So if the globe isn't warming..why are you calling it global warming?

[RollingThunder]

If you start this shit again, I'll immediately drag your fudgepacked ass over to the vets forum, and you can explain to all the vets here why you're spitting on my military service.

Big talk from a bitter old liberal whore...

Really retarded talk from a bitter and very ignorant old denier cult troll.

And the only thing john cook provides is...

...accurate science and a comprehensive debunking of your fraudulent denier cult myths and lies.

Which is why you hate and fear Mr. Cook and his website, you poor moronic denier cult dingleberry.

*****

And in the real world, it is called 'global warming' because, the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms.....and only ignorant anti-science trolls stooging for the fossil fuel industry deny.

 

[SSDD]

Really retarded talk from a bitter and very ignorant old denier cult troll.

Again, you couldn't be more wrong thunder...I am the farthest thing from bitter...of course you wouldn't know that since you can't see past your own crippling psychological problems.

I hate and fear no one...hate and fear are liberal characteristics...Which is why you hate and fear Mr. Cook and his website, you poor moronic denier cult dingleberry.[/quote]

I hate and fear no one...again, since that is the state of your life as a result of the terrible abuse you have suffered, you are, I am sure, unable to imagine living without those emotions in the forefront of your mind all the time...aside from those who have been abused, hate and fear are liberal characteristics...

And in the real world, it is called 'global warming' because, the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms.....and only ignorant anti-science trolls stooging for the fossil fuel industry deny.

Nope...some places are warming...some places are cooling but most places are not doing much of anything...to call anything the climate is doing at present global is disingenuous at best, but mostly it is a bald faced lie.

 

[RollingThunder]

Really retarded talk from a bitter and very ignorant old denier cult troll.

Again, you couldn't be more wrong thunder...I am the farthest thing from bitter...of course you wouldn't know that since you can't see past your own crippling psychological problems.

I hate and fear no one...hate and fear are liberal characteristics...Which is why you hate and fear Mr. Cook and his website, you poor moronic denier cult dingleberry.[/quote]

I hate and fear no one...again, since that is the state of your life as a result of the terrible abuse you have suffered, you are, I am sure, unable to imagine living without those emotions in the forefront of your mind all the time...aside from those who have been abused, hate and fear are liberal characteristics...

And in the real world, it is called 'global warming' because, the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms.....and only ignorant anti-science trolls stooging for the fossil fuel industry deny.

Nope...some places are warming...some places are cooling but most places are not doing much of anything...to call anything the climate is doing at present global is disingenuous at best, but mostly it is a bald faced lie.

LOLOLOLOL.......you are soooo incompetent, SSoooDDumb, you can't even manage to format your posts correctly. What a mess!

And of course, you have repeatedly demonstrated that you are very retarded, very ignorant, and completely full of misinformation and lies.

In the real world....

July 2016: The World’s Hottest Month on Record
September 26, 2016


In the graphic above, the red line is the 5-year average. The black dots represent each year’s average temperature. The latest black dot represents 2015’s average temperature for the year and 2016 is predicted to be even higher than that.

This past July has been the hottest month ever recorded. The previous records were July 2015 and July 2011. The combined temperatures world-wide were .84 degrees celsius warmer than the yearly average.

July 2016 was the tenth consecutive month that was 1 degree celsius warmer than average. 2016 ended up being the hottest year on record. Previously, the hottest year on record was 2015 with temperatures being .90 degrees celsius warmer than average.

Galvin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, states that July 2016 should be the end of the 10 month hot streak due to the ending of El Niño.

“While El Niño provided a boost to global temperatures this year, the bulk of the heat is what has been trapped by accumulating greenhouse gases in the atmosphere,” said Andrea Thompson, climatologist at Climate Central.

The record heats have not only been dangerous due to the heat-stroke level temperatures. The presumed hottest year yet has also brought flood disasters to the United States, the latest of which is still devastating to parts of Louisiana as well as China.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I've never seen a dataset showing that the earth isn't warming...

Why do people on the internet that haven't ever touched a ground station or looked through raw data think they know more then every institution on this planet? It is sick.

You would not know a dataset if it jumped out and bit you on your ass.

