Here's your latest global warming update: It's still happening. Intense heat is now four times more likely to strike in the U.S. than it was in pre-industrial times, according to a new study from Stanford University researchers.
July 2012 was the hottest month on record in the lower 48 states, and the summer brought the "most severe and extensive drought in at least 25 years," according to the USDA. And it seems summers like last year's are going to become more commonplace, with 2012-esque temps becoming more likely, specifically in the north-central and northeastern United States.
This study follows on the heels of a recently leaked draft of an Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change report, which noted that scientists believe we are experiencing more heat waves because of climate change--which yes, we're still sure humans are causing.
"It's clear that our greenhouse gas emissions have increased the likelihood of some kinds of extremes, and it's clear that we're not optimally adapted to that new climate," co-author Noah Diffenbaugh, an associate professor of environmental Earth system science, said in a statement. "Knowing how much our emissions have changed the likelihood of this kind of severe heat event can help us to minimize the impacts of the next heat wave, and to determine the value of avoiding further changes in climate."
The report was part of a special supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society called "Explaining Extreme Events of 2012 From a Climate Perspective."
Most state and city heat records in the US were set prior to 1955, particularly during the spectacularly hot summer of 1936.
In this case, the theory is invalidated by observational data.
Bullsh*t! Their weather models exclude most external forcing data that other scientists find extremely relevant. Either use a climate model that takes in all the factors or shut the hell up with your man made global warming conspiracy BS! Nothing has proven that this is manmade. Nothing.
"Do not try and bend the spoon. That is impossible. Only try and realize the truth - there is no spoon."
Let the games begin. Lol. Grabbing Popcorn. :)
"Do not try and bend the spoon. That is impossible. Only try and realize the truth - there is no spoon."
A typical Shaunacy Ferro article. I stopped reading PopSci for a couple of months because of pointless garbage like this. I saw this on my phone, where for some reason they don't include the author, and I knew immediately who wrote this. I really wish they would stop this push on anthropogenic climate change.
Record highs by continent (in F)
North America: 134 - Set in 1913
Asia: 129.2 - 1942
Africa: 131 - 1931
Australia: 123 - 1960
Europe: 118.4 - 1977
South America: 120 - 1905
Oceania: 108 - 1912
Antarctica: 59 - 1974
Two things of interest in this data. 1) We haven't had a record high globally for 36 years and 2) PopSci (this author specifically) put out an article on January 8 of this year stating that they had their hottest day on record (122) and they had to redo the colors on their heat map to accommodate their new, higher temperatures, going up to 129.2 degrees. The data I got was from ASU, so pretty reputable, and it clearly shows that the hottest day on record in Australia was NOT 2013 and they have absolutely no use for a heat color scale that goes up to 129 degrees when they haven't even been CLOSE to it.
It is important that the data is presented in a clear and consistent way so that it isn't misinterpreted. Once we have legitimately established that the Earth is warming at a greater-than-normal rate (which we haven't yet), then we can start looking at solutions (which we haven't yet). Driving hybrid/electric cars is not the solution.
Dang it with the no editing! They had their hottest day: They = Australia
Funny we're in September and he's talking about summer 2012. I guess 2013 just didn't fit the narrative well enough. Unlucky '13.
Yeah, right....Gullible Warming. What a crock! Guess you didn't get the CLUE about the nearly 20 PAUSE in warming so they've changed the name 3 or 4 times so that the climate is what they say it is...that way it doesn't matter...all roads point to government funding!
The models were faulty, just like the THEORY....so garbage in, garbage OUT
And to paraphrase B Disraeli " All you've got is got lies, dmned lies and Michael Mann HOCKEY STICKS"
"But it's pretty clear it raises the likelihood of extreme weather..."
In related news:
"Tropical storm Gabrielle fizzles: Why has hurricane season been so calm?"
"If the first hurricane fails to appear until after 8 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time Sept. 15, this will be the most hurricane-free first half of a season since satellites began tracking the storms in 1967, he notes in an e-mail."
