AGW failed again

[Old Rocks]

Position Statement.

Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2011), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (Melillo et al., 2014) that global climate has warmed in response to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases. The concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are now higher than they have been for many thousands of years. Human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) are the dominant cause of the rapid warming since the middle 1900s (IPCC, 2013). If the upward trend in greenhouse‐gas concentrations continues, the projected global climate change by the end of the twenty‐first century will result in significant impacts on humans and other species. The tangible effects of climate change are already occurring. Addressing the challenges posed by climate change will require a combination of adaptation to the changes that are likely to occur and global reductions of CO2 emissions from anthropogenic sources.

Purpose.

This position statement (1) summarizes the scientific basis for the conclusion that human activities are the primary cause of recent global warming; (2) describes the significant effects on humans and ecosystems as greenhouse‐gas concentrations and global climate reach projected levels; and (3) provides information for policy decisions guiding mitigation and adaptation strategies designed to address the current and future impacts of anthropogenic warming.

https://www.geosociety.org/documents/gsa/positions/pos10_climate.pdf

A statement from the Geological Society of America.

 

[gipper]

Position Statement.

Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2011), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (Melillo et al., 2014) that global climate has warmed in response to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases. The concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are now higher than they have been for many thousands of years. Human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) are the dominant cause of the rapid warming since the middle 1900s (IPCC, 2013). If the upward trend in greenhouse‐gas concentrations continues, the projected global climate change by the end of the twenty‐first century will result in significant impacts on humans and other species. The tangible effects of climate change are already occurring. Addressing the challenges posed by climate change will require a combination of adaptation to the changes that are likely to occur and global reductions of CO2 emissions from anthropogenic sources.

Purpose.

This position statement (1) summarizes the scientific basis for the conclusion that human activities are the primary cause of recent global warming; (2) describes the significant effects on humans and ecosystems as greenhouse‐gas concentrations and global climate reach projected levels; and (3) provides information for policy decisions guiding mitigation and adaptation strategies designed to address the current and future impacts of anthropogenic warming.

https://www.geosociety.org/documents/gsa/positions/pos10_climate.pdf

A statement from the Geological Society of America.

If only you warmers were capable of learning....stop living in the Dark Ages...stop being a dupe and a dummy. The Earth is not flat...it is round...dummy.

How about this? Can you please learn for once?

The scare about global warming is overdone, according to more than 40 scientific papers published in just the first three months of 2018.

What their charts clearly show is that “nothing climatically unusual is happening.”

In the chart below from a study by Polovodova et al, we see that 20th century warming is perfectly normal in a long-term historical context. It was no warmer – indeed, is slightly cooler – than either the Roman Warm Period or the Medieval Warming Period.



What we also learn from the papers is that these warming periods were global – not, as alarmists like to claim to support their scaremongering thesis, local:

The Deliberate Corrupt...Tim BallBest Price: $5.67Buy New $15.98(as of 11:30 EDT - Details)

A number of strident global warming scientists prefer to dismiss the significance of Europe’s temperature record, claiming that it is local in nature and does not tell us what is really happening globally. However, other papers fully contradict this. For example, a paper by Wündsch et al., 2018 shows us that the warming today in South Africa also is nothing unusual.

It’s global, stupid

Temperature reconstructions show the same is true in Southeast Australia, according to McGowan et al., 2018, Northern Alaska (Hanna et al., 2018), the Tibetan Plateau (Li et al., 2018), South Korea (Song et al., 2018), Antarctica (Mikis, 2018), to cite just a few among dozens of others.


Flood Of New Scientific Papers Show Surprising Results | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Alarmism Takes A Big Hit…Flood Of New Scientific Findings Show Nothing Unusual Happening Climatically

Alarmism Takes A Big Hit…Flood Of New Scientific Findings Show Nothing Unusual Happening Climatically

 

[Confounding]

If only you warmers were capable of learning....stop living in the Dark Ages...stop being a dupe and a dummy. The Earth is not flat...it is round...dummy.

How about this? Can you please learn for once?

The scare about global warming is overdone, according to more than 40 scientific papers published in just the first three months of 2018.

What their charts clearly show is that “nothing climatically unusual is happening.”

In the chart below from a study by Polovodova et al, we see that 20th century warming is perfectly normal in a long-term historical context. It was no warmer – indeed, is slightly cooler – than either the Roman Warm Period or the Medieval Warming Period.



What we also learn from the papers is that these warming periods were global – not, as alarmists like to claim to support their scaremongering thesis, local:

The Deliberate Corrupt...Tim BallBest Price: $5.67Buy New $15.98(as of 11:30 EDT - Details)

A number of strident global warming scientists prefer to dismiss the significance of Europe’s temperature record, claiming that it is local in nature and does not tell us what is really happening globally. However, other papers fully contradict this. For example, a paper by Wündsch et al., 2018 shows us that the warming today in South Africa also is nothing unusual.