 

[Wyatt earp]

If you start this shit again, I'll immediately drag your fudgepacked ass over to the vets forum, and you can explain to all the vets here why you're spitting on my military service.

Big talk from a bitter old liberal whore...

Really retarded talk from a bitter and very ignorant old denier cult troll.

And the only thing john cook provides is...

...accurate science and a comprehensive debunking of your fraudulent denier cult myths and lies.

Which is why you hate and fear Mr. Cook and his website, you poor moronic denier cult dingleberry.

*****

And in the real world, it is called 'global warming' because, the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms.....and only ignorant anti-science trolls stooging for the fossil fuel industry deny.

the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms



WTF?

 

[Wyatt earp]

If you start this shit again, I'll immediately drag your fudgepacked ass over to the vets forum, and you can explain to all the vets here why you're spitting on my military service.

Big talk from a bitter old liberal whore...

Really retarded talk from a bitter and very ignorant old denier cult troll.

And the only thing john cook provides is...

...accurate science and a comprehensive debunking of your fraudulent denier cult myths and lies.

Which is why you hate and fear Mr. Cook and his website, you poor moronic denier cult dingleberry.

*****

And in the real world, it is called 'global warming' because, the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms.....and only ignorant anti-science trolls stooging for the fossil fuel industry deny.

the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms



WTF?


View attachment 120107

You lie again even John Cooks blog won't say something that stupid


Human fingerprints on climate change rule out natural cycles




Of course, it's always possible that some natural cycle exists, unknown to scientists and their instruments, that is currently causing the planet to warm. There's always a chance that we could be totally wrong. This omnipresent fact of science is called irreducible uncertainty, because it can never be entirely eliminated. However, it's very unlikely that such a cycle exists.

 

[RollingThunder]

And the only thing john cook provides is...

...accurate science and a comprehensive debunking of your fraudulent denier cult myths and lies. Which is why you hate and fear Mr. Cook and his website, you poor moronic denier cult dingleberry.
And in the real world, it is called 'global warming' because, the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms.....and only ignorant anti-science trolls stooging for the fossil fuel industry deny.

the Earth is, in fact, warming up un-naturally, far beyond the range of natural variation....a fact that virtually the entire world scientific community affirms

WTF?

This kind of dimwitted twit response to a simple statement of fact actually has a name.....it's called 'Argument From Personal Incredulity'....and it is a common response one gets from utter retards who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, so they moronically reject as false everything they can't understand. Another varient on the 'too stupid to know how stupid you are' quirk that afflicts most of the denier cult dingbats.

This logically fallacious 'argument from personal incredulity', takes the form "this is ridiculous and beyond what anyone could know (i.e. - I can't understand it), so it must be false"....and it contains the totally braindead assumption that the speaker is a superhuman genius who should be able to understand everything....unless he is not seeing something (but he's sure he's a genius, so...that's out). So the "superhuman genius" concludes that some assumption ('natural cycles' and the scientists are all crooks) is true, because it makes things easier to understand.

ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL INCREDULITY
TrulyFallacious
Asserting that because one finds something difficult to understand it can’t be true.
This fallacy is based more on lack of understanding than lack of information. Often used as a means to distrust science on the basis of it being highly technical and difficult to put into layman terms, this fallacy is the standby of regressives who wish everything to remain the way things used to be. To avoid changing one’s mind, the person merely avoids advancing their understanding of the topic at hand.
***

Argument from Personal Incredulity - Logical Fallacies
Video

 

[SSDD]

LOLOLOLOL.......you are soooo incompetent, SSoooDDumb, you can't even manage to format your posts correctly. What a mess!

Hey, you found a formatting error...find any punctuation or spelling errors?...give yourself a little fist pump down in your parent's basement over that one?..

Sorry thunder..."global" warming doesn't exist...some places are warming...some are cooling, and most are standing still..the only way to get a global increase in temperature is by massive infilling of data...that means....just making it up. I know that someone of your limited capacity would never question why the warmest places on earth according to climate science are invariably the places with the least instrumental coverage...but then, that is how you have fallen so hard for the scam...scams are designed to catch the slow and stupid...congratulations.