We're also at a 10-year low in tornado activity.
But a good try, nonetheless, Popular Science. Keep up the good work. We all need a break from reality now and then.
Welcome to Popular Junk Science.
propseudosci - is at it again. Tell the lie enough and it becomes truth.
A country's extreme record temp is not a good indicator of global warming, which creates climate change, two different items that the deniers claim to be the same. Deniers insisting a change in name is part of the conspiracy when it is obviously they are two different entities. One record temp in one country does not show anything except an exceptional temp on one given day. Global average temps show the "Globe" is warming. Don't bother quoting a cooling trend from your favorite websites that tell you what you want to hear instead of actual scientific data. I will trust the NOAA, NASA, every national science organization on the planet, and every institute of higher learning on the planet for info. The high temp records greatly outnumber the low temp records for 2 decades now. They should be 50/50. Don't worry, when the arctic is clear of ice in the summer just keep claiming it is all natural cycles, the fossil fuel industry wil be there to back you up.
So can someone please tell me what ended the last ice age? Mammoth farts? This whole "...scientists believe we are experiencing more heat waves because of climate change--which yes, we're still sure humans are causing" is the most unscientific statement I've ever heard from a "scientist." Like someone has them under a spell maybe.
Actually, a writer wrote that to probably make fun of people, deservedly so. Climate change melted the last ice age , which has nothing to do with now, as it was...quite awhile ago. The climate has changed many times in the past. That is not any kind of a scientific explanation as to how humans are not causing the current climate change (we are). Each time the climate has changed, something triggered it. We humans are the trigger (this time around) and need to own up to the damage we are causing the planet and the consequences we are leaving to future generations (much more than just climate change).
The earth's magnetic field impacts climate: Danish study
COPENHAGEN (AFP) -- The earth's climate has been significantly affected by the planet's magnetic field, according to a Danish study published Monday that could challenge the notion that human emissions are responsible for global warming.
"Our results show a strong correlation between the strength of the earth's magnetic field and the amount of precipitation in the tropics," one of the two Danish geophysicists behind the study, Mads Faurschou Knudsen of the geology department at Aarhus University in western Denmark, told the Videnskab journal.
He and his colleague Peter Riisager, of the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), compared a reconstruction of the prehistoric magnetic field 5,000 years ago based on data drawn from stalagmites and stalactites found in China and Oman.
The results of the study, which has also been published in US scientific journal Geology, lend support to a controversial theory published a decade ago by Danish astrophysicist Henrik Svensmark, who claimed the climate was highly influenced by galactic cosmic ray (GCR) particles penetrating the earth's atmosphere.
Svensmark's theory, which pitted him against today's mainstream theorists who claim carbon dioxide (CO2) is responsible for global warming, involved a link between the earth's magnetic field and climate, since that field helps regulate the number of GCR particles that reach the earth's atmosphere.
"The only way we can explain the (geomagnetic-climate) connection is through the exact same physical mechanisms that were present in Henrik Svensmark's theory," Knudsen said.
"If changes in the magnetic field, which occur independently of the earth's climate, can be linked to changes in precipitation, then it can only be explained through the magnetic field's blocking of the cosmetic rays," he said.
The two scientists acknowledged that CO2 plays an important role in the changing climate, "but the climate is an incredibly complex system, and it is unlikely we have a full overview over which factors play a part and how important each is in a given circumstance," Riisager told Videnskab.
Svensmark's Theory Explained
Man-made climate change may be happening at a far slower rate than has been claimed, according to controversial new research.
Scientists say that cosmic rays from outer space play a far greater role in changing the Earth's climate than global warming experts previously thought.
In a book, to be published this week, they claim that fluctuations in the number of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere directly alter the amount of cloud covering the planet.
High levels of cloud cover blankets the Earth and reflects radiated heat from the Sun back out into space, causing the planet to cool.
Henrik Svensmark, a weather scientist at the Danish National Space Centre who led the team behind the research, believes that the planet is experiencing a natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere.
