What happened to global warming?

[arbell9]

CLICKY ME PLEASE

fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas that "the climate idots" (my edit) say are to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

[Kimbers]

So many people on that Global warming band wagon now, who will look stupid that they will keep talking about it as we go into an ice age due to over cooling!!

[Bibs]

Thermaggedon my ass!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/06/times_thermageddon_r_us/

[Simon350S]

Global warming followed me to Gran Canaria, its 6:40pm and I've not long got in from the beach. Its still 28 degrees out there.

Reality hits tomorrow though. Lisas bringing the boat to pick me up

[Sparky]

Spot on, Alex. I've been shouting this from the rooftops for years, and have experienced a lot of grief for it. The rebranding to Climate Change was pretty smart, and most of the great unwashed failed to spot it. A bunch of arrogant scientists say their models are more accurate than the Earth itself, then a bunch of opportunists get rich by perpetuating the myth. It's about time this bubble was burst.

[freshcut]

What gets me is that you can always take a small chunk of time, do some averages during that period of time and make it look to confirm what your trying to prove. HOWEVER, for those who have done any reading on climate change, in particular theorized periods before an ice age, you will note that its been determined that it's typical to get an increase in global temperature by a couple of degrees followed by the onset of an ice age. One other point is that we're well overdue for another ice age by a few thousand years. I'm willing to go so far as to suggest that the period we've been living in over the past couple of hundred years is the natural response to a coming ice age making all of the current evidence show signs of global warming. The scientists have certainly got it right in suggesting that climate change is occurring, however I don't believe that it's conclusively man-made. If anything I would be willing to don a flame suite and go as far as to say that the significant increase of CO2 has actually helped move us along toward the beginnings of global cooling.

Now granted I'm not careless when it comes to environmental issues. I don't go running into fields burning stacks of tires, etc. I do try to conserve energy, use efficient appliances, lighting, etc. However, There are just some things that man can not prevent and if Mother Nature wants to put us into a deep freeze, it's going to happen, and increased global temperature is how it starts and there is nothing we can do to change it.

[USAndretti42]

I'm no expert on the subject but it's my understanding that there are many more people who are experts on the subject believe that man-made global warming is real than don't. Global warming doesn't predict that each year is warmer than the last, that each summer is hot and sunny nor that temperatures may not drop for a few years due to other influences. We all know that the weather is inconsistent. Instead they are looking at trends and the long-term trend is generally upwards. To make matters worse, the rise in atmospheric CO₂ since the start of the industrial revolution pretty much reflects the rise in the world's consumption of coal. So there is good evidence that the increase in CO2 is largely man-made. And CO₂ is a greenhouse gas. So what you would expect, an increase in temperature, is what has been happening.

Now it could be coincidence rather than cause and effect. Good records of temperatures are not that old and there is a lot of noise in the numbers. Like I said, we all know the weather is inconsistent. Trouble is, if we ignore it and hope that the science is mistaken and it turns out not to be, that the predictions are true, we will be in deep trouble. The safe way is to work sensibly to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If that means installing a load of renewable energy sources, all well and good. It provides cheaper and cleaner energy and leaves more oil for us petrolheads.

Governments jumping on the bandwagon and using global warming as an excuse to raise taxes without encouraging alternatives are doing a bad thing by turning people against the science and not actually achieving any benefit to the environment. I read somewhere recently that Britain's carbon footprint has not gone down at all. It's just had a chunk of it exported to China and other countries that make the stuff that used to be made in Britain. So the government's policy of tax and deter aren't working just like they don't work for smoking or drinking. People need the carrot, not the stick to change their habits. When will the powers that be learn this simple fact?

[redshift]

it's my understanding that there are many more people who are experts on the subject believe that man-made global warming is real than don't.

The keyword here is 'believe'. So far every single one has failed to provide scientific evidence of any human signature in the climate change data.

They can believe all they like, I'm waiting for proof.