It’s global, stupid

Temperature reconstructions show the same is true in Southeast Australia, according to McGowan et al., 2018, Northern Alaska (Hanna et al., 2018), the Tibetan Plateau (Li et al., 2018), South Korea (Song et al., 2018), Antarctica (Mikis, 2018), to cite just a few among dozens of others.


Flood Of New Scientific Papers Show Surprising Results | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Alarmism Takes A Big Hit…Flood Of New Scientific Findings Show Nothing Unusual Happening Climatically

Alarmism Takes A Big Hit…Flood Of New Scientific Findings Show Nothing Unusual Happening Climatically

Right, so a few problems...

A bunch of the information in the blogs you posted is known junk science.

Hilariously enough, recent scientific studies you posted suggest that global warming is real.

Rapid change in temperature and associated snow cover over the past fifty years is similar to that reported elsewhere for temperate alpine areas including the western United States of America and Europe, and is attributed to global warming

From your own link.

Our reconstruction exhibits an overall increasing temperature trend since the 1960s.

Another study you posted.

The impact of human activity was recorded in the study area began around 1297 cal yr BP, and became pronounced from 425 cal yr BP to the present.

And another acknowledging the impact of human activity on the environment.

But hey, never mind that the scientific studies you linked support what 97% of climate scientists are saying, which is that humans are impacting the environment to an extent that is not entirely known yet. I'll come right out and say global warming is not settled science. The evidence, however, does seem to point in one direction, and the overwhelming majority of people educated on the issue agree. Throwing your hands up and saying "Bah, it's nonsense." is incredibly ignorant.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Show us where the term "consensus" is mentioned in the Scientific Method. I'll wait.

A consensus is not proof, but you really should give it some consideration when 97% of people that are educated about this matter are saying the same thing. The study shows that the strength of the consensus is directly correlated with how educated people are about the topic. You're shitting all over people that have spent their lives researching the topic in question simply because they haven't come to your preferred conclusion. Do you really think there is a climate conspiracy that involves 97% of the scientists? That's insane.

You are pushing a FALLACY which is worthless in science research, where REPRODUCIBLE research is what counts not popularity.

There have been MANY past Consensus failures that you are apparently willing to ignore in order to maintain a dead AGW conjecture.

 

[Sunsettommy]

bought and paid for scientists

You realize you're referring to almost all scientists, right? Incredibly few actual scientists don't agree with AGW. They're all bought and paid for? How is a conspiracy that big even contained? Do scientists by and large have no intellectual integrity?

Delete all the so called scientists who are not on the government grant dole then get back to us.

So what you are saying is that all the scientists in all the countries in the world that have reported on AGW are lying and in on some kind of conspiracy? And all the governments are also? Are you truly that fucking stupid?

No, it is pushing a consensus is why it is a failure, because it doesn't prove anything. Science research are driven by Reproducible research nothing more.

The Scientific Method is the basic guideline on HOW to produce credible results of research. Consensus does nothing for research at all, it is a belief system which is normally reserved for Politics.

Reproducible Research drives science.

Consensus drives Pseudoscience because they run on the lack of reproducibility, they run on popularity.

 

[Sunsettommy]

bought and paid for scientists

You realize you're referring to almost all scientists, right? Incredibly few actual scientists don't agree with AGW. They're all bought and paid for? How is a conspiracy that big even contained? Do scientists by and large have no intellectual integrity?

75/77 is very impressive!

All the Scientific Societies in the world, all the National Academies of Science of all the advanced nations, and all the major Universities have policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. People like you have an obese junkie on the AM radio, and a fake British Lord.

You run on Consensus, skeptics and scientists run on reproducible research.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Human-Induced Climate Change Requires Urgent Action

Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes.

Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.

Extensive, independent observations confirm the reality of global warming. These observations show large-scale increases in air and sea temperatures, sea level, and atmospheric water vapor; they document decreases in the extent of mountain glaciers, snow cover, permafrost, and Arctic sea ice. These changes are broadly consistent with longunderstood physics and predictions of how the climate system is expected to respond to human-caused increases in greenhouse gases. The changes are inconsistent with explanations of climate change that rely on known natural influences.

https://sciencepolicy.agu.org/files/2018/02/AGU-Climate-Change-Position-Statement-Final-2013.pdf

Policy position statement of the American Geophysical Union, the largest and most influential geological scientific society in the world.

A POLITICAL statement.