 

[Crick]

No one ever suggested the entire planet would be warming at any given time. The contrary was clearly stated in the earliest assessment reports and every one since. Your latest gambit, running around the planet and finding every location that hasn't warmed recently is just cherry picking bullshit. All those numbers are taken into the global average. The planet, as a whole, is warming just as NOAA, NCDC, Hadley, Met, BEST and JAXA say it is.

There has been more than enough conversation here over the years that virtually every person here knows this claim is a paragon of cherry-picking. That makes you dishonest Shit.

 

[SSDD]

No one ever suggested the entire planet would be warming at any given time.

Whats the matter crick...don't know what the word global means?

global - adjective
1.pertaining to the whole world; worldwide; universal

The contrary was clearly stated in the earliest assessment reports and every one since. Your latest gambit, running around the planet and finding every location that hasn't warmed recently is just cherry picking bullshit. All those numbers are taken into the global average. The planet, as a whole, is warming just as NOAA, NCDC, Hadley, Met, BEST and JAXA say it is.

The only place the globe is warming is in computer models and highly manipulated data sets.

 

[RollingThunder]

Sorry thunder..."global" warming doesn't exist...some places are warming...some are cooling, and most are standing still..the only way to get a global increase in temperature is by massive infilling of data...that means....just making it up.

Repeating over and over your fraudulent denial of reality won't change reality, you poor retard.

I know that someone of your limited capacity would never question why the warmest places on earth according to climate science are invariably the places with the least instrumental coverage...

While that may be generally accurate, there is a real reason for it that isn't part of your crackpot conspiracy theory insanity, SSoooDDumb. Moreover, a number of those places, like Death Valley, have had good "instrumental coverage" for a long time. As to the reason the hottest places have had minimal "coverage", it is pretty obvious.....few people live in those 'hottest places', for the obvious reasons.

"The places that are recorded as the hottest on Earth are places that generally see scorching temperatures. And these places usually have a few characteristics in common, according to Weather.com. They tend to be in deserts with little soil moisture or vegetation, where there is a lot of direct sunshine unimpeded by clouds during the hot season. This means the sun’s energy goes directly into heating the ground. These places also tend to be at lower elevations."

So, scorching temperatures and deserts with little soil moisture or vegetation means these areas are virtually uninhabited...which accounts for the fact that there are very few weather stations.....not your insane assumption that "there must be a conspiracy".

but then, that is how you have fallen so hard for the scam...scams are designed to catch the slow and stupid...congratulations.

This reality denying fossil fuel industry scam (you may be a victim of it or you may be a paid troll pushing it) was indeed "designed to catch the slow and stupid", and the ignorant and ideologically insane......'cause see, they caught you and the other "slow and stupid" denier cult rightwingnut retards.

 

[SSDD]

While that may be generally accurate, there is a real reason for it that isn't part of your crackpot conspiracy theory insanity, SSoooDDumb. Moreover, a number of those places, like Death Valley, have had good "instrumental coverage" for a long time. As to the reason the hottest places have had minimal "coverage", it is pretty obvious.....few people live in those 'hottest places', for the obvious reasons.

So you think it is a good idea to put more instrumentation where more people live? Let the urban heat island effect weigh more heavily? Again, you simply do not think. It is the rural stations that give us the better picture of what the temperatures actually are..and what the trends really look like. There is a reason that climate science has deleted some 75% of the rural stations have been deleted from the system since the 1970's.

As a result, the urban heat island effect has added about .09C per decade to the land temperatures over the past decade alone. Here, have a look.

And if follows that pattern across the globe... Rural areas are not showing the warming that urban areas are showing....as a result, what appears to be warming is nothing more than urban heat restricted to local areas...

Here is the temperature showing only rural stations across the northern hemisphere...as you can see, the bit of warming we have seen is no worse than the warming leading up to the 1950's...what you believe is global warming is nothing more than smoke and mirrors designed to fool idiots.

If you want to know what drives the climate, look at that big fiery ball in the sky...

There is a reason some 600 papers have been published since 2016 calling the mainstream "science" into question...and there is a reason you believe what you do, and as strongly as you do, but it has nothing to do with actual science...it has everything to do with how gullible you are.