[esprithk]

well, let me have my Dodge Viper first, then I don't mind facing the ICE AGE or GLOBAL WARMING

Edited October 15, 2009 by esprithk

[rens914]

shit

no global warming ??

yust was thinking of buying a house in the north of sweden

the add stated that there was a warning about icebear's

with the global warming they would be melting bears so who cares

XXXXXXXXX

have to look in europe now

what about buckingham palace

wont be that expensive i think

england is going bankrupt

will get the queen as a bonus for free

will need her as a gardner

rens

[wookiecj]

Dumb cynic here..... Isn't CO2 what plants eat? In previous periods of high CO2 didn't plants/trees etc thrive? Wasn't that good for the planet? Granted, CO2 is not much use once all of the trees have been converted into bookcases/tables/kitchen units etc.... discuss

[MPx]

The whole thing is just a statistical sports day....anyone can join in, if you dont know the numbers just make some up cos they'll be about as relevant as any that anyone else has got. Here's my rant:

The weather cycles (ice ages, heat waves, etc) take maybe 100,000 years, or maybe several 1,000,000 years, to pass. Those looking into the past by studying glacier cores suggest that within those periods of change there's loads of periods way off the "average" trend for that part of the cycle. Now when you're studying old stuff deep in glaciers its not really possible to say ooohhh it was a bit warmer for the second half of the minus1234567th century. All they can say it was a bit warmer than trend for maybe 10000 years or so several million years ago. So anyone who thinks they can read anything significant about the weather in into a couple of hundred years of data is taking the piss. I mean if they are so good about forecasting off short back run data, why cant they guess what it will be like at the weekend and get it right? Or next summer? What evidence have they got that these global warming predictions are any better than those about the BarBQue summer or the imminent ice age of 30 years ago. None. And dont give me any b****ks about those last points being comparing short run variancies aginst long run trend. That is exactly my point. The climate change lobby is all about using short run data of an inately fickle activity to identify a long run trend. The trend is easy....this planet oscillates between too cold for humans to too hot for humans. Now the last extreme was too cold for humans....so I predict that next it will get too hot for humans....but not for a few generations yet(!) There you go....now where's my nobel prize?

[USAndretti42]

The keyword here is 'believe'. So far every single one has failed to provide scientific evidence of any human signature in the climate change data.

They can believe all they like, I'm waiting for proof.

Sorry. Bad choice of words on my part. I meant to say "are convinced"

This arguement reminds of the health care debate here in the States or the evolution vs. creation debate. Lots of people claiming to know more than the people who make a living studying the topic. Some of those claimants are on one side of the debate and some on the other. What I'm saying is that, if groups didn't jump on the bandwagon and stretch the truth or misrepresent the evidence to suit their own agenda, the rest of us would be able to see the science.

Wookie's point is a serious one. Not only have we been pumping CO₂ into the atmosphere, we've been cutting down the trees that would take out.

[lotus4s]

"people who make a living studying the topic"

That's the key phrase right there. There are a lot of people making a lot of money from government grants to consumer dollars on global warming and it's in their best interests to fuel the paranoia and suppress any objective data to the contrary.

[Bibs]

If cars are such an enemy of the environment, how come our govt has systems in place to ensure we spend longer in traffic so we burn more fuel to raise more revenue for them? Are humans causing this, or are we not?

[Kimbers]

Of course not!

At any time in our history there have been "threats" to keep the population under thumb. The French, German aggression, Nazism, The cold war, Terrorism, Global warming, Man made Co2.

Now some have been very very real, but what happens when there is only a distant or no threat?

Whats next when human effected climate change has been poo poo'd? And worse still what does our interfering with the natural progression of our planet do to it's stability and naturally swinging climate? Are we merely making these swings larger by trying to interfere?

My head hurts!

[Rick Edwards]

Just a thought...are there ANY tree hugging supercar owners?

Feed a tree, drive a big car !

[USAndretti42]

Ranking the sources of CO₂ and drawing up a plan to deal with them is a whole new can of worms. For example, who would have guessed that computer data centres produce as much CO₂ as airlines? (Read clicky)

I agree there is no excuse for all governments to try to keep traffic moving to save fuel, particularly those governments of countries importing their oil. There is no sense in sticking to the old policies of making life difficult for the motorist so he, or she, switches to public transport. That has never shown any sign of working.

[USAndretti42]

[redshift]

The climatology research unit has been hacked.

Some rather unfortunate documents and e-mails have emerged - around 160MB.

If these prove true then the sh1t is really going to meet the fan at full power!

http://www.investigatemagazine.com/australia/latestissue.pdf