogress so they can tell you how to act like adult...
you think anyone take you serious on global warming aka CLIMATE change with your stupid childish insults, think again

 

[flacaltenn]

Here's something that corroborates what I've been saying, from a prominent meteorologist, Dr. Jeff Masters, who has studies and writes about this modern global warming/climate change crisis.

Global warming continues with no slow down
Dr. Jeff Masters
March 27, 2013
(excerpts)
One often hears the statement in the media that global warming stopped in 1998, or that there has been no global warming for the past 16 years. Why pick 16 years? Why not some nice round number like 20 years? Or better yet, 30 years, since the climate is generally defined as the average weather experienced over a period of 30 years or longer? Temperatures at Earth's surface undergo natural, decades-long warming and cooling trends, related to the La Niña/El Niño cycle and the 11-year sunspot cycle. The reason one often hears the year 1998 used as a base year to measure global temperature trends is that this is a cherry-picked year. An extraordinarily powerful El Niño event that was the strongest on record brought about a temporary increase in surface ocean temperatures over a vast area of the tropical Pacific that year, helping boost global surface temperatures to the highest levels on record (global temperatures were warmer in both 2005 and 2010, but not by much.) But in the years from 2005 - 2012, La Niña events have been present for at least a portion of every single year, helping keep Earth's surface relatively cool. Thus, if one draws a straight-line fit of global surface temperatures from 1998 to 2012, a climate trend showing little global warming results. If one picks any year prior to 1998, or almost any year after 1998, a global warming trend does result. The choice of 1998 is a deliberate abuse of statistics in an attempt to manipulate people into drawing a false conclusion on global temperature trends.

Correcting for natural causes to find the human contribution to global temperature changes
We know that natural global warming or cooling on time scales of 1 - 11 years can be caused by changes in the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle, dust from volcanic eruptions, and changes in solar energy. For example, a study published in March 2013 in Geophysical Research Letters found that dust in the stratosphere has increased by 4 - 10% since 2000 due to volcanic eruptions, keeping the level of global warming up to 25% lower than might be expected. So, it is good to remove these natural causes of global temperature change over the past 34 years for which we have satellite data, to see what the human influence might have been during that time span. The three major surface temperature data sets (NCDC, GISS, and HadCRU) all show global temperatures have warmed by 0.16 - 0.17°C (0.28 - 0.30°F) per decade since satellite measurements began in 1979. The two satellite-based data sets of the lower atmosphere (UAH and RSS) give slightly less warming, about 0.14 - 0.15°C (.25 - .27°F) per decade (keep in mind that satellite measurements of the lower atmosphere temperature are affected much more strongly by volcanic eruptions and the El Niño phenomena than are surface-based measurements taken by weather stations.) A 2011 paper published by Grant Foster and Stefan Rahmstorf, "Global temperature evolution 1979- 2010", took the five major global temperature data sets and adjusted them to remove the influences of natural variations in sunlight, volcanic dust, and the El Niño/La Niña cycle. The researchers found that adjusting for these natural effects did not change the observed trend in global temperatures, which remained between 0.14 - 0.17°C (0.25 - 0.31°F) per decade in all five data sets. The warmest years since 1979 were 2010 and 2009 in all five adjusted data sets. Since the known natural causes of global warming have little to do with the observed increase in global temperatures over the past 34 years, either human activity or some unknown natural source is responsible for the global warming during that time period.

Figure 3. Departure from average of annual global temperatures between 1979 - 2012, adjusted to remove natural variations due to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) cycle, dust from volcanic eruptions, and changes in solar energy. The five most frequently-cited global temperature records are presented: surface temperature estimates by NASA's GISS, HadCRU from the UK Met Office, and NOAA's NCDC, and satellite-based lower-atmosphere estimates from Remote Sensing Systems, Inc. (RSS) and the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH.) Image is an update (via realclimate.org) of one from a 2011 study, Global temperature evolution 1979 - 2010 , by Grant Foster and Stefan Rahmstorf, Environ. Res. Lett. 6, 2011, 044022 doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/044022.