 

[Crick]

When you start referencing Soon for TSI v temp data, you've thrown away any pretence of objectivity. That data was bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry.

 

[SSDD]

When you start referencing Soon for TSI v temp data, you've thrown away any pretence of objectivity. That data was bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry.

Says the guy who references skeptical science...you are laughable crick...and you are one of the least objective people here...an objective person....when finding themselves unable to provide even the smallest piece of observed, measured, quantified, empirical data supporting AGW over natural variability, would start to wonder why they hold the position they hold..but do you wonder?...not even a little..you just double down on the cult dogma and claim that you have provided mountains of such evidence, and that mountains of such evidence exists, even though you know I am going to ask to see it and you know just as well that you won't be able to provide it...

So lets do the sensible person asks the monkey a question thing again...This time I ask for a single shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting AGW over natural variability...

Now, the monkey...being a monkey...will hurl some form of feces in frustration, and not fulfill the request....and why is the monkey frustrated...because the sensible person asked the monkey to fulfill an impossible request since no such evidence exists.

 

[RollingThunder]

When you start referencing Soon for TSI v temp data, you've thrown away any pretence of objectivity. That data was bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry.

Says the guy who references skeptical science...you are laughable crick...and you are one of the least objective people here...an objective person....when finding themselves unable to provide even the smallest piece of observed, measured, quantified, empirical data supporting AGW over natural variability, would start to wonder why they hold the position they hold..but do you wonder?...not even a little..you just double down on the cult dogma and claim that you have provided mountains of such evidence, and that mountains of such evidence exists, even though you know I am going to ask to see it and you know just as well that you won't be able to provide it...

So lets do the sensible person asks the monkey a question thing again...This time I ask for a single shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting AGW over natural variability...

Now, the monkey...being a monkey...will hurl some form of feces in frustration, and not fulfill the request....and why is the monkey frustrated...because the sensible person asked the monkey to fulfill an impossible request since no such evidence exists.

Once again SSoooDDumb repeats his litany of fraudulent denier cult myths that have no connection to reality, as if constant repetition is going to somehow make them magically become true.

In the real world, there are literally mountains of "observed, measured, quantified, empirical data supporting AGW over natural variability"......enough in fact, to convince the entire world scientific community of the reality of human caused global warming.

For those who aren't brainwashed trolls, here are a few examples of some good, reputable places to find that evidence - there are lots more....

Climate change: How do we know? - Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA
Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal. - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced ...
***
How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming? - Union of Concerned Scientists
The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states: it is a ... So how do scientists know that today's warming is primarily caused by humans putting too much carbon in the ...
***
How do we know humans are causing global warming? - Global warming, explained - Vox
Climate scientists say they are 95 percent certain that human influence has been the dominant cause of global warming since 1950. They're about as sure ... How do we know global warming is real? 3. How do we know ...
***
Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming - Skeptical Science
This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming. ... Agriculture as we know it would be more or less impossible if the average temperature was −18 °C. In other words, ...
***
Human Caused Global Warming — OSS Foundation
How do we know current global warming is human caused, or man made? Is global warming real, or a hoax? Consider the facts: the climate system is indicated to have left the natural cycle path; multiple lines of ...
***
How do we know global warming is not a natural cycle? - Climate Central
Nov 7, 2009 - In other words, climate variations are not at all unusual. So how do we know this one is caused by humans? Several reasons. First, we know that burning coal, oil, and gas releases heat-trapping ...
***
The Reality, Risks and Response to Climate Change - American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) - "What We Know"
Thus, it is important and increasingly urgent for the public to know there is now a high degree of agreement among climate scientists that human-caused climate change is real. Moreover, while the public is becoming ...
***
How do scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities? - Royal Society
Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change ...
***
What sparked global warming? People did. - Environmental Defense Fund
3 days ago - But you can also do your part to propel large-scale progress: Tell your leaders where you stand and voice your support ... Scientists are more confident than ever that humans are causing global warming.

 

[SSDD]

Once again SSoooDDumb repeats his litany of fraudulent denier cult myths that have no connection to reality, as if constant repetition is going to somehow make them magically become true.

In the real world, there are literally mountains of "observed, measured, quantified, empirical data supporting AGW over natural variability"......enough in fact, to convince the entire world scientific community of the reality of human caused global warming.

