Is a mini ICE AGE on the way?

[ralfyman]

authorama.com/english-fairy-tales-23.html

You are no longer posting anything relevant to this thread. Given that, I’ve no choice but to add you to my ignore list.

 

[ralfyman]

No, we’re below the model projections made for our actual growth in CO2 emissions. Our temperatures are tracking to the projections for if we had flatlined our CO2 at 2000 levels.

Do your homework and stop simply repeating talking points.

There are two studies about the matter mentioned here:

blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2012/12/11/ipcc-climate-forecast-from-1990-amazingly-accurate/

 

[ralfyman]

We are not within the range of their predictions. In fact CO2 has increased significantly more than they predicted and the temperature has increased not all . They were wrong. Instead of just admitting they were wrong they come up with increasingly bizarre theories as to why the world is warming even though it is notFor instance after wholesale changing of past temperature readings downwaninrd ,supposedly to make them more “accurate” ,they then issue alarming press releases claiming 2014 was the warmest year on record- of course when you get to the FinePrint you see they’re claiming a 200s of 1 degree warming. That’s the best they can do after manipulating the data?

According to two papers, we are.

For an analysis of multiple reconstructions, try

nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11676

Finally, please present peer-reviewed papers showing that temperature readings were changed.

 

[ralfyman]

One of the over 50 explanations “scientists” have advance as to why they were right even though they were wrong

dailycaller.com/2014/09/12/there-are-now-52-explanations-for-the-pause-in-global-warming/

But the explanations show that the overall heat level did not decrease. If any, scientists are now beginning to realize that they are underestimating the problem by looking only at surface temperature. That’s why studies concerning positive feedback is increasing.

 

[ralfyman]

The loops are not identified, and there is no clear sense that they are causing havoc. You can’t say “there are evil feedback loops” and then not explain what that means, you must identify them, and prove that they exist, and explain what the negative or positive feedback processes are, or you are not saying anything except that a manufactured worst case scenario is possible, and that also means nothing.

There are over fifty listed here:

guymcpherson.com/2014/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/

with several links to papers.

 

[ralfyman]

Your comments make no sense as regards what I was quoted. Consensus is a political terms, and since the consensus messaging organizations admit that it has failed, my quoted statement easily stands.

But the contrarian study I mentioned confirms the consensus.

 

[ralfyman]

Rocketry works because the systems may be modeled, then engineered, constructed and objectively tested, unlike the bog-like mess of climate science

Unfortunately, the argument works both ways. Given that, the logical thing to do is to see climate change in light of other crisis, such as peak oil. The IEA does that in its 2010 report:

iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/weo-2010.html

It’s also not surprising that not only conservative energy agencies but organizations ranging from the Pentagon to insurers to multinational banks are also releasing reports on AGW.

 

[ralfyman]

That statement makes no sense in context to my statement.

It does because the NAS has the most comprehensive review of the issue. Skeptics tried the same with an independent study which also confirms AGW.

Sure it does, but not to the tune of the climate hysteria advocates.

“Overwhelms” has no other “tune”.

 

[ralfyman]

dailycaller.com/2015/07/17/satellites-earth-is-nearly-in-its-21st-year-without-global-warming/

“Satellite data from the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) group also shows a prolonged “hiatus” in global warming. After November of this year, RSS data will be in its 22nd year without warming. Ironically, the so-called “hiatus” in warming started when then vice President Al Gore and environmental groups touted RSS satellite data as evidence a slight warming trend since 1979.”

…

"Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,’” wrote NOAA scientists in their study.

The study was highly criticized for inflating the temperature record since the late 1990s to show vastly more global warming than was shown in older data. The warming “hiatus” was eliminated and the warming trend over the period was more than doubled.

“There’s been so much criticism of NOAA’s alteration of the sea surface temperature that we are really just going to have to use the University of East Anglia data,” Pat Michaels, a climate scientist with the libertarian Cato Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“I don’t think that’s going to stand the test of time,” Michaels said of NOAA’s recent adjustments.