You are such a useful tool. You just contradicted yourself in the last couple posts.

First you toss some numbers out to me MINIMIZING the effects of "natural forcings" and falsely claiming that solar irradiation increases of 1W/M2 only account for 0.1DegC is laughable.. But THEN --- you post a brand new "where is Waldo" study showing a warming trend exists UNDERNEATH all those natural forcings. That if you start removing natural forcings -- then a 0.17 degC/decade trend suddenly just springs right up !!!

Which is it man?? The natural forcings are insignificant? Or they can effectively nullify and CANCEL the warming due to CO2???
I NEED an answer from YOU on that one

Now that 0.17 degC trend found is interesting on several accounts.. First it is FAR LESS than the hissy dramatic predictions that AGW is based on --- and it's not far from the CO2 forcing ONLY number that elemental physics predicts.. No apparent "climate sensitivities" approaching 3.0 or 4.0 is there??

So you don't know it --- but the lying in THAT paper --- actually finds a CO2 forced trend line SIGNIFICANTLY below the IPCC hysterical predictions !!!!!

The lie that cannot stand in that abstract is that using 1998 as a baseline year has any significant impact on a 15 year running average. The deviation in that year was a mere 0.08degC.. Over an average of 15 yrs -- that barely passes significance..

 

[Stephanie]

Two of the biggest hypocrites who don't live a life of this impending DOOM AND who have no DEGREE in climate or weather yet are the almights GODS of climate change and you people will follow them off the cliff...I laugh at this...
HEY OBAMA, WHAT HAPPENED WITH JOBS? now it's the climate we are in crisis over, last week it was guns, next week it will be???????

SNIP

Obama channels his inner Al Gore in climate change messaging shift

By Ben Geman - 07/06/13 12:07 PM ET

President Obama is channeling his inner Al Gore in his new climate push with a public relations strategy that breaks with his first term.

Obama, in short, is now talking loudly and directly about the peril of climate change as he promotes an array of executive-level actions.

“There has definitely been a messaging shift,” said Brad Johnson of the advocacy group Forecast the Facts.

“The recognition that Americans are already suffering the consequences of climate pollution is long overdue,” adds Johnson, who, alongside other activists, criticized the barely cameo status that climate had in the 2012 campaign.

The president packed last week’s big climate speech with calls to heed scientists’ warnings, a strong attack on climate skeptics, and full-throated claims that the planetary stakes are immense.

“I refuse to condemn your generation and future generations to a planet that’s beyond fixing,” he said at Georgetown University.

Obama spoke of the economic and human toll of extreme weather events like big storms, floods, wildfires and droughts.

“Those who are already feeling the effects of climate change don’t have time to deny it – they’re busy dealing with it,” he said.

Joe Romm of the liberal Center for American Progress, writing on his blog in late June, was delighted that Obama “went full climate hawk.”

Gore, who complained two years ago that Obama had “failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action” on climate, also touted last week’s speech.

The former vice president, a longtime advocate for aggressive policies to cut carbon emissions, called it “by far the best address on climate by any president ever.”

While activists have welcomed Obama’s newly aggressive tack, it’s facing strong criticism from the right.

“The economy stagnates. Syria burns. Scandals lap at his feet. China and Russia mock him, even as a ‘29-year-old hacker’ revealed his nation’s spy secrets to the world. How does President Obama respond? With a grandiloquent speech on climate change,” conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote in Friday’s Washington Post.

Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, are alleging the plan will hurt the economy, a notion the White House is pushing back hard against

all of it here
Read more: Obama channels his inner Al Gore in climate change messaging shift - The Hill's E2-Wire
Follow us: [MENTION=27326]The[/MENTION]hill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

thankfully the people are getting sick of Obama and his one crisis after another...lot of COMMENTS at site with article

 

[flacaltenn]

So ---- How come this "deep ocean absorption" wasn't part of the modeling? The models you're presenting here claim to based on knowledge we've had for a couple decades.