So you say...and yet, you don't seem to be able to post any...but lets look at what passes for observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in that little mind of yours...

Climate change: How do we know? - Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA

Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal. - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced ...

Right there in the second sentence...they say it is "likely" human induced...that is how climate science is done...no actual evidence... just claims. They certainly show evidence of climate change, but don't have the first shred of actual evidence that supports AGW over natural variability. But if you think there is something in that paper that amounts to actual evidence that supports AGW over natural variability, by all means, go cut it out and paste it here.

How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global Warming? - Union of Concerned Scientists

The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states: it is a ... So how do scientists know that today's warming is primarily caused by humans putting too much carbon in the ...

From the union of concerned scientists? Really? Personally, I would be embarrassed to post anything from that wacko outfit..but apparently it is one of your most trusted sources...Do you know anything about the membership of the union of concerned scientists?... Here, let me post you a photo of a card holding, voting member in good standing..

In short, anyone willing to pay the dues can be a member of the union of concerned scientists...and in that link, they post evidence of climate change, but not the first actual piece of evidence supporting AGW over natural variability.

How do we know humans are causing global warming? - Global warming, explained - Vox

Climate scientists say they are 95 percent certain that human influence has been the dominant cause of global warming since 1950. They're about as sure ... How do we know global warming is real? 3. How do we know ...

This bunch is 95% certain that we are causing warming, but don't seem to be able to provide any actual evidence in support of the claim...again, if there is anything there that you believe amounts to observed, measured, quantified evidence supporting AGW over natural variability, by all means, bring it here.

Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming - Skeptical Science
This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming. ... Agriculture as we know it would be more or less impossible if the average temperature was −18 °C. In other words,

Skeptical Science? Im laughing at you...those guys are even worse than the union of concerned scientists...you believe cartoonists do you?...So they make lots of claims, but don't have the first piece of actual evidence to support said claims...again, if you think there is some actual evidence there supporting AGW over natural variability, bring it here.

Human Caused Global Warming — OSS Foundation
How do we know current global warming is human caused, or man made? Is global warming real, or a hoax? Consider the facts: the climate system is indicated to have left the natural cycle path; multiple lines of ...

Again...evidence that the climate is changing...nothing more than assumptions that we are causing it...not the first shred of observed measured, quantified evidence supporting AGW over natural variability.

See a trend developing here thunder?...If you believe there is any actual observed, measured quantified evidence supporting AGW over natural variability in any of those links...or anywhere else for that matter, bring it here...or do you even have any idea of what observed, measured, quantified evidence might look like...you seem to believe that it exists in the links above..but there isn't a shred there..

 

[RollingThunder]

Once again SSoooDDumb repeats his litany of fraudulent denier cult myths that have no connection to reality, as if constant repetition is going to somehow make them magically become true.

In the real world, there are literally mountains of "observed, measured, quantified, empirical data supporting AGW over natural variability"......enough in fact, to convince the entire world scientific community of the reality of human caused global warming.

So you say...and yet, you don't seem to be able to post any...but lets look at what passes for observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in that little mind of yours...

Climate change: How do we know? - Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA

OK, moron, let's look in more detail at some of the scientific evidence that you are too stupid to understand and too brainwashed to accept.

Climate change: How do we know? - Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Credit: Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.) Find out more about ice cores (external site).

The Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 650,000 years there have been seven cycles of glacial advance and retreat, with the abrupt end of the last ice age about 7,000 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

"Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal." - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.(1)

Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale. This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a changing climate.

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.(2) Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming.(3)

The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling:

Sea level rise
Global sea level rose about 8 inches in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century.(4)


An indicator of current global sea level as measured by satellites; updated monthly.

Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global warming: the added water from melting land ice and the expansion of sea water as it warms.

