The political world would lose control if CO2 was not the cause of a calamity.
Quote from the UN's Own "Agenda 21": "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."
This is the holy grail of the powers that be. If CO2 were not the temperature controller that it is projected to be, then this would be a great financial and political setback, pure and simple.
Grifter:
http://www.c3headlines.com/fabricating-f...
Read this. It shows different temperatures between GISS reports. 1934 was always considered the hottest year on record until Jimmy cook the books. STOP BEING LED AROUND BY THE NOSE WITH AL GORE PULLING THE CHAIN!
Hmmm "no warming for 17 years" so your starting point is 1996, what was the temp anomaly in 1996
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators#g...
1996 = 0.36c, our recent coolest year 2011 was 0.54c our recent warmest year 2010 = 0.66c
Even the coolest year of the last decade 2008 was 0.49c.
Just the year before the start of your 17 year period 1995, was then the warmest year in the modern record at 0.42c. So even our coolest years now beat the record warmest years of the mid 1990's, how do deniers keep a straight face while trying to flog the myth we are not warming.
The watts story from climate scientist Christopher Monckton of Brenchley (only joking) claims we have not warmed in almost 2 decades, a claim he often makes.
Yet look at the actual data and that is not what it says
The 1990's were the warmest decade in the modern record at 0.36°C, until they where replaced by the decade of the 2000's at 0.56°C, that decade end just a few years ago.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201...
A rise of 0.2°C, which is in line with the estimate of the IPCC for the decadal rise due to AGW.
What deniers don't like to talk about when they reference 1998, is 1999, 2000 or 2001 when temps dropped back without the boost of the El Nino.
Admittedly we have had 2 years of cooler temperatures 2011 & 2012 but the are also linked to the actions of ENSO (La Nina) a double event but these years are only cool compared to the average year we get now, they are in fact warmer that any year before 1998 (and a number after 1998), with the La Nina fading, 2013 is already at the level of 6th warmest year in the modern record with a good likelihood it may climb at least another 1-2 places before years end.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201...
"No significant warming for 17 years 4 months," is a statement that would be significant if thermometers had been invented in January, 1996. Monckton is not interested in enough data to show statistically significant warming as such data will show denialist claims to be a bunch of hot air.
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/graphs...
Monckton's articel was posted in June. He would have to exclude January and February, 1996 to make the same claim, today.
Global warming refers to an energy imbalance measured at the top of the atmosphere. Though there has been a pause in surface and lower tropospheric warming warming of other areas of the globe have continued. The reason for this is there is still a difference between the energy retained and the energy exiting the system. To see the amount of energy retained by CO2 during this time period we can go look at AIRS data, which measures the amount increase of greenhouse gases via spectral measurements, and compare them to surface measurements.
http://airs.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/descrip...
http://airs.jpl.nasa.gov/news_archive/20...
http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.or...
This extra energy needs to go somewhere. What has happened is that energy has been redistributed elsewhere in the system. This has occurred due to such things as the PDO going into negative mode. The IPO, which has much the same temperature profiles as the PDO, may also be responsible.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vao...
There also exists a possibility that this extra energy has gone into what is known as the AMOC cycle which is part of the Thermohaline circulation.
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CON...
"The essence of science is that it is always willing to abandon a given idea, however fundamental it may seem to be, for a better one; the essence of theology is that it holds its truths to be eternal and immutable."
~ H.L. Mencken
That is a bold faced lie perpetrated by David Rose who took MET research, altered it to serve his purpose, and lied about global cooling.
The same day the article was printed posing his lie, the MET debunked him in their own blog
For Christ's sake, 10 of the last 15 years are the warmest on record for 132 years. Stop being led around by your nose, search the web and learn to tell the difference between lies and real science.
Maybe there is no such thing as "global warming alarmists" except in the BS fantasies of hired hacks for the fossil fuel industry's anti-science deception campaign, and the small army of half-wit dupes on YA who regurgitate Wattsup's endless recycling of long-since exploded anti-science myths.
Because it would force them to admit to doubt and uncertainty, and such things are not permitted within a totalitarian belief system.
The unassailable certainty in the CAGW meme is on of the aspects that exposes the movement as non-science. It is a totalitarian belief system, and, as such, harboring doubts about the 'sacred science' is blasphemy.
But, consider Popper's Principle of Falsifiability: if an idea is such that there is no way it could be shown to be false, it cannot be considered true (scientifically). To hold otherwise is to establish it as a dogma, the stuff of religion.
You have questioned the sacred texts (CAGW hypothesis), and offended the prophets (Gore, Mann, Jones, etc.). You will be called out as a blasphemer (denier), and will be cast out from the fellowship of believers.
Its because your claim is bullshit
Because WUWT is all lies. Try using a valid source of information
Even Dr Pachauri from the IPCC admits there has been no global warming for 17 years so why do some people persist with this lie ?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/13/no-significant-warming-for-17-years-4-months/
Cognitive dissonance. When a warmist media source claims: "OVER the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar." and you continue to deny that, you are simply letting your internal biases dictate what you want to hear and believe and are detaching yourself from reality. http://www.economist.com/news/science-an...
Other detailed examinations of recent temperature trends:
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2013/est...
http://troyca.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/a...
They are like religious zealots who cannot admit to anything that goes against their creed, your wasting your time arguing with them
My neighbour an intelligent man and and a Jehovah's witness will not accept evolution and I refuse to argue with him about it, because it just a waste of time.
Money
a real skeptic would double check 'facts' presented by wuwt.
meantime.. check ocean temperatures