I'm not "presenting models"; I'm presenting the evidence that scientific studies have produced showing that, due to persistent La Nina events over the last eight years, a great deal of heat energy has been transferred to the ocean depths, thus slowing the rate of rise in surface air temperatures, even though global warming has not "paused" or "stopped", but in fact has continued to accelerate. Try and keep up with what is actually being said instead of getting lost in your straw man argument fantasies.

Where is this "thermal inertia" part of the IPCC modeling? And why doesn't it count for the 1W/m2 increase in solar irradiance that we've seen since the 1800s? Maybe all THAT got "stored in the deep oceans" also...

Sunspot activity has played a major role in long-term climate change.
The Maunder Minimum most likely caused the Little Ice Age.
The Recent Modern Maximum peaked in 1960.
Only 0.1 ° C of the 0.8 ° C of warming since the late 1800s is due to solar irradiance. Since direct satellite measurements (1980 –present) solar contribution to the observed rapid warming is negligible.
In fact, the sun has been WEAKER while the climate WARMS since 1960.
There is no evidence that variations in the strength of the sun are the cause of the modern day climate change.
While the troposphere (the lower region of the atmosphere) has warmed, the stratosphere, just above it, has cooled. If solar changes provided the dominant forcing, warming would be expected in both atmospheric layers.
(source - slides 6,7,8,9 - you should watch the whole slide show)

Oceans are huge heatsinks. To have that effect SUDDENLY and CONVIENIENTLY kick in UNANTICIPATED and UNANNOUNCED (in a short number of years) just illustrates how this AGW sideshow isn't even out of "concept phase" yet..

Climate scientists have figured out quite a bit about what's happening but it is still a rapidly developing science and no one has ever claimed that they already know everything about the Earth's climate and the year to year impacts of anthropogenic global warming. Climate scientists are, however, nowhere near as clueless and ignorant as you bamboozled anti-science denier cult retards have been duped into thinking they are. La Nina events have been happening for at least a part of every year from 2005 to 2012, and they tend to draw surface heat into the ocean depths.

The OP IS presenting a model. A model of OHC that uses sparse and variable data to PROJECT a global effect.. You don't even know what you're posting..

But let's try to be objective here. What I LOVE about this "revelation" that Global Warming is "hiding" in the deep oceans is this..

One of the sillinesses of AGW theory is that it's ALL been based on the ridiculous expectation that radiative forcings at the surface are expected to result in IMMEDIATE and correlated temperature rises. The diff btwn radiative forcings and temperature is that one is POWER measurements and the other is ENERGY storage. There is a a time variable that has been pretty much ignored..

That's like expecting that if I turn up the range on a pot of water, the temperature will follow DIRECTLY the power being applied. It doesn't. It has a thermal inertia. And if I merely LEAVE the range dial set to 8 -- that the water WON'T continue to INCREASE in temp to thermal equilibrium over a (relatively) long period of minutes.

So --- now climate scientists are digging harder to understand the diff between POWER and ENERGY storage. That's a good thing.. Painful to see such a late understanding, but still useful..

So if a 1W/M2 change in solar irradiance occurrs since 1800 or so and we are looking for 2.6W/M2 change in TOTAL surface radiative forcing to explain the temp change -- it's NOT insignificant and it DOESN'T MATTER if it "stalled" in the 1960s or so does it? Because we SHOULD NOT EXPECT instant warming from these forcings --- should we? Not if there is a "hidden" (ha Ha) thermal time constant in that MASSIVE thermal mass that is the Earth.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The fossil fuel industry's propaganda machine continues to grind out new pseudo-science and misinformation. Witness the recent spurt of bogus articles claiming something like "climate scientists are puzzled by halt in global warming for last 15 years". The Earth has continued to retain more of the sun's energy than it can radiate away into space due to the increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere that mankind has created, primarily through the burning of fossil fuels, but because the rise in surface temperatures has slowed down compared to the three previous decades of very rapid increases in surface temperatures, many people has misinterpreted that to mean that global warming has paused or is in a "lull". This is not true. The excess heat energy retained by the excess CO2 has been transferring itself to the ocean depths, but it will eventually return to the surface and radically increase surface temperatures once again in the next decade. Meanwhile, global warming has continued to manifest itself in the melting of the Arctic ice cap, Greenland, West Antarctica and the world's glaciers, as well as the many other symptoms, like the changing of seasonal timing and increases in extreme weather events.