This, he says, is responsible for much of the global warming we are experiencing.
He claims carbon dioxide emissions due to human activity are having a smaller impact on climate change than scientists think. If he is correct, it could mean that mankind has more time to reduce our effect on the climate.... "
Should we be worried about Earth's magnetic poles reversing?
What will happen when north-pointing compasses make a 180-degree turn toward Antarctica? Will the continents tear themselves apart, or are we in store for much more mundane changes?
Natalie Wolchover, Life's Little Mysteries
Thu, Feb 16 2012 at 11:39 AM
Earthquake News, Ecology
The end of the world as we know it could come in any number of ways, depending on who you ask. Some people believe global cataclysm will occur when Earth's magnetic poles reverse. When north goes south, they say, the continents will lurch in one direction or the other, triggering massive earthquakes, rapid climate change and species extinctions.
The geologic record shows that hundreds of pole reversals have occurred throughout Earth's history; they happen when patches of iron atoms in Earth's liquid outer core become reverse-aligned, like tiny magnets oriented in the opposite direction from those around them. When the reversed patches grow to the point that they dominate the rest of the core, Earth's overall magnetic field flips. The last reversal happened 780,000 years ago during the Stone Age, and indeed there's evidence to suggest the planet may be in the early stages of a pole reversal right now.
But should we really fear this event? What will actually happen when north-pointing compasses make a 180-degree turn toward Antarctica? Will the continents tear themselves apart, or are we in store for much more mundane changes?
"The most dramatic changes that occur when the poles reverse is a very large decrease of the total field intensity," said Jean-Pierre Valet, who conducts research on geomagnetic reversals at the Institute of Earth Physics of Paris. [5 Ways the World Will Change Dramatically this Century]
Earth's magnetic field takes between 1,000 and 10,000 years to reverse, and in the process, it greatly diminishes before it re-aligns. "It's not a sudden flip, but a slow process, during which the field strength becomes weak, very probably the field becomes more complex and might show more than two poles for a while, and then builds up in strength and [aligns] in the opposite direction," said Monika Korte, the scientific director of the Niemegk Geomagnetic Observatory at GFZ Potsdam in Germany.
The scientists say it's the weak in-between phase that would be roughest on Earthlings.
According to John Tarduno, professor of geophysics at the University of Rochester, a strong magnetic field helps protect Earth from blasts of radiation from the sun. "Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) occasionally occur on the Sun, and sometimes hurtle directly toward Earth," Tarduno said. "Some of the particles associated with CMEs can be blocked by Earth's magnetic field. With a weak field, this shielding is less efficient."
The charged particles bombarding Earth's atmosphere during solar storms would punch holes in Earth's atmosphere, and this could hurt humans. "Ozone holes, like that over Antarctica (which today are due to an entirely different cause related to man) could form as solar particles interact with the atmosphere in a cascade of chemical reactions. These 'holes' would not be permanent, but might be present on one- to 10-year timescales — arguably important enough to be a concern in terms of skin cancer rates," Tarduno said. [Will Sunscreen Protect You from the Upcoming Solar Flares?]
Valet agrees that a weak magnetic field could lead to the formation of ozone holes. He wrote a paper last year proposing a direct link between the demise of Neanderthals, our evolutionary cousins, and a significant decrease of the geomagnetic field intensity that occurred exactly at the same period. (That time, the lead-up to a geomagnetic reversal appears to have been "aborted"; the field weakened but didn't end up flipping.)
Other scientists aren't convinced that there's a connection between pole reversals and species extinctions. "Even if the field becomes very weak, at the Earth's surface we are shielded from radiation by the atmosphere. Similarly as we cannot see or feel the presence of the geomagnetic field now, we most likely would not notice any significant change from a reversal," Korte said.
Our technology definitely would be in danger, however. Even now, solar storms can damage satellites, cause power outages and interrupt radio communications. "These kinds of negative influences clearly will increase if the magnetic field and thus its shielding function became significantly weaker, e.g. during a reversal, and it will be important to find mitigation strategies," she told Life's Little Mysteries.
