Posted on 02/26/2015 2:08:09 PM PST by zeestephen
It appears as though internal variability has offset warming over the last 15 or so years...Eventually we expect temperatures to ‘catch up,’ but it may take longer than five years for that to happen...
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
It is completely credible then....BWAHAHAHAHHA
Good comparison — they are climate Millerites.
None of the warmists have been able to explain that period of warming. They conveniently ignore all requests to explain why it warmed up so much and then why it cooled down.
Some of the warmists have claimed that the warming was restricted to Greenland, but recently some other climate specialist said the warming took place over most of the northern hemisphere.
I believe the Vikings may have grown grapes in Greenland as well as Newfoundland.
Yeah, I've got friends who've said the same thing, but interestingly enough they always vote for Dems.
“Despite the continued increase of greenhouse gas emissions from us, rise of global surface temperatures has been easing since 1998.”
So they have been lying about it getting warmer for the
past 18 years.
“suggest that it may persist for years even in our notably warming world.”
How can there be a “notably warming world” when “global surface temperatures has been easing since 1998”?
Externally Induced Climate Variability: It refers to the impact of some external factor that leads to variability, such as the impact of
Variations in solar radiation
Solar and lunar tides
Internally Induced Climate Variability: It refers to internal interactions between components of the climate system, such as the interaction between
Ocean and atmosphere
Atmosphere and biosphere
http://know.climateofconcern.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=article&id=128
————Variations in solar radiation-————
The old fraud is doubling down.
MichaelMann(x1,x2,x3,.....) = GlobalWarming
what ever happened to the hole in the ozone ?
Thank you. I'll watch out of that 1% internal variability after subtracting the volcanoes and the sun.
This is like convincing a kid that a dog doo doo on the ground is a snickers bar and that he should eat it. And yet, most American's seem to be picking this up and eating it. It's remarkable.
Because monkeys MAY fly out of my butt.
And if they don’t, that just means THEY WILL eventually fly out of my butt.
Thank you BitWielder1 for this post
I took thermodynamics at Rutgers in 1976, I don't think the laws have changed since...So, I just use my hashtag #AlGoreBullWarming on everything!
Supposedly the CO2 produced by burning fossil fuels has a lower C13 isotope component than naturally occurring CO2. The argument goes that the ratio of the C13 to C12 isotope has been dropping therefore the increase in the CO2 must be due to anthropogenic sources however that may not be the case Manmade CO2 ?
In addition we know from the ice cores that CO2 increases lag temperature increases by approximately 800 years ( Not vice versa as Gore claimed in his ridiculous movie). Perhaps not co-incidentally the Medieval Warm period was reaching its zenith approximately 800 years ago.
Also there are other views on whether or not all of the CO2 increases are man made. An alternative View of CO2
Hey Palmer, where is the insertion of the consumption variable into the algorithm due to the increase of plant growth and coverage expansion because of the increase of the availability of food (CO2)? Hello McFly!!!!!
Of course. Why do you think it's called 'Mann made Global Warming'?
So they admit it isn’t getting hotter - but it will, just wait, it will be!
The real problem the warmists have is that they put all their eggs in the CO2 basket, when in fact they have no idea what and how many different variables affect long range temperatures, let alone how these variables act and how they interact with each other. We are now undergoing one of the longest periods of reduced sunspot activity on record - such a reduction might be expected to reduce our temperatures somewhat, in spite of what the CO2 measurements are - but its occurrence and duration are unpredictable and to think it possible to determine all such occurrences of this and other possible variables over the next fifty years to predict more than approximately what the climate will be is a fools erand.....
Lady: We at the network want a dog with attitude. He’s edgy, he’s “in your face.” You’ve heard the expression “let’s get busy”? Well, this is a dog who gets “biz-zay!” Consistently and thoroughly.
Krusty: So he’s proactive, huh?
Lady: Oh, God, yes. We’re talking about a totally outrageous paradigm.
Meyer: Excuse me, but “proactive” and “paradigm”? Aren’t these just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important[backpedaling]
Not that I’m accusing you of anything like that.
[pause]
I’m fired, aren’t I?
Myers: Oh, yes.
Next!
“Scientists Now Know Why”
An actual scientist would read those 4 words, and just stop. Faulty premise, no point in continuing.
the SUN and the oceans and currents drive the weather / climate. this “study” is by people who ahve fudged the numbers in the past and got caught... IF YOUR THEORY CANT PREDICT THE OUTCOME.... YOUR THEORY IS NO GOOD... end of report..
CLIMATE CHANGE IS A NATURAL EVENT.....ITS BEEN HAPPENING SINCE THE BIG BANG (if you believe in that) At that time the universe was 10 million degrees and been COOLING ever since...
AND THE GENIUSES CANT ACCOUNT FOR THE “INFLATION” FACTOR of he BIG BANG theory.....
LOTS OF THEORIES....... AS SGT FRIDAY SAID “JUST THE FACTS MAM...JUST THE FACTS”...
Thank you. Yes, it’s from the episode where they added Poochie the Dog to the Itchy and Scratchy Show. Thanks for adding the dialogue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.