Global warming is actually still accelerating and competent climate scientists are not puzzled about what is happening. Here's a good explanation of just what is really happening.

In Hot Water: Global Warming Has Accelerated In Past 15 Years, New Study Of Oceans Confirms
ClimateProgress
By Dana Nuccitelli
Mar 25, 2013
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.
* As suspected, much of the ‘missing heat’ Kevin Trenberth previously talked about has been found in the deep oceans. Consistent with the results of Nuccitelli et al. (2012), this study finds that 30% of the ocean warming over the past decade has occurred in the deeper oceans below 700 meters, which they note is unprecedented over at least the past half century.
* Some recent studies have concluded based on the slowed global surface warming over the past decade that the sensitivity of the climate to the increased greenhouse effect is somewhat lower than the IPCC best estimate. Those studies are fundamentally flawed because they do not account for the warming of the deep oceans.
* The slowed surface air warming over the past decade has lulled many people into a false and unwarranted sense of security.

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.


(continued on website linked in article headline)

this study finds that 30% of the ocean warming over the past decade has occurred in the deeper oceans below 700 meters, which they note is unprecedented over at least the past half century.

Half century? Why hold back? Unprecedented EVER!!

Quick, turn off your computer, you're killing penguins!

 

[RollingThunder]

Here's some more news regarding the report by the World Meteorological Organization that was released just a few days ago.

Unprecedented climate extremes marked last decade, says World Meteorological Organization
The Guardian
3 July 2013
(excerpts)
The World Meteorological Organization says the planet "experienced unprecedented high-impact climate extremes" in the ten years from 2001 to 2010, the warmest decade since the start of modern measurements in 1850. Those ten years also continued an extended period of accelerating global warming, with more national temperature records reported broken than in any previous decade. Sea levels rose about twice as fast as the trend in the last century. A WMO report, The Global Climate 2001-2010, A Decade of Climate Extremes, analyses global and regional temperatures and precipitation, and extreme weather such as the heat waves in Europe and Russia, Hurricane Katrina in the US, tropical cyclone Nargis in Myanmar, droughts in the Amazon basin, Australia and East Africa, and floods in Pakistan.

It says the decade was the warmest for both hemispheres, and for both land and ocean surface temperatures. There was a rapid decline in Arctic sea ice and accelerating loss of net mass from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and from the world's glaciers. This melting and the thermal expansion of sea water caused global mean sea levels to rise about three millimetres annually, about double the observed 20th century trend of 1.6 mm per year. Global sea level averaged over the decade was about 20 cm higher than in 1880, the report says. The WMO secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, said: "WMO's report shows that global warming accelerated in the four decades of 1971 to 2010 and that the decadal rate of increase between 1991-2000 and 2001-2010 was unprecedented." He added: "Rising concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are changing our climate, with far-reaching implications for our environment and our oceans, which are absorbing both carbon dioxide and heat." His reference to the oceans' role as a sink for CO2 and heat is significant in the present debate about the apparent slight slow-down in the pace of atmospheric warming and the likelihood that the heat is going into the oceans instead. The report says that between 2001 and 2010, there was no major El Niño event, which normally leads to higher temperatures (as in the then-record warm year of 1998). Much of this last decade experienced either cooling La Niña or neutral conditions, except for the 2009/2010 moderate to strong El Niño.

