If that's EH being ironic and trolling by using the assumed and often quoted 98% consensus concerning climate change, then I think it's a genius at work.
global warming
- Thread starter Stu
- Start date
Not trolling. By my count I have been wrong to varying degrees a total of 4 times here. Allowing for an error factor of +-1. Each time I have admitted my mistake.
I wouldn't be able to say how correct you are concerning the rest of your statement.
The very simple real fact is that while there may be varying degrees of evidence to suggest humans effect global tempatures, there is to date simply no proof of that. Should you fall into the category of someone who believes there is proof, I strongly suggest you research, read up or even take a few classes concerning scientific processes, what they mean nd how they are achieved.
I've argued the point to the best of my tolerance and ability. The simple fact of the matter is I am not changing the world in this forum and my efforts seem to be entirely wasted. I did try to help you but you can't lead a horse to water and force it to drink.
I've argued the point to the best of my tolerance and ability. The simple fact of the matter is I am not changing the world in this forum and my efforts seem to be entirely wasted. I did try to help you but you can't lead a horse to water and force it to drink.
Scientific organizations endorsing the consensus (but they obviously do not understand what "scientific prosseses" mean)
The following scientific organizations endorse the consensus position that "most of the global warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities":
- American Association for the Advancement of Science
- American Astronomical Society
- American Chemical Society
- American Geophysical Union
- American Institute of Physics
- American Meteorological Society
- American Physical Society
- Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
- Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO
- British Antarctic Survey
- Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
- Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
- Environmental Protection Agency
- European Geosciences Union
- European Physical Society
- Federation of American Scientists
- Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
- Geological Society of America
- Geological Society of London
- International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA)
- International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
- National Center for Atmospheric Research
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
- Royal Meteorological Society
- Royal Society of the UK
Salem witch trials were in 1692, basically Americas Middle Ages, a consensus among scientists indicates an acknowledgement of use of the scientific method.
I am not deluded enough to take on the work of a climatologist.
When it comes time to pass legislation revolving around global tempatures etc I'll know that the people who support the man made global warming theory never took the time to actually research the issue through the means that can give real answers. In other words they are doing nothing but guessing. So, when funding is cut I'll not only know why but I'll support the move.
Hey, I appreciate a good trolling. It's a display of character and a sense of humour.
Greenpeace co-founder: No scientific evidence of man-made global warming
February 25th, 2014
There is no scientific evidence that human activity is causing the planet to warm, according to Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, who testified in front of a Senate committee on Tuesday.
Moore argued that the current argument that the burning of fossil fuels is driving global warming over the past century lacks scientific evidence. He added that the Earth is in an unusually cold period and some warming would be a good thing.
“There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” according to Moore’s prepared testimony. “Today, we live in an unusually cold period in the history of life on earth and there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be anything but beneficial for humans and the majority of other species.”
“It is important to recognize, in the face of dire predictions about a [two degrees Celsius] rise in global average temperature, that humans are a tropical species,” Moore said. “We evolved at the equator in a climate where freezing weather did not exist. The only reasons we can survive these cold climates are fire, clothing, and housing.”
“It could be said that frost and ice are the enemies of life, except for those relatively few species that have evolved to adapt to freezing temperatures during this Pleistocene Ice Age,” he added. “It is ‘extremely likely’ that a warmer temperature than today’s would be far better than a cooler one.”
Indeed, cold weather is more likely to cause death than warm weather. RealClearScience reported that from “1999 to 2010, a total of 4,563 individuals died from heat, but 7,778 individuals died from the cold.” Only in 2006 did heat-related deaths outnumber cold deaths.
In Britain, 24,000 people are projected to die this winter because they cannot afford to pay their energy bills. Roughly 4.5 million British families are facing “fuel poverty.”
“The fact that we had both higher temperatures and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main cause of global warming,” Moore said.
“When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time,” he added. “Then an Ice Age occurred 450 million years ago when CO2 was 10 times higher than today.”
Moore, a Canadian, helped found the environmental activist group Greenpeace in the 1970s. He left the group after they began to take on more radical positions. He has since been a critic of radical environmentalism and heads up the group Ecosense Environmental in Vancouver, Canada.
Moore’s comments come after President Obama declared global warming a “fact” in the State of the Union. His administration has attempted to argue that the recent U.S. cold snap was influenced by a warmer planet.
