http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut...
Don't necessarily agree. It depends on what you mean by recent. The above chart shows a slight downtrend.
http://ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc...
In the chart on page 202 the third one down if this IPCC report, accepted by all scientists of the time, it shows a rise in earth's temperature of about 0.7 degrees C from 1650 to 1990. Of this rise about 0.4 degrees came between 1650 and 1700, long before anyone's 'industrial revolution'. If anything is unprecedented, that should be. Over 50% of a 350 year rise in temperature in only 50 years.
It only proves what we have know all along. Baccy Baby is just a low down name calling bully, having nothing scientific to back up his mundane claims. If you don't have facts and science on your side, just bluster.
Your contention that "the recent warming rate was nearly identical in the early 1900's as it is now, though true does not state the cause. The cause of the warming was partly due to the Sun and partly due to increases in greenhouse gases, specifically CO2. The current warming is mostly due to increases in greenhouse gases, mainly CO2. To look at if this warming is unusual or unprecedented you're going to have to look before those time periods. In my opinion, is the warming unusual? Yes. Is it unprecedented? This is a rather large question to which I would say most likely not. But of course this deals with the entire Earth's history, which is much longer than the 6000 years you claim it is.
I agree, with a giant sigh. Here's an argument I've used before. I've yet to hear a rebuttal for what is wrong with my logic:
At 9am, the temperature in my flat was about 8 degrees C according to the digital display on the thermostat. I put the heat on and my flat is now 15 degrees. During the summer, my flat was more than 15 degrees - I remember one day it was 30 degrees.
The fact that my flat was 30 degrees in the past does not change the fact that the temperature increase from 8 to 15 degrees in the last few hours is primarily due to my radiators. Natural factors, such as increased sunlight over time as a result of the rotation of the planet, may be a contributing factor but it is less significant over the past two hours than my radiators have been.
Looking at past temperatures is not an argument for or against AGW. The fact that temperatures in the past may have been greater than they are today is interesting but it is irrelevant to the issue of climate change. What happened to temperatures in the past is not relevant to what happens to temperatures today if the causes are different, just as what happened last summer is not relevant to the current warming of my flat.
By burning fossil fuels we are adding additional greenhouse gases to our atmosphere. We currently pump 30 billion tonnes of it each year into the sky. The natural processes of our planet cannot scrub that CO2 out of the atmosphere faster than we can produce it. Therefore CO2 levels must rise. We are adding an additional factor that influences our climate. We are beginning to understand how that additional factor will impact us, and we can mitigate against the effects and have the ability, if not the will, to control the degree of impact of that additional factor. Just as I have the ability to turn on and off my radiators.
From my own analysis
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...
Earth cooled from 1900-1918, warmed from 1918-1944 cooled from 1944-1977 and warmed since 1977. The recent warming was no more dramatic then the warming from 1918-1944. But, consider these plots
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...
In the plot of trends from 1918-1944 not only did temperature go up, but so did solar activity.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...
The graph of solar irradiance from 1600-2012 explains why 2012 was warmer than1712, but not why it was warmer than 1977.
Global warming is happening
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010...
And we are causing it
http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-c...
The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2011 and 2012.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
There is nothing unprecedented about our climate in the last 40 years or so. It has all not only happened before, but happened in this interglacial.
Bacc'. Both your links are to the Marcott paper.Got anything real to support your claim?
"1900 to 1940 is part of the current century. That is warming in response to human activity."
Bollocks it is.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/c...
According to the Satelites reports on November 28/ 2012 Ice has started to accumulate on different parts on Earth for the first time. Mike
Interesting that the 10 warmest years globally have been within the last 15 years at a time when CO2 is at it's highest and the Sun has been in a cooling cycle hmmmm I consider that unusual
Agree.
Everything that happens has a certain unprecedentedness (that should be a word) to it until it happens but I agree that it isn't unusual based on historical accounts and many climate reconstructions that don't look like hockey sticks.
because unlike some I am not insane, I agree.
-----------------------
It is much faster than any time known before, certainly since the last ice age 11,000 years ago.
The most recent research concludes that it has been warmer in the past, but it has not warmed as fast.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2013/03...
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/61...
Whether you believe it or not is moot. Your ignorance does not affect physics.
**************************
1900 to 1940 is part of the current century. That is warming in response to human activity. There is no known time when natural warming was as fast as this century. The rate of warming in this century is unprecedented. You can deny it, but you don't matter.
Baccheus references the Marcott paper in which he fraudulently redates core tops to get a 20th century uptick.
Alarmists don't care anything about science, just the fear mongering.
Baccheus...go get your mommy and she can help you read what Marcott said himself (after he got caught):
"20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions."
It is part of Gods plan for us. Global warming is a test.
WRONG ,,,