 

[prepster]

The fossil fuel industry's propaganda machine continues to grind out new pseudo-science and misinformation. Witness the recent spurt of bogus articles claiming something like "climate scientists are puzzled by halt in global warming for last 15 years". The Earth has continued to retain more of the sun's energy than it can radiate away into space due to the increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere that mankind has created, primarily through the burning of fossil fuels, but because the rise in surface temperatures has slowed down compared to the three previous decades of very rapid increases in surface temperatures, many people has misinterpreted that to mean that global warming has paused or is in a "lull". This is not true. The excess heat energy retained by the excess CO2 has been transferring itself to the ocean depths, but it will eventually return to the surface and radically increase surface temperatures once again in the next decade. Meanwhile, global warming has continued to manifest itself in the melting of the Arctic ice cap, Greenland, West Antarctica and the world's glaciers, as well as the many other symptoms, like the changing of seasonal timing and increases in extreme weather events.

Global warming is actually still accelerating and competent climate scientists are not puzzled about what is happening. Here's a good explanation of just what is really happening.

In Hot Water: Global Warming Has Accelerated In Past 15 Years, New Study Of Oceans Confirms
ClimateProgress
By Dana Nuccitelli
Mar 25, 2013
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.
* As suspected, much of the ‘missing heat’ Kevin Trenberth previously talked about has been found in the deep oceans. Consistent with the results of Nuccitelli et al. (2012), this study finds that 30% of the ocean warming over the past decade has occurred in the deeper oceans below 700 meters, which they note is unprecedented over at least the past half century.
* Some recent studies have concluded based on the slowed global surface warming over the past decade that the sensitivity of the climate to the increased greenhouse effect is somewhat lower than the IPCC best estimate. Those studies are fundamentally flawed because they do not account for the warming of the deep oceans.
* The slowed surface air warming over the past decade has lulled many people into a false and unwarranted sense of security.

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.


(continued on website linked in article headline)

This actually reaffirms the possible exogenous factors in models showing a halt in atmospheric and land temperature increases. We are starting to get more knowledge in the ability of the oceans, particularly the deep oceans, to act as a carbon/GHG sink. Of course, this is not a good thing, as this will have cascading effects upon the biodiversity of the ocean ecosystem, melting of the polar ice caps, and eventually, the changing of ocean currents and global weather patterns, so we should not be giddy about this at all. Now onto seeing if the exogenous factor of water vapor/cloud cover is having a greater effect than we previously thought.

 

[RollingThunder]

Here's a good news summary of a scientific report published earlier this year in the journal Science.

Alarming new study on climate change says Earth's heat is accelerating superfast
The Examiner
March 10, 2013
(excerpts)
The latest report on climate change came out on Friday and the news isn't good. The study was released in Science magazine and it examines climate research done at Oregon State University (OSU). The geological team there combined current computer models with techniques that allowed them to glean information from past weather events by the use of ice core samples from polar regions and tree rings from different areas. They also studied temperature by testing for chemicals in the shells of tiny, fossilized sea creatures known as foraminifera. The researchers from OSU discovered the acceleration of warming is happening faster than anyone anticipated. “Global temperatures are warmer now than about 75 percent of anything we've seen over the last 11,000 years or so," said Shaun Marcott, a geologist at OSU in a NPR report. "It's really the rates of change here that's amazing and atypical." Marcott explained it this way: "Here's what happened. After the end of the ice age, the planet got warmer. Then, 5,000 years ago, it started to get cooler — but really slowly. In all, it cooled 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit, up until the last century or so. Then it flipped again — global average temperature shot up. Temperatures now have gone from that cold period to the warm period in just 100 years. So it's taken just 100 years for the average temperature to change by 1.3 degrees, when it took 5,000 years to do that before."