Climate scientists, however, have been struggling to explain why global surface temperatures have not risen in the last 17 years and why atmospheric temperatures have been flat for the last decade.
“From 1910 to 1940 there was an increase in global average temperature of [0.5 degrees Celsius] over that 30-year period,” Moore said. “Then there was a 30-year ‘pause’ until 1970. This was followed by an increase of [0.57 degrees Celsius] during the 30-year period from 1970 to 2000. Since then there has been no increase, perhaps a slight decrease, in average global temperature.”
“This in itself tends to negate the validity of the computer models, as CO2 emissions have continued to accelerate during this time,” the former environmental activist added. “The increase in temperature between 1910-1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970-2000.”
“Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910-1940 to ‘human influence.'” Moore continued. “They are clear in their belief that human emissions impact only the increase ‘since the mid-20th century.’ Why does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by ‘human influence,’ when it has no explanation for the nearly identical increase from 1910-1940?”
(H/T Climate Depot)
Follow Michael on Twitter and Facebook
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contactlicensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
I just want to give a about shout out to @Stu. I just recognized that this thread was not posted in the science forum section. We can call many of the things posted here news but far fewer science.
I find it exhausting to counter every piece of info you @Eventhorizon put up, but when I do take the time again and again I see where you are misled by right wing media outlets that are repeating obfuscating claims that are designed to confuse people...I like to smoke, but I keep it at a minimum because, despite years of teh tobacco industry trying to sway public opinion with fake science, I accept the scientific consensus that smoking is bad for me.
so not exactly a Climatologist, but he does have a Ph.D in science
"
Reconciling Late Ordovician (440 Ma) glaciation with very high (14X) CO2 levels
Thomas J. Crowley Steven K. Baum
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012) Volume 100, Issue D1, pages 1093–1101, 20 January 1995
Geochemical data and models suggest a positive correlation between carbon dioxide changes and climate during the last 540 m.y. The most dramatic exception to this correlation involves the Late Ordovician (440 Ma) glaciation, which occurred at a time when CO2 levels may have been much greater than present (14–16X?). Since decreased solar luminosity at that time only partially offset increased radiative forcing from CO2, some other factor needs to be considered to explain the glaciation. Prior work with energy balance models (EBMs) suggested that the unique geographic configuration of Gondwanaland at that time may have resulted in a small area of parameter space permitting permanent snow cover and higher CO2 levels. However, the crude snow and sea ice parameterizations in the EBM left these conclusions open to further scrutiny. Herein we present results from four experiments with the GENESIS general circulation model with CO2 levels 14X greater than present, solar luminosity reduced 4.5%, and an orbital configuration set for minimum summer insolation receipt. We examined the effects of different combinations of ocean heat transport and topography on high-latitude snow cover on Gondwanaland. For the no-elevation simulations we failed to simulate permanent summer snow cover. However, for the slightly elevated topography cases (300–500 m), permanent summer snow cover occurs where geological data indicate the Ordovician ice sheet was present. These results support the hypothesis based on EBM studies. Further results indicate that although average runoff per grid point increases substantially for the Ordovician runs, the decreased land area results in global runoff 10–30% less than present, with largest runoff reductions for flat topography. This response has implications for CO2-runoff/weathering parameterizations in geochemical models. Finally, simulated tropical sea surface temperatures (SSTs) are the same or only marginally warmer than present. This result is consistent with evidence from other warm time intervals indicating small changes in tropical SSTs during time of high CO2.
anges in tropical SSTs during time of high CO2.