 

[westwall]

If only you warmers were capable of learning....stop living in the Dark Ages...stop being a dupe and a dummy. The Earth is not flat...it is round...dummy.

How about this? Can you please learn for once?

The scare about global warming is overdone, according to more than 40 scientific papers published in just the first three months of 2018.

What their charts clearly show is that “nothing climatically unusual is happening.”

In the chart below from a study by Polovodova et al, we see that 20th century warming is perfectly normal in a long-term historical context. It was no warmer – indeed, is slightly cooler – than either the Roman Warm Period or the Medieval Warming Period.



What we also learn from the papers is that these warming periods were global – not, as alarmists like to claim to support their scaremongering thesis, local:

The Deliberate Corrupt...Tim BallBest Price: $5.67Buy New $15.98(as of 11:30 EDT - Details)

A number of strident global warming scientists prefer to dismiss the significance of Europe’s temperature record, claiming that it is local in nature and does not tell us what is really happening globally. However, other papers fully contradict this. For example, a paper by Wündsch et al., 2018 shows us that the warming today in South Africa also is nothing unusual.

It’s global, stupid

Temperature reconstructions show the same is true in Southeast Australia, according to McGowan et al., 2018, Northern Alaska (Hanna et al., 2018), the Tibetan Plateau (Li et al., 2018), South Korea (Song et al., 2018), Antarctica (Mikis, 2018), to cite just a few among dozens of others.


Flood Of New Scientific Papers Show Surprising Results | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Alarmism Takes A Big Hit…Flood Of New Scientific Findings Show Nothing Unusual Happening Climatically

Alarmism Takes A Big Hit…Flood Of New Scientific Findings Show Nothing Unusual Happening Climatically

Right, so a few problems...

A bunch of the information in the blogs you posted is known junk science.

Hilariously enough, recent scientific studies you posted suggest that global warming is real.

Rapid change in temperature and associated snow cover over the past fifty years is similar to that reported elsewhere for temperate alpine areas including the western United States of America and Europe, and is attributed to global warming

From your own link.

Our reconstruction exhibits an overall increasing temperature trend since the 1960s.

Another study you posted.

The impact of human activity was recorded in the study area began around 1297 cal yr BP, and became pronounced from 425 cal yr BP to the present.

And another acknowledging the impact of human activity on the environment.

But hey, never mind that the scientific studies you linked support what 97% of climate scientists are saying, which is that humans are impacting the environment to an extent that is not entirely known yet. I'll come right out and say global warming is not settled science. The evidence, however, does seem to point in one direction, and the overwhelming majority of people educated on the issue agree. Throwing your hands up and saying "Bah, it's nonsense." is incredibly ignorant.

Of course climate change is real. The issue is mans contribution to it. The facts are there is almost zero observable data to support that theory. None. Feel free to post up any OBSERVED data that you can find. Just remember, computer models are not data.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

bought and paid for scientists

You realize you're referring to almost all scientists, right? Incredibly few actual scientists don't agree with AGW. They're all bought and paid for? How is a conspiracy that big even contained? Do scientists by and large have no intellectual integrity?

75/77 is very impressive!

All the Scientific Societies in the world, all the National Academies of Science of all the advanced nations, and all the major Universities have policy statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. People like you have an obese junkie on the AM radio, and a fake British Lord.

Money talks.

 

[Confounding]

Of course climate change is real. The issue is mans contribution to it. The facts are there is almost zero observable data to support that theory. None. Feel free to post up any OBSERVED data that you can find. Just remember, computer models are not data.

The very studies that were posted to refute the idea of AGW suggest that recent climate change is being fueled by human activity.

Oh, and I'm sure these bought and paid for kooks at NASA are just pushing lies, right? Saying there is no evidence of human caused climate change is an outrageous lie.

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence

The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia.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:

Global temperature rise

The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.5 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with 16 of the 17 warmest years on record occurring since 2001. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months. 6

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.
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.
Glacial retreat
Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.9

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.15

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.

Ocean acidification

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.11,12 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.

 

[Confounding]

Money talks.

Scientists the world over are not involved in a giant AGW conspiracy. To suggest that the vast majority of climate scientists all over the world lack integrity to the point that they'd all lie to the public and manipulate information is actually insane. You are so desperate to not be wrong that you'll come to any conclusion you have to to keep your head in the sand.

 

[TNHarley]

Here is your evidence!!! "likely"

 

[Confounding]

Here is your evidence!!! "likely"

extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability)

And again, I never said it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. I said all of the evidence seems to point in that direction, that the scientists agree and that it's insane to suggest that it's all a bunch of nonsense that's not to be taken seriously.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Money talks.

