As for arguing about graph start years that is also pointless. The end of the Little Ice Age was the coldest point in the last 10,000 years. It is only very recently that man-made CO2 could have had any effect and for a lot of that time the temperature has been flat - get over it! Most of the recent warming has been natural.
The other reason for not arguing about woodfortrees start years is that it covers such a small timescale. If you use two sheets of A4 or Letter Size paper to plot the earth's history then the last 10 million years all occurs in the last millimetre or one twenty-fifth of an inch. The thickness of the paper represents a million years.
For the last few thousand years the temperature has been falling.
The 2°C limit by the end of the century is also pointless. What happens after the end of the century? If the temperature is still increasing then why did we get into a panic about the 2°C? It always was a political target and not a scientific one.
With global temperature declining the only thing that is "running out" is IPCC credibility, not that they ever had much.
The article is a masterpiece of propaganda, it points out that global temperature has increased about 0.8°C since 1900 -- Woop-T-Doo. Then it goes on to say that predictions are for a 2°C rise in “coming decades”.
In “coming decades”??? How many decades? Do they mean in the next twenty years or the next thousand years --- either of those would be “coming decades.”
The IPCC has ran out of things to say. They have tried every scare tactic in the book. And their rants have no effect anymore, people have heard it all and seen just the opposite. But they will never give up, unless they are held accountable.
-----------------------
They have been saying that time is running out for awhile. In some of those statements, the time frame given is in the past, so that means that time has already run out.
Meanwhile, the latest IPCC report suggests 1.5C as within the range of possibility. They were unwilling to state 2-4.5C like in the last report. So to definitively state over 2C of warming is foolish, and at odds with IPCC science.
I read this earlier. LOL!
Managing information is not their best attribute.
It's a conscious less cry from the climate science and environmental loony bin.
The whole purpose of the UNIPCC is to prove that CO2 emissions are causing Global Warming. They have done that in their own minds. They just won't admit that it isn't catastrophic or even a serious matter so they let things like this go. What's it going to hurt? Everybody stretches the truth.
Temperature has the final say on this and not much has changed in 300 years that hasn't happened in Earth's previous history.
The self-important science industry and the self-important United Nations are now in control it seems : http://news.yahoo.com/climate-meeting-di...
" ... The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, will meet next week in Berlin to chart ways in which the world can curb the greenhouse gas emissions that scientists say are overheating the planet. ... "
Overheating the planet? Scientific dolts! Giving credence to this stupidity? ROTFLMAO!!!
Americans don't really care about it anyways, or at least nothing has changed since 1989 : http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/04/...
<<"Temperatures have already risen by about 0.8 C (1.4F) since 1900 and are set to breach the 2 C ceiling on current trends in coming decades, U.N. reports show."
According to the data the earth's temperature is declining. >>
Not if you actually put 1900 as your starting year.
BTW, what happened to deniers' favorite claim that it has not warmed for 17 years? Why this sudden change in picking another start date as you did in your linked graph? Why did you pick 2002 and not 1998 as deniers usually do? Is it perhaps because the trend line starting in 1998 is not as steep as the one in 2002?
If you wanted to just show a steep trend line and thus arbitrarily select your start date, you might as well have selected July 2013 as your start date and February 2014 as your end date to show that the Northern Hemisphere is rapidly cooling; a claim which like yours is scientifically nonsensical but will nonetheless be repeated ad infinitum by the intellectually challenged.
>> According to the data the earth's temperature is declining. <<
How many Degrees of Freedom does you graph represent? [NOTE: If it takes you more than 5 seconds to answer the question it means that you are too stupid to know what the data say.]
Time is running out,if we want to limit the rise in average global temperature to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial times.
Cherry picking your start and end dates is just another form of lying as there have been several drops followed by even bigger increases since 1900. [1]
It went up 4 degrees in the Medevil Warm Period .
People thrived . No factorys in that time.
UN is ran by crooks and fools
No, according to the data, the earth's temperature is increasing.
If people are incapable of reading the data and understanding the difference between fluctuations and trends, then it is probably best they leave it to scientists to interpret the data for them.
I think the term "Time running out" has been used by alarmists since the time they became alarmists.
I am asking this question in regards to this article:
http://news.yahoo.com/time-running-meet-global-warming-target-u-n-110118064--finance.html
The article states, "It says nations will have to impose drastic curbs on their still rising greenhouse gas emissions to keep a promise made by almost 200 countries in 2010 to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial times.
Temperatures have already risen by about 0.8 C (1.4F) since 1900 and are set to breach the 2 C ceiling on current trends in coming decades, U.N. reports show."
According to the data the earth's temperature is declining.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2002/to:2013/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2002/to:2013/trend
Even though the CO2 level has increased.