That temperatures have been both higher and lower in the past and that CO2 levels were generally higher in the (geological) past. There is a good discussion of temperature and CO2 proxies at RealCLimate. Here is a noce picture of the proxy data from the IPCC AR4 (via RealClimate)
Sadly climate skeptic blogs are full of this kind of story, where someobdy has heard an apparently paradoxical combination of bits of science but not bothered to check the actual state of scientific knowledge, before rushing off to make grand claims. Google scholar however makes this fact checking relatively straightforward these days, perhaps we should ask why the likes of Moore"
And I really like this graphic
"Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cotes, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year. A copy of his application letter and Greenpeace's response are available here (PDF). [Greenpeace, 12/7/10]" Moore obtained a Ph.D. in ecology from the Institute of Animal Resource Ecology, University of British Columbia under the direction of Dr. C.S. Holling and forest ecologist Hamish Kimmins
so not exactly a Climatologist, but he does have a Ph.D in science
This is a great statement to repeat as an argument against taking action on CO2 emissions but is not a syllogism. Like so much of the public wrangling over global warming the "do nothing" crowd repeatedly appeals to an intuitive reasoning where the scientific response is difficult to read and hard to understand
"
Reconciling Late Ordovician (440 Ma) glaciation with very high (14X) CO2 levels
Thomas J. Crowley Steven K. Baum
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012) Volume 100, Issue D1, pages 1093–1101, 20 January 1995
Geochemical data and models suggest a positive correlation between carbon dioxide changes and climate during the last 540 m.y. The most dramatic exception to this correlation involves the Late Ordovician (440 Ma) glaciation, which occurred at a time when CO2 levels may have been much greater than present (14–16X?). Since decreased solar luminosity at that time only partially offset increased radiative forcing from CO2, some other factor needs to be considered to explain the glaciation. Prior work with energy balance models (EBMs) suggested that the unique geographic configuration of Gondwanaland at that time may have resulted in a small area of parameter space permitting permanent snow cover and higher CO2 levels. However, the crude snow and sea ice parameterizations in the EBM left these conclusions open to further scrutiny. Herein we present results from four experiments with the GENESIS general circulation model with CO2 levels 14X greater than present, solar luminosity reduced 4.5%, and an orbital configuration set for minimum summer insolation receipt. We examined the effects of different combinations of ocean heat transport and topography on high-latitude snow cover on Gondwanaland. For the no-elevation simulations we failed to simulate permanent summer snow cover. However, for the slightly elevated topography cases (300–500 m), permanent summer snow cover occurs where geological data indicate the Ordovician ice sheet was present. These results support the hypothesis based on EBM studies. Further results indicate that although average runoff per grid point increases substantially for the Ordovician runs, the decreased land area results in global runoff 10–30% less than present, with largest runoff reductions for flat topography. This response has implications for CO2-runoff/weathering parameterizations in geochemical models. Finally, simulated tropical sea surface temperatures (SSTs) are the same or only marginally warmer than present. This result is consistent with evidence from other warm time intervals indicating small changes in tropical SSTs during time of high CO2.
anges in tropical SSTs during time of high CO2.
That temperatures have been both higher and lower in the past and that CO2 levels were generally higher in the (geological) past. There is a good discussion of temperature and CO2 proxies at RealCLimate. Here is a noce picture of the proxy data from the IPCC AR4 (via RealClimate)
Sadly climate skeptic blogs are full of this kind of story, where someobdy has heard an apparently paradoxical combination of bits of science but not bothered to check the actual state of scientific knowledge, before rushing off to make grand claims. Google scholar however makes this fact checking relatively straightforward these days, perhaps we should ask why the likes of Moore"
And I really like this graphic
Hey if you think that information is enough for you to completely discount the article great.
I personally found it odd as to why anyone would care what the founder of Greenpeace had to say about the climate. But the figures given were accurate. Such as no polar ice caps during 200 million years ago. Guess those dinosaur farts really helped heat up the world back then. Kind of like liberal farts do now.
I personally found it odd as to why anyone would care what the founder of Greenpeace had to say about the climate. But the figures given were accurate. Such as no polar ice caps during 200 million years ago. Guess those dinosaur farts really helped heat up the world back then. Kind of like liberal farts do now.
(CNSNews.com) – Ten years after former Vice President Al Gore warned in his 2006 Oscar-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth, that if nothing was done to stop man-made global warming, melting Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets could raise sea levels by up to 20 feet, four peer-reviewed scientific studies found “no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming.”
“It is widely assumed that sea levels have been rising in recent decades largely in response to anthropogenic global warming,” Kenneth Richard writes at NoTricksZone. “However, due to the inherently large contribution of natural oscillatory influences on sea level fluctuations, this assumption lacks substantiation….
“Scientists who have recently attempted to detect an anthropogenic signal in regional sea level rise trends have had to admit that there is ‘no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming’,” Richard points out, listing four peer-reviewed studies published this year that have all come to the same conclusion.
