I am posting up actual peer reviewed published science
Bullshit.
evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability
By definition, there can be no "AGW hypothesis" that doesn't account for what you call "natural variability." AGW and any non-AGW are additive, not distinct. And the data makes plain that we would be experiencing cooling rather than warming were it not for the AGW portion. So the the non-AGW portion is negative. Now just how could a negative produce record positive warming year after year? I know, insane denial!
So are you saying that the AGW hypothesis is unfalsifiable, or are you saying that man made climate change is indistinguishable from natural variability?
]
the term commonly refers to the observed and continuing increase in average air and ocean temperatures since 1900 caused mainly by emissions of
greenhouse gases in the
modern industrial economy.
[5
OK..so that is a claim...where is the observed measured evidence that the warming is due to greenhouse gasses. When did we change from natural warming out of the little ice age to man made warming and where is the evidence that we weren’t going to warm at lest to the temperature prior to the onset of the little ice age...because we are still not as warm as it was prior to the onset of the LIA?
In the modern context the terms
global warming and
climate change are commonly used interchangeably,
[6] but
climate change includes both
global warming and its effects, such as changes to precipitation and impacts that differ by region.
[7][8] Many of the observed changes in climate since the 1950s are unprecedented in the
instrumental temperature record, and in
historical and
paleoclimate proxy records of climate change over thousands to millions of years.
[2]
That claim is simply a lie. There are literally hundreds of published papers finding that there is nothing happening in the present climate that is in any way unprecedented.
Here is the gold standard (according to climate science) GISP2 temperature reconstruction which shows temperature changes far greater, and far faster than anything we have seen. And do note that it is cooler now than it has been for most of the past 10,000 years. Keep in mind that this is n ice core taken above the arctic circle and reflects arctic temperatures. Ice cores taken in the Antarctic show a very similar record over the past 10,000 years and be reminded that climate science has stated clearly that the arctic regions are the canaries in the coal mine and what happens in those regions follows across the globe.
And here is a link to literally hundreds of papers that show that in the past, in various locations on the globe, it has bee warmer,cooler, wetter and dryer than it is today.
Medieval Warm Period - Google My Maps
The link will take you to a global map where you will find green,red,yellow and blue location markers. The red markers indicate locations where studies have been done that found the temperature to have been warmer than the present prior to the onset of the little ice ge...the blue markers indicate cooler, the green markers indicate wetter, the yellow markers indicate drier conditions...the gray markers indicate little change since the onset of the LIA.
Do feel free to point out something specific in the climate today that you believe is unprecedented.
Do i think any amount of science will alter your belief on the topic? No. Your position is clearly based on politics and not actual science as evidenced by the fact that you post opinion pieces in support of your belief rather than actual science. But someone else who is perhaps interested in actual science may find the links I posted informative.