One additional worry is that a weakening and eventual reversal in the field would disorient all those species that rely on geomagnetism for navigation, including bees, salmon, turtles, whales, bacteria and pigeons. There is no scientific consensus on how those creatures would cope.
Many of the disaster scenarios associated with geomagnetic pole reversals in popular imagination are pure fantasy, the scientists said. There definitely won't be any break-up or shift of the continents.
The first proof is the geologic record. When the last pole switch happened, "no worldwide shifting of continents or other planet-wide disasters occurred, as geoscientists can testify to from fossil and other records," said Alan Thompson, head of geomagnetism at the British Geological Survey.
The scientists explained that changes in the Earth's liquid core happen on a completely different distance and timescale than convection in the Earth's mantle (which causes Earth's tectonic plates to shift, moving the continents). The liquid core does indeed touch the bottom of the mantle, but it would take tens of millions of years for changes in the core to propagate up through the mantle and influence the motion of the tectonic plates. In short, "there is no evidence from the geological past and in my opinion also no conceivable method that magnetic reversals could trigger Earthquakes," Korte said.
Sooner or later
The geomagnetic field is currently weakening, possibly because of a growing patch of reverse-alignment in the liquid core deep beneath Brazil and the South Atlantic. According to Tarduno, the strength of Earth's magnetic field "has been decreasing for at least 160 years at an alarming rate, leading some to speculate that we are heading toward a reversal."
The reversal might happen, or it might be aborted — Earth is too complex a system for scientists to know which outcome to expect. Either way, the process will drag on over the next few thousand years, giving us time to adjust to the changes.... "
Earth's Magnetic Poles May
Be About To Switch
By Paul Simons
The Guardian - London
The Earth could be about to turn upside down. The planet's magnetic field is showing signs of wanting to make a gigantic somersault, so that magnetic north heads towards Antarctica, and magnetic south goes north. Compasses will point the wrong way, and migrating birds, fish and turtles are going to be very confused.
Just when this will happen, how long it will take and what the consequences will be, is difficult to fathom. What is not in doubt, though, is that it will happen. About every half a million years or so, the Earth's magnetic field flips upside down.
The story begins in 1600, when Sir William Gilbert, physician to Queen Elizabeth I, suggested that the Earth was a giant magnet. At the magnetic poles, a compass needle would stand up and point straight down into the Earth. And he was right, up to a point. The magnetic poles are where all the lines of force of Earth's magnetic field are drawn together. It does not coincide with the geographic poles, the axis on which the Earth spins, but it is close.
Yet the Earth is not a solid magnet. For one thing, its magnetic poles are constantly drifting around. At present, magnetic north is heading out of Canadian territory into the Arctic Ocean at about 10 miles per year. Also, a bar magnet quickly loses its power, yet the Earth's magnetic field has been around for billions of years, so something is regenerating it. This is why Einstein remarked that the origin of the Earth's magnetic field was one of the greatest mysteries of physics.
Today, we think that magnetic power comes from the Earth's hot outer shell of molten iron sloshing around a solid inner core. As this subterranean ocean of liquid metal slowly whirls around, it behaves like a dynamo generating electrical currents and magnetic fields. Just like the flickering light on a bicycle powered by a dynamo, the Earth's currents are a little erratic, and so the magnetic field at the surface of the Earth fluctuates. We know the magnetic polarity goes topsy-turvy from rocks on the bed of the Atlantic Ocean.
Along the middle of the Atlantic runs a gigantic crack from which lava oozes. As the lava solidifies into rock, it records the Earth's magnetic polarity at the time. These records show that we are due for another flip about now. But the Earth does not keep a regular rhythm, so no one could make a prediction based on past performance alone. There is, however, more convincing proof that we are heading for a tumble. Each time the magnetic field heads for a reversal, it grows weaker over several thousand years until it almost disappears. Then it switches and starts up again with renewed vigour.