SATELLITE DATA: 1993-PRESENT - Satellite sea level observations.
Credit: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
RATE OF CHANGE: Plus 3.4 millimeters per year (margin: ±0.4)

How much sea level changed from about 1870 to 2000, derived from coastal tide gauge data. - Credit: CSIRO
***

Global temperature rise
All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880.(5) Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with 15 of the 16 warmest years on record occurring since 2001. The year 2015 was the first time the global average temperatures were 1 degree Celsius or more above the 1880-1899 average.(6) Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase.(7)

Global Annual Mean Surface Air Temperature Change

Line plot of global mean land-ocean temperature index, 1880 to present, with the base period 1951-1980. The dotted black line is the annual mean and the solid red line is the five-year mean. The green bars show uncertainty estimates.

This graph illustrates the change in global surface temperature relative to 1951-1980 average temperatures. Sixteen of the seventeen warmest years in the 136-year record have occurred since 2000, with the 17th being 1998. The year 2016 ranks as the warmest on record. (Source: NASA/GISS). This research is broadly consistent with similar constructions prepared by the Climatic Research Unit and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.


***

Warming oceans
The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.(8)

* Article: Warming ocean causing most Antarctic ice shelf mass loss
Ocean waters melting the undersides of Antarctic ice shelves are responsible for most of the continent's ice shelf mass loss, a new study by NASA and university researchers has found.
***

Shrinking ice sheets
The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.

Image: Flowing meltwater from the Greenland ice sheet


* Vital Signs: Land Ice
An indicator of the current volume and the Antarctica and Greenland ice sheets using data from NASA’s Grace satellite.


* Global Ice Viewer
An interactive exploration of how global warming is affecting sea ice, glaciers and continental ice sheets world wide.
***

Declining Arctic sea ice

Image: Visualization of the 2007 Arctic sea ice minimum

Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.(9)

Arctic sea ice reaches its minimum each September. September Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 13.3 percent per decade, relative to the 1981 to 2010 average. The 2012 sea ice extent is the lowest in the satellite record. The 2016 ice extent tied with 2007 for the second lowest.

This graph shows the average monthly Arctic sea ice extent in September since 1979, derived from satellite observations.

AVERAGE SEPTEMBER EXTENT RATE OF CHANGE: negative 13.3% per decade - Data source: Satellite observations. Credit: NSIDC/NASA
***

Glacial retreat

Image: The disappearing snowcap of Mount Kilimanjaro, from space

Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.(10 )
***

Extreme events

The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.(11)

* Precipitation Measurement Missions - The official website for NASA's fleet of Earth science missions that study rainfall and other types precipitation around the globe.
***

Ocean acidification

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.(12,)(13) This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.(14,)(15)

* How does climate change affect coral reefs?
Article about how global warming leads to coral bleaching and changes ocean chemistry, leading to acidification.

* The Other Carbon Dioxide Problem
NOAA page on ocean acidification.
***

Decreased snow cover

Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and that the snow is melting earlier.(16)

* National Snow and Ice Data Center
As an information and referral center in support of polar and cryospheric research,NSIDC archives and distributes digital and analog snow, ice, and

* Earth Observatory: Snow Cover
Time series of global snow cover from NASA's Earth Observatory.

 

[SSDD]

So you say...and yet, you don't seem to be able to post any...but lets look at what passes for observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in that little mind of yours...

Climate change: How do we know? - Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA

OK, moron, let's look in more detail at some of the scientific evidence that you are too stupid to understand and too brainwashed to accept.

Climate change: How do we know? - Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Credit: Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.) Find out more about ice cores (external site).

First, your posts aren't better, or more informative because you print them in large, bold face with colors...they just make you look like a wild eyed, locust eating prophet coming in from the desert preaching your dogma...

Clearly you think this constitutes evidence that man is causing climate change.....it isn't. In order to believe that our CO2 is causing the climate to change, you must ASSUME that an increase in CO2 causes warming.. To date, there hasn't been the first piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence supporting that claim...computer models are not evidence and the only place CO2 causes measured warming is in computer models.

Claims that require you to assume that they are true are not evidence.

The Earth's climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 650,000 years there have been seven cycles of glacial advance and retreat, with the abrupt end of the last ice age about 7,000 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

First, the ice age did not end....we are in an interglacial, but interglacials are merely melt backs happening within an ice age...the earth is still in an ice age as evidenced by the existence of ice at one or both poles....And the article says that the climate change that has happened within the past 7000 years is "ATTRIBUTED" to...do you know what that means? It is just a claim..not based on any sort of actual proof....

"Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal." - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Who is arguing that the climate doesn't change? Certainly not me. But saying that the climate changes is not any sort of proof as to why the climate is changing...

The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.(1)

Again...very likely? Based on what? I am looking for actual observed, measured, quantified evidence that supports the claim that we are causing the change rather than just seeing natural variability. Claims are not evidence...but if this sort of thing passes for evidence in your mind, it is easy to see why you come across as a wild eyed locust eating prophet coming in from the desert.

Do you have any idea why the make the claim above and limit the time to the past 1,300 years?...It is because if they go back any further, then they are faced with: first, the Medieval Warm Period which was warmer than the present...second, go back a while further and they run into the Roman Warm Period which was warmer than the Medieval Warm Period...go back a bit further and you run into the Minoan Warm Period, which was warmer than the Roman Warm Period and the Medieval Warm Period.and go back some more and they run into the Holocene opitimum which was warmer than the Minoan Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, and the Medieval Warm Period...and according to gold standard ice core temperature reconstructions, those periods warmed not only to temperatures higher than we have seen, but faster than the fraction of a degree we have seen in the past 100 years.

Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale. This body of data, collected over many years, reveals the signals of a changing climate.

Once again..evidence of change is not evidence of cause.

The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.(2) Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.

OK...so lets see some actual observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence of that claim...We hear it all the time, but none of you warmers can seem to come up with any actual evidence of it...believing it to be true is not actual evidence that it is true...The hypothesis says that if additional CO2 could actually trap heat, that there would be a definite tropospheric hot spot as a result...no such hot spot is in evidence...

A couple of wack jobs have tried to claim that it is there but just can't be detected...but if a hot spot were there, the temperature would reflect it.

Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in greenhouse gas levels. Ancient evidence can also be found in tree rings, ocean sediments, coral reefs, and layers of sedimentary rocks. This ancient, or paleoclimate, evidence reveals that current warming is occurring roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming.(3)

Actually, the ice core data show that CO2 responds to changes in the climate...not the other way around. Claims to the contrary are bullshit.

The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling:

Evidence for a changing climate is compelling...there is no actual evidence that the change we have seen is rapid, or unprecedented is unusual or unprecedented in the least.

Sea level rise

Global sea level rose about 8 inches in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century.(4)


An indicator of current global sea level as measured by satellites; updated monthly.

Sea level rise is caused primarily by two factors related to global warming: the added water from melting land ice and the expansion of sea water as it warms.

SATELLITE DATA: 1993-PRESENT - Satellite sea level observations.
Credit: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
RATE OF CHANGE: Plus 3.4 millimeters per year (margin: ±0.4)

How much sea level changed from about 1870 to 2000, derived from coastal tide gauge data. - Credit: CSIRO
***

Claims of unusual sea level rise in the past century are bullshit...I am not going to go into the whole thing again here, but if you want to see the evidence supporting my claim of bullshit, go here

Global temperature rise

All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880.(5) Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with 15 of the 16 warmest years on record occurring since 2001. The year 2015 was the first time the global average temperatures were 1 degree Celsius or more above the 1880-1899 average.(6) Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase.(7)

The pause is real and the claims of the hottest year ever are the result of data manipulation...aside from that, evidence of warming is not evidence of what is causing the change...It has certainly warmed since the little ice age...but not to the temperatures that existed in earlier periods...showing me that it is warming is not showing me any sort of evidence of why it is warming....I have asked for observed, measured, quantified evidence supporting the claim that the present climate is changing due to us rather than due to natural variability which we have seen has caused the climate in the past to warm more than the present and to warm faster.

Warming oceans

The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.(8)

Evidence that the oceans are warming is evidence that the oceans are warming...that is not evidence of why...I asked for actual observed, measured, quantified evidence supporting the claim that we are causing the warming and not natural variability....showing me evidence that the oceans have warmed and then calling it evidence that we caused the change is just more assumption on your part...but again, if this sort of thing passes for evidence of AGW, and not simply evidence of changing climate in your mind, it is easy to see why you have been taken in to the degree that you have...clearly, you have no idea of what actual evidence supporting the claim of manmade climate change over natural variability might look like...of course, I can't really blame you since there is no actual observed, measured, quantified evidence supporting man made climate change over natural variability....