Scientists the world over are not involved in a giant AGW conspiracy. To suggest that the vast majority of climate scientists all over the world lack integrity to the point that they'd all lie to the public and manipulate information is actually insane. You are so desperate to not be wrong that you'll come to any conclusion you have to to keep your head in the sand.

Scientists the world over are not involved in a giant AGW conspiracy.

Of course not.
How much government grant money goes to scientists who say we aren't doomed if use oil and coal?
How much to scientists who say we are doomed?

To suggest that the vast majority of climate scientists all over the world lack integrity

I would never suggest such a thing.
I'm sure they have excellent, non-corrupt reasons for altering historical data.

 

[Confounding]

Money talks.

Scientists the world over are not involved in a giant AGW conspiracy. To suggest that the vast majority of climate scientists all over the world lack integrity to the point that they'd all lie to the public and manipulate information is actually insane. You are so desperate to not be wrong that you'll come to any conclusion you have to to keep your head in the sand.

Scientists the world over are not involved in a giant AGW conspiracy.

Of course not.
How much government grant money goes to scientists who say we aren't doomed if use oil and coal?
How much to scientists who say we are doomed?

To suggest that the vast majority of climate scientists all over the world lack integrity

I would never suggest such a thing.
I'm sure they have excellent, non-corrupt reasons for altering historical data.

Speaking of ridiculous conspiracies...

But hey, whatever; I was never going to change your mind anyway. Enjoy your stay in crazy land.

 

[TNHarley]

Here is your evidence!!! "likely"

extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability)

And again, I never said it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. I said all of the evidence seems to point in that direction, that the scientists agree and that it's insane to suggest that it's all a bunch of nonsense that's not to be taken seriously.

Thats what they thought in Scandinavia when a god caused lightning. It was insane to think otherwise.
Wanna know why they thought it was a god? Because SOMETHING had to explain the unexplained.
Kinda like what AGW does.
For instance, the OP.
"Humans are causing the drought. Why? BEcause there is no other explanation"
Fast forward a few years "severe drought is normal"
The End.

 

[Confounding]

Thats what they thought in Scandinavia when a god caused lightning. It was insane to think otherwise.
Wanna know why they thought it was a god? Because SOMETHING had to explain the unexplained.
Kinda like what AGW does.
For instance, the OP.
"Humans are causing the drought. Why? BEcause there is no other explanation"
Fast forward a few years "severe drought is normal"
The End.

We've come a long way since the days of Thor and Odin my friend. All of the documented evidence we have points in one direction and just about everybody that's educated on the matter agrees. We can't say it's completely proven science, but it's very likely true and something worth giving serious consideration to. This argument is weak as hell. You've been defeated.

 

[TNHarley]

Thats what they thought in Scandinavia when a god caused lightning. It was insane to think otherwise.
Wanna know why they thought it was a god? Because SOMETHING had to explain the unexplained.
Kinda like what AGW does.
For instance, the OP.
"Humans are causing the drought. Why? BEcause there is no other explanation"
Fast forward a few years "severe drought is normal"
The End.

We've come a long way since the days of Thor and Odin my friend. All of the documented evidence we have points in one direction and just about everybody that's educated on the matter agrees. This argument is weak as hell. You've been defeated.

All the evidence WE HAVE. THATS the point. And apparently not too far since we are using the same logic

 

[EGR one]

No, i dont act like i know whats going on when there is no actual truth to justify it. Im not a dishonest hack. So i can say with certainty that i am comfortable with my stance
Im done fucking with you. Hacks bore me.

Is my analysis of what the author said wrong? It's still accurate to say that 97% of climate scientists believe AGW is real to some extent. It's still accurate to say that the large majority of climate scientists believe that humans are mostly responsible for it. It's not accurate to say that 97% have concluded that humans are mostly responsible.

It seems that they did fudge the numbers a bit, but the general idea is still true. A large majority of experts think we are mostly responsible, and a vast majority (97%) believe we are at least somewhat responsible.

The basic question, as I see it, is a matter of degree. It is common sense to accept that 6.5 billion humans attempting to live on this planet are having some degree of impact on global climate change. The main disagreement is whether that degree of impact is negligible, moderate, or severe. I doubt that you could get more than a handful of climate scientists to agree on what the level of impact may be.

 

[Confounding]

All the evidence WE HAVE. THATS the point. And apparently not too far since we are using the same logic

If all of the evidence we have is pointing in one direction, with scientists thinking it's true with 95% certainty, what is your reason for scoffing at the notion of AGW? How can you look at the 5% uncertainty and think "Nah, it's probably bullshit because Thor and Odin, and we shouldn't move forward believing this is true until something proves otherwise." Seriously?