Magnetism trapped in ancient pottery shows that over the past 4,000 years, the magnetic field has weakened by more than 50%. This past century, the strength has dropped by 5%. At this rate, the field might disappear in the next few hundred or thousand years. Another warning sign of an imminent flip has come recently from satellite measurements of the Earth's magnetic field.
A team led by Gauthier Hulot, of the Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, has spotted patches of reversed magnetism concentrated in two places just underneath the Earth's outer mantle. In the largest patch, beneath the southern tip of Africa, the magnetic field is pointing towards the centre of the Earth, instead of outwards. The other patch is near the north pole.
Some experts have stuck their necks out to predict that we can expect the next reversal some time in the next 2,000 years. The process would probably then take anything between 100 and a few thousand years - not even a blink in the history of Earth. We can only guess what life would be like during that reversal. Anyone trying to navigate with a magnetic compass is going to have a tough time, but what is going to happen to all those birds, fish and other animals that migrate vast distances using their own internal magnetic compass? Will they have time to re-draw their magnetic maps and get new bearings?
Even more creatures such as bees and some bacteria use a sense of magnetism for finding their way around their local territories, for a north/south or up/down axis. The Earth's magnetic field also stretches several hundred miles into space and protects us from the sun's charged particles and cosmic rays by focusing them towards the poles. This is where they appear as the northern and southern lights as they excite gases in the atmosphere. As the magnetic poles migrate across the world, those night lights are going to light up some very strange places where they have never been seen before.
During a field reversal, this protective magnetic shield is going to be weak and might even disappear for a century or more. That might drastically affect the weather. There is a growing body of evidence that the sun's highly charged particles batter the upper atmosphere so hard that some of the assault filters down into the atmosphere around us, influencing the wind, atmospheric pressure and temperature.
Without our magnetic shield, those solar particles might create havoc with the weather. That cosmic radiation blasting the Earth's surface could cause genetic mutations and cancers. Yet when palaeontologists scoured the fossil records looking for signs of mass extinctions or bursts of evolution during previous magnetic field flips, they found nothing. Living organisms seem to have survived intact. But what will happen next time? ..... ".
Geomagnetic Reversal and hypothetical considerations of 2010/2012
The Earth's geomagnetic field is currently undergoing a reversal. It is not known when it will be completed, but it is already well underway, will continue into 2012 and beyond. The field is weakening with consequences of irradiation from the sun and deep space. But the reversal also means deep seated changes inside the earth with consequences of earthquakes in places not familiar with them and new volcanoes. During the reversal, we can experience increased earthquake activity, even an earthquake storm. Three new volcanoes are being born in the various undersea locations of the Pacific Ocean at this time. Remarkable footage has been taken of one of them with huge upwelling of ocean water as magma boils it from below. In addition, Iceland is going through volcanic activity now impacting the world since April 14th, 2010. So changes are afoot and building...... ".
chop down more forests!
The coinciding periods of correlation between the Earth’s global temperature and the strength of the Earth’s global magnetic field
It is obvious that the long term variation between the temperature and Earth’s MF is coincident. We have known this for a long time but haven’t been able to figure out what caused this correlation.
We have seen above how the intensity of the solar wind must be suspected for being the real magnetic "dynamo" of Earth’s MF.
However, we have not fully understood the coinciding periods of correlation between Earth’s global temperature and the strength of Earth’s global MF.
According to the Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark (Danish National Space Center) the variation of Earth's temperature is (in brief) caused by the intensity of the solar wind.
For the first time in history, we therefore have a serious common denominator that can explain both the variation of Earth’s temperature as well as the cause of the (real) dynamo of Earth’s MF..... ".
What you are referring to is all theoretical with one notable study by the Danes. While the vast majority of scientists believe CO2 is the culprit, based on enough studies to eclipse your lengthy posts (which I am sure nobody is going to bother to read) and which the scientific community now considers to be fact. The only things in question are how bad and how soon (with all the models trending towards very bad) and how long all the meaningless debates on blogs will continue.