In a paper published on May 18, Hindumathi Palanisamy at the Laboratoire d’Etudes en Geophysique et Oceanograhie Spatiales (LEGOS) in Toulouse, France and her co-authors explain that “sea level is an integrated climate parameter that involves interactions of all components of the climate system (oceans, ice sheets, glaciers, atmosphere, and land water reservoirs) on a wide range of spatial and temporal scales….
“Since 1993, sea level variations have been measured precisely by satellite altimetry. They indicated a faster sea level rise of 3.3 mm/yr over 1993-2015. Owing to their global coverage, they also reveal a strong regional seal level variability that sometimes is several times greater than the global mean sea level rise,” the researchers state.
“Considering the highly negative impact of sea level rise for society, monitoring sea level change and understanding its causes are henceforth high priorities.”
Comparing sea level changes between 1950 and 2009 in the Indian Ocean, South China and Caribbean Seas, Palanisamy’s team found that the “tropical Pacific displays the highest magnitude of sea level variations.”
the remaining residual sea level trend pattern does not correspond to externally forced anthropogenic sea level signalHowever, by studying “sea level spatial trend patterns in the tropical Pacific and attempting to eliminate signal corresponding to the main internal climate mode, we show that the remaining residual sea level trend pattern does not correspond to externally forced anthropogenic sea level signal.”
Another group of scientists led by Mohammad Hadi Bordbar from the Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in Kiel, Germany also concluded in a study published in April that the recent sea level trends in the tropical Pacific “are still within the range of long-term internal decadal variability.
“Further, such variability strengthens in response to enhanced greenhouse gas concentrations, which may further hinder detection of anthropogenic climate signals in that region,” the study found.
In another study also published in April, a research team led by Sonke Dangendorf of the Research Institute for Water and Environment at the University of Siegen, Germany said that “superimposed on any anthropogenic trend there are also considerable decadal to centennial signals linked to intrinsic natural variability in the climate system… In the Arctic, for instance, the casual uncertainties are even up to 8 times larger than previously thought.
“This result is consistent with recent findings that beside the anthropogenic signature, a non-negligible fraction of the observed 20th century sea level rise still represents a response to pre-industrial natural climate variations such as the Little Ice Age” – a period of low temperatures which occurred between 1300 and 1850.
In a fourth paper published online in January in the Journal of Coastal Research, lead author Jens Morten Hansen of the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland and his co-authors studied sea level patterns from the eastern North Sea to the central Baltic Sea over a 160-year period (1849-2009).
“Identification of oscillators and general trends over 160 years would be of great importance for distinguishing long-term, natural developments from possible, more recent anthropogenic sea-level changes,” the researchers note.
“However, we found that a possible candidate for such anthropogenic development, i.e. the large sea-level rise after 1970, is completely contained by the found small residuals, long-term oscillators, and general trend. Thus, we found that there is (yet) no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming in the world's best recorded region.”
In addition, the Earth’s coasts actually gained land over the past 30 years, according to another study published August 25 in Nature Climate Change.
Researchers led by Gennadii Donchyts from the Deltares Research Institute in the Netherlands found that the Earth’s surface gained a total of 58,000 square kilometers (22,393 square miles) of land over the past 30 years, including 33,700 sq. km. (13,000 sq. mi.) in coastal areas.
“We expected that the coast would start to retreat due to sea level rise, but the most surprising thing is that the coasts are growing all over the world,” study co-author Fedor Baart told the BBC.
“We were able to create more land than sea level rising was taking.”
Related: WH Climate Report: Sea Level Could Rise 8 Inches, 11 Inches, 4 Feet, or 6.6 Feet
Related: Wrong: Al Gore Predicted Arctic Summer Ice Could Disappear in 2013
Barbara Hollingsworth
More from Barbara Hollingsworth
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
http://quizzes.howstuffworks.com/qu...94585ad9c39286c&sg_uid=8zp-_a_nTdKmB3iMRiOHYw
CNSNews.com is a division of the Media Research Center.
.
“It is widely assumed that sea levels have been rising in recent decades largely in response to anthropogenic global warming,” Kenneth Richard writes at NoTricksZone. “However, due to the inherently large contribution of natural oscillatory influences on sea level fluctuations, this assumption lacks substantiation….
