Is the recent warming trend really unprecedented in earth's history?

[abu afak]

Stryder50 said:

'Worst-case' climate predictions are 'no longer plausible,' study​

...The world is unlikely to reach the 'worst case scenario' of climate change by the end of the century, according to a new study, that found efforts to reduce emissions are helping keep warning under control.

The Paris Climate Agreement goal to limit global warming this century to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit over pre-industrial temperatures was set in December 2015.

This urged nations to take action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses in order to forestal the most extreme climate change scenarios being predicted by scientists at the time - that could see temperatures rise by up to 9 degrees Fahrenheit.

However, a new study, by the University of Colorado Boulder, that looked at the latest data on emission levels, found those extreme temperatures, that would have led to a sharp rise in extreme weather events and sea rises, are no longer plausible.

The researchers found that the extreme scenarios and temperature increase predictions were based on outdated data from 15 years ago, that didn't take into account recent efforts to reduce emissions, and a move to renewable energy.
...
'Worst-case' climate predictions are 'no longer plausible,' study
MSM spin of course, still a slight damper on the alarmists.
Click to expand...

YOUR LINK continues:

""'They said that temperatures are likely to rise by no more than 4 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, and the 3.6F goal 'is still within reach' if emission reduction continues.​

​

They Warned a rise of 3.6F would still place a 'Significant Toll on the Planet', as it was a global average, with some areas of the world 'much warmer' and others colder.""​

It will also mean accelerated Warming and Sea Level Rise, accelerated Release of Monster Methane which is 30-80x more powerful than CO2: a snowball effect they are ignoring.

Not that their prediction is Gospell just one of the admittedly more consrvative ones.

I DESTROYED your (LOL - "cooling') Eastmen Copy/Pastes and this is barely better.
and this one of course Acknowledges/Admits AGW, porking the Troll ding for like the 5000th time.
`

 

[ding]

Voting:

9 for no
1 for yes

 

[Crick]

The claim is often made that the recent warming trend is unprecedented in earth's history, but I've never seen anyone ever attempt to actually back up that claim by presenting any evidence. It would seem to me to be a difficult claim to prove. What does everyone think about that claim? Is it provable? Can it be disproved? Is the recent warming trend really unprecedented in earth's history?

No one with a modicum of science education has ever claimed that the warming trend is unprecedented in Earth's history. That you claim they are indicates that YOU are lacking a modicum of education on the matter. It IS unprecedented in the history of human culture and very likely in the entire history of homo sapiens, but what the planet did or didn't do in the roughly 4.5 billion years before modern humans existed is irrelevant - as you've been told often enough that it is surprising to see that you're actually stupid enough to have started this thread.

 

[ding]

No one with a modicum of science education has ever claimed that the warming trend is unprecedented in Earth's history.

You are kidding, right?

I'll be sure to point it out to you whenever I see it in the future.

That you claim they are indicates that YOU are lacking a modicum of education on the matter.

Or that I am reporting what I actually saw.

It IS unprecedented in the history of human culture and very likely in the entire history of homo sapiens, but what the planet did or didn't do in the roughly 4.5 billion years before modern humans existed is irrelevant - as you've been told often enough that it is surprising to see that you're actually stupid enough to have started this thread.

So basically you are agreeing with me that the recent warming trend is not unprecedented in earth's history. .

 

[ding]

YOUR LINK continues:

""'They said that temperatures are likely to rise by no more than 4 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, and the 3.6F goal 'is still within reach' if emission reduction continues.​

​

They Warned a rise of 3.6F would still place a 'Significant Toll on the Planet', as it was a global average, with some areas of the world 'much warmer' and others colder.""​

It will also mean accelerated Warming and Sea Level Rise, accelerated Release of Monster Methane which is 30-80x more powerful than CO2: a snowball effect they are ignoring.

Not that their prediction is Gospell just one of the admittedly more consrvative ones.

I DESTROYED your (LOL - "cooling') Eastmen Copy/Pastes and this is barely better.
and this one of course Acknowledges/Admits AGW, porking the Troll ding for like the 5000th time.
`

I am sooooo glad you are on the other side.

 

[ding]

No one with a modicum of science education has ever claimed that the warming trend is unprecedented in Earth's history. That you claim they are indicates that YOU are lacking a modicum of education on the matter. It IS unprecedented in the history of human culture and very likely in the entire history of homo sapiens, but what the planet did or didn't do in the roughly 4.5 billion years before modern humans existed is irrelevant - as you've been told often enough that it is surprising to see that you're actually stupid enough to have started this thread.

Would the little ice age be as unprecedented in human history as the recent warming trend?

How do you know that the warming since the little ice age isn't just the earth returning to it's native interglacial cycle temperature?

There's actually quite a bit of evidence that there are well established glacial and interglacial minimums and maximums, right?

 

[ding]

 

[ding]

Climate scientists skip over studying the geologic record because the geologic record doesn't support their narrative. The earth's climate fluctuates - especially over the past 3 million years - and never once because of CO2. So why aren't they discussing the causes of previous climate fluctuations as possible causes of the recent warming trend? It's not like there haven't been warming trends in the past. And if CO2 wasn't responsible for those warming trends then why are they dismissing natural causes in the current warming trend especially without any discussion or reason why? Their logic is literally we know CO2 should cause the planet to warm so we don't have to consider anything else. There's a reason they include the urban heat island effect and use low variability solar output datasets in their models... it's the only way they can get the results to match their bias.