In my opinion base upon the science I have read 3 things contribute to global warming or just changes in the atmospheric environment.
1.) The sun cycles.
2.) The recent contribution by humans and the industrial revolution with the production of pollution of material and gases - CO2 and more.
3.) The extreme rare magnetic pole flip with the reduction of the Earths magnetic field. Which when it does occur does have an larger effect on the global environment in a broad spectrum influence, with one of the influences being global warming.
Number 2 is highly advantageous for government leaders, politicians and business since it can be said 'humans' cause this and therefore we feel guilt for our sins and the government and business can grow larger to save us.
Number 1 and 3 we humans only have the choice of adapting to the situation
By the way NASA has written articles about the changing magnetic field and its effect on the environment too. In fact many different countries science origination have involved science towards this too. It just easier leverage to use guilt against humanity and focus on 2, so this is where much of the government money is spent and the media too.
Yes they are all theories.
@Staz, good reads! I love that little part in the one article -(which today are due to an entirely different cause related to man)- lol. You can tell that was last minute edit. In any case, you are right, this is an external source of heat that is not present in the current weather models. I also agree that based on the number of "mistakes" made by scientists, politicians and doctors, that we see everyday, that to simply take the word of these people is foolish and I find it no winder that drchuck1 simply eats the whatever is in the spoon he is being fed.
" I will trust the NOAA, NASA, every national science organization on the planet, and every institute of higher learning on the planet for info. -drchuck1"
You like the airplane technique don't you chuck? Around and around... vrooooommrooooooommvrooooom!... in the mouth and right out of your finger onto Popsci. Mmmmm tasty! Lol. I'm so glad you admitted it because it was becoming apparent anyways. Use that brain chuck or change your name to "groundchuck". Your credibility is shrinking and your naivety is growing. You don't even look at why the subject is so controversial do you? Why people are so fractured on the subject. You just eat what you're being fed. Sad. Bring some real evidence people. Something more than just saying "I believe it because government run science organizations say so". Learn for yourselves. At least read independent studies too. Too funny.
Boom starz. Boom. Not only that but the Solar forcing data they use is pretty weak in the models too. Its very probable that most of our warming is due to Solar and cosmic energy forcing. I think that by adopting the attitude that it is a major factor we will force scientists to disprove that it's real. Something they won't be able to do.
One nice thing Starz... the Sun flips it's pole every 11 years. It's about to happen now. It's a few months from completing.
When it does, there is always the "slight chance", that while the Suns is flipping, and ours in flux, ours could also change more rapidly than naturally occurs, to match the Suns! A small chance but, possible. Let's hope! It is actually proven that the last field reversal happened in less than 200 years, in a rapid flip that then reversed itself. The flip didn't take and the poles went back to where they were. This failure is called an "excursion". However, when looking at possible reasons for a quick flip... the Suns own dipole reversal becomes a major culprit! Some interesting Sun/Earth timing coincidences in the last flip.
"Do not try and bend the spoon. That is impossible. Only try and realize the truth - there is no spoon."
lnwolf41 So my question is what caused the great drought in 1930's? since we had a whole lot less green house gasses being produced.
You accuse me of going round and round when the same troll crap keeps coming from you along with resorting to childish name calling, you would be lucky if you were just naïve instead of being a cowardly bully hiding behind your computer...I don't know why I am bothering but yes, doctors and scientist can be wrong, it is not a valid point to assert that nearly all are likely wrong because a few are wrong from time to time...so you get a second opinion when things are serious, like a serious diagnosis for instance...it seems odd you would think 97% of climatologists would not qualify as enough of a second opinion to except the first climatologist opinion...and the magnetic field theory stuff is fringe science, just a hypothesis, I wrongly accredited it to scientific theory as that would mean it is not believed to be proven false, which is not the case.
The hard thing about the magnetic field theory is it takes such a long time period to actually know if it is happening and none of will be alive after the fact to scientifically actually 'know'. So yes, I acknowledge very much the vote of it happen now is justifiable sitting on the fence.