“Scientists who have recently attempted to detect an anthropogenic signal in regional sea level rise trends have had to admit that there is ‘no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming’,” Richard points out, listing four peer-reviewed studies published this year that have all come to the same conclusion.
In a paper published on May 18, Hindumathi Palanisamy at the Laboratoire d’Etudes en Geophysique et Oceanograhie Spatiales (LEGOS) in Toulouse, France and her co-authors explain that “sea level is an integrated climate parameter that involves interactions of all components of the climate system (oceans, ice sheets, glaciers, atmosphere, and land water reservoirs) on a wide range of spatial and temporal scales….
“Since 1993, sea level variations have been measured precisely by satellite altimetry. They indicated a faster sea level rise of 3.3 mm/yr over 1993-2015. Owing to their global coverage, they also reveal a strong regional seal level variability that sometimes is several times greater than the global mean sea level rise,” the researchers state.
“Considering the highly negative impact of sea level rise for society, monitoring sea level change and understanding its causes are henceforth high priorities.”
Comparing sea level changes between 1950 and 2009 in the Indian Ocean, South China and Caribbean Seas, Palanisamy’s team found that the “tropical Pacific displays the highest magnitude of sea level variations.”
the remaining residual sea level trend pattern does not correspond to externally forced anthropogenic sea level signalHowever, by studying “sea level spatial trend patterns in the tropical Pacific and attempting to eliminate signal corresponding to the main internal climate mode, we show that the remaining residual sea level trend pattern does not correspond to externally forced anthropogenic sea level signal.”
Another group of scientists led by Mohammad Hadi Bordbar from the Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research in Kiel, Germany also concluded in a study published in April that the recent sea level trends in the tropical Pacific “are still within the range of long-term internal decadal variability.
“Further, such variability strengthens in response to enhanced greenhouse gas concentrations, which may further hinder detection of anthropogenic climate signals in that region,” the study found.
In another study also published in April, a research team led by Sonke Dangendorf of the Research Institute for Water and Environment at the University of Siegen, Germany said that “superimposed on any anthropogenic trend there are also considerable decadal to centennial signals linked to intrinsic natural variability in the climate system… In the Arctic, for instance, the casual uncertainties are even up to 8 times larger than previously thought.
“This result is consistent with recent findings that beside the anthropogenic signature, a non-negligible fraction of the observed 20th century sea level rise still represents a response to pre-industrial natural climate variations such as the Little Ice Age” – a period of low temperatures which occurred between 1300 and 1850.
In a fourth paper published online in January in the Journal of Coastal Research, lead author Jens Morten Hansen of the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland and his co-authors studied sea level patterns from the eastern North Sea to the central Baltic Sea over a 160-year period (1849-2009).
“Identification of oscillators and general trends over 160 years would be of great importance for distinguishing long-term, natural developments from possible, more recent anthropogenic sea-level changes,” the researchers note.
“However, we found that a possible candidate for such anthropogenic development, i.e. the large sea-level rise after 1970, is completely contained by the found small residuals, long-term oscillators, and general trend. Thus, we found that there is (yet) no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming in the world's best recorded region.”
In addition, the Earth’s coasts actually gained land over the past 30 years, according to another study published August 25 in Nature Climate Change.
Researchers led by Gennadii Donchyts from the Deltares Research Institute in the Netherlands found that the Earth’s surface gained a total of 58,000 square kilometers (22,393 square miles) of land over the past 30 years, including 33,700 sq. km. (13,000 sq. mi.) in coastal areas.
“We expected that the coast would start to retreat due to sea level rise, but the most surprising thing is that the coasts are growing all over the world,” study co-author Fedor Baart told the BBC.
“We were able to create more land than sea level rising was taking.”
Related: WH Climate Report: Sea Level Could Rise 8 Inches, 11 Inches, 4 Feet, or 6.6 Feet
Related: Wrong: Al Gore Predicted Arctic Summer Ice Could Disappear in 2013
Barbara Hollingsworth
More from Barbara Hollingsworth
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
http://quizzes.howstuffworks.com/qu...94585ad9c39286c&sg_uid=8zp-_a_nTdKmB3iMRiOHYw
CNSNews.com is a division of the Media Research Center.
.
