全 21 件のコメント

[–]Non-equilibrium [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Concluding remarks: Our results support previous findings of a reduced rate of surface warming over the 2001–2014 period — a period in which anthropogenic forcing increased at a relatively constant rate.

[–]CynicalBastard3118Goldwater Conservative [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Oh, of course.

I've had an interest in weather and climate for too many years, and while you should take what I say with a grain of salt, this is my conclusion;

The earth, on average, is warming, though I doubt it has anything to do with greenhouse gases. CO2 has risen and fallen throughout the history of the earth, and the correlation between that and rising temperatures is non-existent. Furthermore, the earth was about this warm during two recent periods. These are the medieval warm period and roman warm period. This is why vikings from Norway were able to reach Greenland without being trapped in inpenetrable Sea Ice.

Centuries later, the Little Ice Age struck. This allowed for annual ice skating on the River Thames and Hudson River, and frequent snows in Paris and Amsterdam(places which now receive 2-3 snowfalls a year.)

Since the 1880s, we've been recovering from this little ice age, though at a slower rate than in the 1940s, 50s, 60s, and 80s/90s. Perhaps after this particularly bizarre El Nino, we'll see further stagnation in global temperature, followed by a slight rise, or maybe even a slight fall.

The earth has warmed, but this isn't unprecedented, and climate hysteria is absolute bullshit.

[–]imbalanced [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

The real inconvenient question is when do they get to stop calling it a hiatus since they have zero evidence it will begin to rise again, if it ever did at all without data manipulation.

[–]bheilig [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I thought the point was that the global mean temperature is not rising as quickly as the models predicted, but the temperature is still rising.

[–]tupacsnoducket [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah the title for this lost is cognitive dissonance

[–]cristi1990an [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

More reasons to "just wait and and see", right?

[–]1Arky [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Yeah, and keep laying on those carbon taxes, just in case it's real, right?

[–]tupacsnoducket [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah, i be never seen a glacier melting. How the hell do we know it's happenining !!!!?

[–]xray606 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

My favorite is when NASA did the new survey, and actually found the ice density had technically increased on average... Not decreased. But then they said, that doesn't really mean anything, and nobody should really pay attention to that. So they tell everybody for 20 years that the ice decreasing was the #1 proof that we're all screwed, and it meant EVERYTHING. But when it shows that it didn't decrease, then it's no big deal, and doesn't really mean anything at all... Supposedly we're still screwed anyway. ha ha Interesting how that works.

[–]ultimisConstitutionalist [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm a luke warmer and have been since 2009 when I first reserached the topic. The IPCC and climate community are likely going to continue to decrease the CO2 forcing further and further if they want to remain within the realms of science. It has been my position the doubling of CO2 provides .7 to 1 degree Celsius of warming. Such a forcing is nothing to be feared by humans at all.

[–]tupacsnoducket [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Literally the first sentence is that the global rate of temperature increases is not quite as high as predicted. Its not supposed to be going up every year period. Wtf are you talking about

[–]terroh8er[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

"Hiatus" is the term used in climatology literature. Global warming has been insignificant since the late 90s/early 2000's.

[–]cristi1990an [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

It's debated, not widely accepted. (Relevant: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/did-global-warming-slow-down-in-the-2000s-or-not/) But I'm sure some "skeptics" will try to use this as "proof" that global warming is not real or something...

[–]terroh8er[S] [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Clearly you didn't bother reading the article, which is discussing an article published in the journal Nature a couple days ago that concedes the slowdown is real. It's okay - nobody expected you to leave your safe space and read a different opinion.

[–]cristi1990an [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

My comment was more a response to the title (and the one of this post), which implied that every scientist agrees that the slowdown is real. That's not true. Read MY article.

[–]terroh8er[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Your link doesn't show that it isn't widely accepted. The study was published in the most well-respected journal in the world and without even reading the article you jumped to the conclusion that it's a fringe view simply because it goes against the left wing orthodoxy of climate alarmism. Typical Bernie supporter.