Shrinking ice sheets
The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.

Again...evidence of changing climate is not evidence of the cause of the change...but here, take a look at the gold standard ice core temperature reconstruction of the past 10,000 years, derived from ice cores taken in Greenland, above the Arctic Circle....what do you suppose the ice looks like now, compared to what it has looked like for most of the past 10,000 years?

By the way, look at the magnitude, and speed at which past temperature changes happened.....look at the period about 7900 years ago to about 8200 years ago...3.5 degrees of change in about 300 years...and look at the rates of change across the board...many periods showing much more rapid change than we have seen...and the same temperature spikes are seen in the Antarctic ice cores as well.

Ocean acidification

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.(12,)(13) This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.(14,)(15)

The present level of CO2 in the atmosphere is 400ppm...When the present ice age began, the atmospheric CO2 levels were in excess of 1000ppm...most of the species in the oceans evolved during times when the atmospheric CO2 level was far in excess of 1000ppm...the claim that our 0.0004% contribution to the atmospheric CO2 is causing the oceans to acidify is bullshit..

So for all the stuff you posted...and have posted, there isn't the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence that we are causing the climate to change...you apparently believe that evidence of climate changing is also evidence of what is causing the change...it isn't...your assumption that we are causing it is evidence of your political leanings...or evidence of the fact that you weren't taught critical thinking in school...or evidence that you just need something to believe...but it isn't actual evidence supporting the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.

 

[RollingThunder]

So you say...and yet, you don't seem to be able to post any...but lets look at what passes for observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in that little mind of yours...

Climate change: How do we know? - Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA

OK, moron, let's look in more detail at some of the scientific evidence that you are too stupid to understand and too brainwashed to accept.

Climate change: How do we know? - Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence - NASA

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Credit: Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.) Find out more about ice cores (external site).

Clearly you think this constitutes evidence that man is causing climate change.....it isn't. In order to believe that our CO2 is causing the climate to change, you must ASSUME that an increase in CO2 causes warming.. To date, there hasn't been the first piece of observed, measured, quantified evidence supporting that claim...computer models are not evidence and the only place CO2 causes measured warming is in computer models.

Yup! That long list of evidence presented by NASA does, in fact, "constitute evidence that man is causing climate change". Unfortunately you are just too retarded and brainwashed to understand that.

The Greenhouse Gas nature of CO2 is so well established scientifically that your denial of its reality constitutes denier cult insanity. You have been shown the laboratory experiments and other evidence supporting the scientific facts about this many times but again, you are just too stupid and brainwashed to acknowledge that reality.

 

[SSDD]

[QUOTE="RollingThunder, post: 16991389, member: 22971]
Yup! That long list of evidence presented by NASA does, in fact, "constitute evidence that man is causing climate change". Unfortunately you are just too retarded and brainwashed to understand that.[/quote]

No thunder...I know this must be hard for you...but all you provided was evidence that the climate is changing....none of it was evidence of the cause...your sources simply assume that man is causing it...there wasn't the first piece of evidence there establishing cause...there was evidence that the climate is changing and simple statements that we are doing it...

[QUOTE="RollingThunder, post: 16991389, member: 22971The Greenhouse Gas nature of CO2 is so well established scientifically ...... [/quote]

And yet, there isn't the first actual measured, quantified evidence of it..

[QUOTE="RollingThunder, post: 16991389, member: 22971]You have been shown the laboratory experiments and other evidence supporting the scientific facts about this many times but again, you are just too stupid and brainwashed to acknowledge that reality.[/QUOTE]

And those lab experiments showed all sorts of things...from the temperature of compression, to abject scientific incompetence...but none of them showed any evidence that CO2 could cause any sort of warming outside of a tightly sealed environment.

You are a believer...you require no actual evidence...your faith is enough...you will accept anything as evidence due to your faith...I am a bit more pragmatic...if you are going to tell me that CO2 causes warming out in the atmosphere, then I would like to see some evidence of it...you haven't shown any...but don't worry, because none exists...

Prove me wrong...lets see some evidence that CO2 causes warming out in the open atmosphere.