But if it is happening, it would have an effect on large dramatic effecdt on Earth and the weather. Take care. ;)
Whenever I need a good laugh, I go to the comments section of a global warming article to see all the armchair climate "skeptics" pretend to know what they're talking about.
drchuck1, ok, ok, funny how I am the bully now. Just giving you a taste of your own medicine really. However, if you would like to go back to being civil then we can try that. Have an opinion but call me a Troll or say that I'm full of shit and I will go back being uncivil. I show respect to those who respect me. I don't attack people for no reason. You get what you give.
Objectively, I do have one little problem here though with your scientific belief in GW. That is, what is it you believe? Most people on here with such strong convictions, for a particular view, will post some science on it. Exactly which Climatologist, Climate Scientist, Geologist, Meteorologist and general weather model do you believe in? If you are so against adding Cosmic and Solar forcing data, why? What solar models are you familiar with? What is your reason? Don't critique if you aren't going to join the discussion. Right now all we have from you is... nothing. I welcome a post. I'm not bullying either, I'm generally interested in a strong apposing view. Right now, after looking at the NASA Climate Data, which falls right in line with your mainstream view, I still don't believe that ALL of the warming is caused by man. Here, I will even give you this, which is pretty daunting scientific evidence for CO2:
I still don't believe this is MAIN the cause of the current warming trend. It is a number. It is derived from ice core sampling and it is not as exact as they would make you think. Of the apposing scientists views, and they are just as credible and smart, they say that the current climate models have inflated amounts of CO2 in them, as a result of leaving out solar and cosmic forcing data. Therefore, the model uses inexact sources of CO2 that are actually measured in small concentrations and then assumed to be a broad measurement of overall CO2 levels, in PPM, throughout the entire globe. The ever holy phrase ("Ice Core Samples") resonating in our minds.
That's like taking a piece of ice in my freezer, from when I first bought my house, and then analyzing it to see how much CO2 is my house. Ridiculous. Even the scientists who use them no there is large measure of error in doing so. There are other geological layers besides ice that would backup there measurements. They don't use those though.
Then you have studies by scientists who can achieve the same current conditions in their models, with less CO2, by adding accurate Solar/Cosmic forcing into the model. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT MAN HASN'T CREATED A BUNCH OF CO2 SINCE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. NO ONE IS SAYING THAT CO2 ISN'T A PROBLEM. WE ARE SAYING THAT IT ISN'T "THE" MAIN PROBLEM AS PEOPLE WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE. FACT: THE CLIMATE MODELS THAT ARE CONSIDERED THE MAINSTREAM VIEW, LEAVE OUT EXTERNAL FORCING DATA THAT, IS PROVEN IN OTHER MODELS TO, SHOW OUR CURRENT SITUATION, AS WELL AS, PAST SITUATIONS CLIMATE SITUATIONS.
Is that coincidence? I think that a logical and objective debate, with current research, can begin here. For the education of ourselves and those who come in interest on the subject. Deep down, my mind is never truly made up. I am always taking in new factors that give more insight into a issue.
GW is partly man made, and of the biggest part, man is not responsible for it. I don't believe that cutting CO2 emissions drastically will have a large impact on GW. Please, change my mind.
D49, obviously it doesn't matter what evidence you get since you've already made up your mind that it's a fraud. You've just blindly discounted evidence from NASA, so why would you accept anything else from other reputable science institutions like the National Academy, American Meteorological Society, American Geophysical Union, etc. ?
And I haven't seen you cite anything from these supposed credible opposing scientists. All I've seen from you is unsupported claims that contradict the science. So please give us this wealth of opposing science that refutes the AGW consensus. Remember, peer-review science only from reputable journals. No parroting of debunked climate myths from some non-expert blogs. Thanks.
D49, you're also blatantly wrong about climate models. Climate scientists have been well aware of solar irradiance and its effect on climate for many, many years. They don't discount it when doing their models. Ironically, I've seen climate deniers NOT use solar output in their models to show how CO2 has a poor correlation with surface temperature.