- Dec 29, 2009
- 5,536
- 22,536
- 3,498
- MBTI
- INFJ
I find it exhausting to counter every piece of info you @Eventhorizon put up, but when I do take the time again and again I see where you are misled by right wing media outlets that are repeating obfuscating claims that are designed to confuse people...I like to smoke, but I keep it at a minimum because, despite years of teh tobacco industry trying to sway public opinion with fake science, I accept the scientific consensus that smoking is bad for me.
"Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cotes, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year. A copy of his application letter and Greenpeace's response are available here (PDF). [Greenpeace, 12/7/10]" Moore obtained a Ph.D. in ecology from the Institute of Animal Resource Ecology, University of British Columbia under the direction of Dr. C.S. Holling and forest ecologist Hamish Kimmins
so not exactly a Climatologist, but he does have a Ph.D in science
This is a great statement to repeat as an argument against taking action on CO2 emissions but is not a syllogism. Like so much of the public wrangling over global warming the "do nothing" crowd repeatedly appeals to an intuitive reasoning where the scientific response is difficult to read and hard to understand
"
Reconciling Late Ordovician (440 Ma) glaciation with very high (14X) CO2 levels
Thomas J. Crowley Steven K. Baum
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012) Volume 100, Issue D1, pages 1093–1101, 20 January 1995
Geochemical data and models suggest a positive correlation between carbon dioxide changes and climate during the last 540 m.y. The most dramatic exception to this correlation involves the Late Ordovician (440 Ma) glaciation, which occurred at a time when CO2 levels may have been much greater than present (14–16X?). Since decreased solar luminosity at that time only partially offset increased radiative forcing from CO2, some other factor needs to be considered to explain the glaciation. Prior work with energy balance models (EBMs) suggested that the unique geographic configuration of Gondwanaland at that time may have resulted in a small area of parameter space permitting permanent snow cover and higher CO2 levels. However, the crude snow and sea ice parameterizations in the EBM left these conclusions open to further scrutiny. Herein we present results from four experiments with the GENESIS general circulation model with CO2 levels 14X greater than present, solar luminosity reduced 4.5%, and an orbital configuration set for minimum summer insolation receipt. We examined the effects of different combinations of ocean heat transport and topography on high-latitude snow cover on Gondwanaland. For the no-elevation simulations we failed to simulate permanent summer snow cover. However, for the slightly elevated topography cases (300–500 m), permanent summer snow cover occurs where geological data indicate the Ordovician ice sheet was present. These results support the hypothesis based on EBM studies. Further results indicate that although average runoff per grid point increases substantially for the Ordovician runs, the decreased land area results in global runoff 10–30% less than present, with largest runoff reductions for flat topography. This response has implications for CO2-runoff/weathering parameterizations in geochemical models. Finally, simulated tropical sea surface temperatures (SSTs) are the same or only marginally warmer than present. This result is consistent with evidence from other warm time intervals indicating small changes in tropical SSTs during time of high CO2.
anges in tropical SSTs during time of high CO2.
That temperatures have been both higher and lower in the past and that CO2 levels were generally higher in the (geological) past. There is a good discussion of temperature and CO2 proxies at RealCLimate. Here is a noce picture of the proxy data from the IPCC AR4 (via RealClimate)
Sadly climate skeptic blogs are full of this kind of story, where someobdy has heard an apparently paradoxical combination of bits of science but not bothered to check the actual state of scientific knowledge, before rushing off to make grand claims. Google scholar however makes this fact checking relatively straightforward these days, perhaps we should ask why the likes of Moore"
And I really like this graphic
View attachment 36135
@Stu the most eminent scientific bodies ( you've listed them) globally support the theory of global warming. There is a degree of doubt, but the evidence is compelling and sufficient to warrant far greater action. Waiting for "absolute proof" is very unwise.
Sadly I think that's it's probably too late already. But the variables are large, no one can sure of the outcome or when. I think it's prudent to avoid living in coastal areas, or lower land near rivers etc.
There's still a chance things maybe better than we think, or the earth itself adjusts in ways we don't anticipate.
My step son has switched from smoking to vaping. The science is not totally proven, but it looks hugely better, almost the same as quitting smoking. If you see anything similar on pizza intake please let me know....
Hardly compelling evidence when the U.N. report is known to have used manipulated data as well as deleting the key last few sentence saying there's no proof of man made global warming.