But what Michaels and others say is more problematic is the growing divergence between NOAA’s new temperature data versus satellite data and records from the UK Met Office. NOAA’s data shows significantly more warming than Met Office or satellite records.

“It’s a major problem because outside of the north polar region, the upper troposphere is supposed to warm faster than the surface,” Michaels said.

“Pretty much every projection made by our climate models for sensible weather is simply not at all trustworthy,” Michaels said."

From March:

"One satellite data set is underestimating global warming "

theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/mar/25/one-satellite-data-set-is-underestimating-global-warming

 

[ralfyman]

LOL, I asked you a very basic evidentiary question on the AGW models, and you deflect. Like I said, you can’t engage if it’s not in the official talking points.

I’ll provide you with the evidence, but unfortunately it only show the models are not validated by actual measurement.

Here are the three scenarios Hansen presented to congress and the world (1988)
A) “Business as usual” with CO2 growth >1.5% annually
B) Reduced CO2 growth
C) Capped CO2 growth (flatlined at what we hit in 2000)

RESULTS:
CO2: Since our actual CO2 growth has been above 2%/yr, we should be exceeding the Scenario A temperature projections.

Global Temp: Actual measurement has invalidated the model since temperatures are clearly tracking below his best case Scenario C. This should be completely and utterly impossible if the climate models had merit.

http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c01bb07ec1576970d-700wi

I think the reason is given here:

skepticalscience.com/Hansen-1988-prediction-advanced.htm

 

[ralfyman]

There is actually a wealth of published research showing the mediaeval warm period occurred around the globe.

Medieval Warm Period Project

Just pick your desired region and you can see the peer reviewed research conducted. This is a collection of independent research that shows a warming occurred in that region/location. Added together, they show the warming was not localized to Europe.

Sorry if you feel I’m not ‘being nice’ but I asked a very basic evidentiary question about the models, and you’ve deflected.

One can consider this paper:

sciencemag.org/content/342/6158/617

The interesting thing, though, is that the lead author uses the same findings to argue that the ocean is currently warming faster:

carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/10/10,000-year-record-shows-pacific-depths-warming-fast/

 

[estesbob]

According to two papers, we are.

For an analysis of multiple reconstructions, try

nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11676

Finally, please present peer-reviewed papers showing that temperature readings were changed.

Actually the temperature didnt change-they manipulated them to make it appear. Temperatures are changed. In truth there has been no warming for going on 20 years. In truth every single prediction made by global warming alarmists has been wrong.

 

[lynnvinc]

There is actually a wealth of published research showing the mediaeval warm period occurred around the globe.

What’s the point. That sort of proves GW can happen. Sheesh!

There were even much greater warmings in the past – the end-Permian wiping out 95% of life on earth, triggered by burning coal seams in the Siberian Trapps.

Difference now – we’re emitting GHGs much faster than nature did in the past and the situation could be much worse (tho they do say life is more resilient than 251 mya when that happened).

The scientists KNOW GHGs cause warming and have caused several extinction-level events from warming in the past (or in some cases greatly enhanced the warming from GHGs being released from frozen permafrost and hydrates due to an initial warming). Nothing new there. However the difference now is it is much faster (in a geological time-frame), and scientists do not have an analog for that.

We’re heading lickity-split into dangerous territory with about a third of the population burying their heads in the sand and another thirds more concerned about next Saturday night’s date or next quarter’s profits to be focused in enough to address the problem.

 

[lynnvinc]

Actually the temperature didnt change-they manipulated them to make it appear. Temperatures are changed. In truth there has been no warming for going on 20 years. In truth every single prediction made by global warming alarmists has been wrong.

20 years? Check out the year 1994 and the year 2014 (count 4 dots from 1990 and compare with the last dot).

No warming, you say?

http://csas.ei.columbia.edu/files/2015/01/Global-surface-temperatures-relative-to-1951-1980.png

People need to look into the facts now and then.

