Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
True..and I'm still of the same opinion on this matter...and the sun being boring. (life on earth would get pretty exciting, albeit for a short time, without it )
I didn't deride you. But it helps if we are all looking at the same original source document.
Page 162 in the Executive Summary:"The total
increase between the average of the 1850–1900 period and the 2003–
2012 period is 0.78 [0.72 to 0.85] °C and the total increase between
the average of the 1850–1900 period and the reference period for projections,
1986−2005, is 0.61 [0.55 to 0.67] °C, based on the single
longest dataset available"
....no basis to reality? really? which bit did I make up??
You didn't, I read the IPCC report long before your post, about the sun being boring, apparently based on a sample of one (probably dodgy copy of) a PST.
Climate change looks at long term trends, not short term variability.
To quote the IPCC introduction on page 164:
"the climate comprises a variety of space- and timescales: from the diurnal cycle, to interannual variability such as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), to multi- decadal variations. ‘Climate change’ refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period of time"
Reduced to its absurd conclusion, your argument would suggest the Australian climate is getting colder ( despite the fact we are running into winter).
You are cherry picking the document in a manner that totally ignores its overall conclusion.
If pressed for time, I invite all to read the executive summary.
It overwhelmingly states greenhouse gas concentrations are increasing, warming is occurring, and even with the current "slow down" (even you admit the figure is not negative) the deep oceans are getting warmer.
It has everything to do with the long term trend....the longest of which, since instrumental records were kept, is undeniably up.
Are you seriously suggesting greenhouse is not a real physical process?
Despite Mercury getting 4x the solar flux from the Sun as Venus, the latter
is 40 degrees hotter thanks to greenhouse.
Humans activities emit about 10 billion tons of CO2 per year to the atmosphere every year...and the number is rising.
I do however recall the tobacco industry also saying in a similar manner 20 smokes a day couldn't possibly hurt anyone.....
|
Let's see, I said,
"
And curiously or coincidentally or not so coincidentally, ever since the big sunspot groups have dried up in the late 1990s, the earth's temperature has entered a pause, a hiatus - has failed to increase."
You said
"
What utter rubbish."
I quoted the IPCC,
"
Climate Models and the Hiatus in Global-Mean Surface Warming of the Past 15 Years.
For example, in HadCRUT4 the trend is 0.04 ºC per decade over 1998–2012, compared to 0.11"
You now still refuse to believe a Hiatus exists, saying that your statement about my statement being rubbish is still true, and decide to go into a homily about Global Warming and long term trends over short term trends and the planets.
A classic attempted snow job and attempt at diversion from your first factually incorrect and unsupported statement.
Do you admit the existence of the Hiatus, or do you chose to remain in denial?
Regards,
Renato