Many scientists agree they are now in new climatic territory. When records are being broken at such accelerated rates, they face a situation unlike any before. “You can start to see a shifting from one climate system to another. So the climate has in one sense actually changed and we are now entering a new series of climatic conditions that we just haven't seen before," said Tim Flannery, head of the Australian government's climate change commission in response to the OSU research. Climate scientists predict that 100-year weather events will continue to increase, because there is currently too much complacency about reducing the vast level of greenhouse gases that already exist in the atmosphere, much less curbing new emissions. "The climate changes to come are going to be larger than anything that human civilization and agriculture has seen in its entire existence," said Gavin Schmidt, a climate researcher at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. "And that is quite a sobering thought." Moreover, there is scientific consensus that such rapid warming is a testament to how the burning of fossil fuels is the dominating factor. UN climate chief, Christiana Figueres, was quoted as saying the new research indicates, “staggering global temps show urgent need to act. Rapid climate change must be countered with accelerated action." But urgent action in the US Congress is not likely. Too many Republicans in Congress like James Inhofe (R-Ok), Lemar Smith (R-Tx) and Paul Broun (R-GA), believe that global warming is a hoax or that it is a phenomenon created by God that only He can control, so mankind is useless to stop it. Amazingly, these lawmakers hold key positions on science committees and have shown no interest in letting proven facts get in the way of their personal biases. Connections to petroleum industries and anti-science think tanks like the Heritage Foundation are suspected to be the real reason behind such increasingly laughable claims against the existence of global warming.

 

[Stephanie]

oooooooooo, superfast....lol

 

[RollingThunder]

oooooooooo, superfast....lol

ooooooooo, super denier cult retardedness......LOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

[prepster]

Here's a good news summary of a scientific report published earlier this year in the journal Science.

Alarming new study on climate change says Earth's heat is accelerating superfast
The Examiner
March 10, 2013
(excerpts)
The latest report on climate change came out on Friday and the news isn't good. The study was released in Science magazine and it examines climate research done at Oregon State University (OSU). The geological team there combined current computer models with techniques that allowed them to glean information from past weather events by the use of ice core samples from polar regions and tree rings from different areas. They also studied temperature by testing for chemicals in the shells of tiny, fossilized sea creatures known as foraminifera. The researchers from OSU discovered the acceleration of warming is happening faster than anyone anticipated. “Global temperatures are warmer now than about 75 percent of anything we've seen over the last 11,000 years or so," said Shaun Marcott, a geologist at OSU in a NPR report. "It's really the rates of change here that's amazing and atypical." Marcott explained it this way: "Here's what happened. After the end of the ice age, the planet got warmer. Then, 5,000 years ago, it started to get cooler — but really slowly. In all, it cooled 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit, up until the last century or so. Then it flipped again — global average temperature shot up. Temperatures now have gone from that cold period to the warm period in just 100 years. So it's taken just 100 years for the average temperature to change by 1.3 degrees, when it took 5,000 years to do that before."

Many scientists agree they are now in new climatic territory. When records are being broken at such accelerated rates, they face a situation unlike any before. “You can start to see a shifting from one climate system to another. So the climate has in one sense actually changed and we are now entering a new series of climatic conditions that we just haven't seen before," said Tim Flannery, head of the Australian government's climate change commission in response to the OSU research. Climate scientists predict that 100-year weather events will continue to increase, because there is currently too much complacency about reducing the vast level of greenhouse gases that already exist in the atmosphere, much less curbing new emissions. "The climate changes to come are going to be larger than anything that human civilization and agriculture has seen in its entire existence," said Gavin Schmidt, a climate researcher at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. "And that is quite a sobering thought." Moreover, there is scientific consensus that such rapid warming is a testament to how the burning of fossil fuels is the dominating factor. UN climate chief, Christiana Figueres, was quoted as saying the new research indicates, “staggering global temps show urgent need to act. Rapid climate change must be countered with accelerated action." But urgent action in the US Congress is not likely. Too many Republicans in Congress like James Inhofe (R-Ok), Lemar Smith (R-Tx) and Paul Broun (R-GA), believe that global warming is a hoax or that it is a phenomenon created by God that only He can control, so mankind is useless to stop it. Amazingly, these lawmakers hold key positions on science committees and have shown no interest in letting proven facts get in the way of their personal biases. Connections to petroleum industries and anti-science think tanks like the Heritage Foundation are suspected to be the real reason behind such increasingly laughable claims against the existence of global warming.

You have a horrible understanding of sarcasm