Oh, that’s right, it’s all bogus and made up data, and there’s no increase in ice melt, heat waves, wildfires, storms, floods, droughts, tropical disease spread into new areas. It’s all made up by crazy weathermen around the nation. Hurricanes Haiyan, Hagupit, and Noul never happened and some Hollywood set team created false images.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[estesbob]

20 years? Check out the year 1994 and the year 2014 (count 4 dots from 1990 and compare with the last dot).

No warming, you say?

Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions

People need to look into the facts now and then.

Oh, that’s right, it’s all bogus and made up data, and there’s no increase in ice melt, heat waves, wildfires, storms, floods, droughts, tropical disease spread into new areas. It’s all made up by crazy weathermen around the nation. Hurricanes Haiyan, Hagupit, and Noul never happened and some Hollywood set team created false images.

http://betakit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Typhoon-Haiyan-Tacloban-009.jpg

Wow! Global warming causes landfills who’d a thunk it? And we are having hurricanes now! And typhoons ! Is there anything global warming is not the cause of ?

 

[lynnvinc]

Wow! Global warming causes landfills who’d a thunk it? And we are having hurricanes now! And typhoons ! Is there anything global warming is not the cause of ?

I used to say earthquakes, but that’s not completely true either, since melting glaciers reduce the weight on mountains, which can cause a rebound and small quakes, also the Storegga undersea landslide…

And volcanoes – I’d thought GW wouldn’t have anything to do with them, but I read somewhere about a year ago that they may impact volcanos in some places, I think Iceland, but I’m not sure.

The point is we are entering into a totally different world with AGW and pretty much quite a few things are going to be impacted in some way or the other. My main concern is the impact on reducing food productivity.

 

[Monkey1976]

20 years? Check out the year 1994 and the year 2014 (count 4 dots from 1990 and compare with the last dot).

No warming, you say?

http://csas.ei.columbia.edu/files/2015/01/Global-surface-temperatures-relative-to-1951-1980.png

People need to look into the facts now and then.

Oh, that’s right, it’s all bogus and made up data, and there’s no increase in ice melt, heat waves, wildfires, storms, floods, droughts, tropical disease spread into new areas. It’s all made up by crazy weathermen around the nation. Hurricanes Haiyan, Hagupit, and Noul never happened and some Hollywood set team created false images.

http://betakit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Typhoon-Haiyan-Tacloban-009.jpg

Convenient that this graph starts in the middle of the Little Ice Age.

 

[estesbob]

Convenient that this graph starts in the middle of the Little Ice Age.

I ignore the graphs that are posted of these threads. People post them and wave them about about like the sword Excalibur claiming they prove ther point and then about 30 seconds later somebody will post a graph disputing their graph .

 

[lynnvinc]

Convenient that this graph starts in the middle of the Little Ice Age.

The graph started when more reliable instrumental temps were being taken around the world in 1880 and that is after the “Little Ice Age” (which some say ran from 1300 to 1850). However, if you want a longer graph that goes back further, here it is:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Now what is important to remember, aside from globally averaged temps going up and down, up and down, until recently when they are mainly going up, is that today’s temp is not what scientists and those concerned about life on earth are concerned about. It is how high the temps might go by 2100, and the projection if we continue on our emissions path is they will go way up (some say as high as 6C warmer), which is way above many of the great warming periods of the past that caused extinction level events.

But I guess we won’t be alive then so who cares? Right? (I guess I’m the only one – so pity me)

 

[estesbob]

The graph started when more reliable instrumental temps were being taken around the world in 1880 and that is after the “Little Ice Age” (which some say ran from 1300 to 1850). However, if you want a longer graph that goes back further, here it is:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

Now what is important to remember, aside from globally averaged temps going up and down, up and down, until recently when they are mainly going up, is that today’s temp is not what scientists and those concerned about life on earth are concerned about. It is how high the temps might go by 2100, and the projection if we continue on our emissions path is they will go way up (some say as high as 6C warmer), which is way above many of the great warming periods of the past that caused extinction level events.

But I guess we won’t be alive then so who cares? Right? (I guess I’m the only one – so pity me)

If we can just price the poor out of existence there will plenty for the elite when the Brave New World arrives.