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 ...
Headlines Baby! That's all the sheeple need to read.
When I was a kid all of the science books were saying the earth was going to have another ice age..... we were all gonna die. Now its global warming and we’re all gonna die. We’re all gonna die someday... that’s the only part they have right. When it comes to global weather patterns... they’re clueless.
Bad things are going to happen soon, and it’s your fault. Really soon, or maybe later. But I promise you, bad things are coming. It could be warmer, it could get colder and then warmer, or it might just get really cold, but it’s going to be bad, and it’s your fault.
Why is it disturbing? CO2 has been increasing for the past 20 years while temperature has remained static. More to the point linear increases in CO2 can not produce linear increases in temperature. It is not a linear function but a logarithmic one. Any doubling of CO2 can only increase temperature by 1 to 2 degrees C. So relax, global warming is not what you should fear, we can adapt to that and the ice cores show it has never, ever run away. Glaciation? Now that is worth sh1tting your pants over.
Re: “what ever happened to the hole in the ozone?”
Filled up with CO2.
Translation: "We've been 100% wrong for 15 years but we assure you we will be 100% right in about another 5 and its gonna be even worse.
How does that differ from those who use the same argument to claim their refusal to vote against Obama were not stupid?
It doesn't. Nature produces about 200 and absorbs about 200 Gt. Additionally nature absorbs another 3-4 Gt which is part of the excess above equilibrium. But the estimates for nature are very rough (lots of unknowns).
Yes, there would be a rise in CO2 now due to the MWP centuries ago. But the deep ocean warming behind that process would not be more than 1C and the CO2 release would not be more than 10ppm (probably half of that). So MWP warming cannot explain the current CO2 rise of 120ppm and rising.
It is one of the uncertainties. But keep in mind that plant growth is seasonal and a lot of the CO2 is released. There will be more wood and other sequestered carbon but I think it is very poorly measured. The CO2 rise in the atmosphere is about half of what it should be given man's 30 Gt (CO2) per year. The rest is assumeed to be mainly in the ocean but could also be in increased woody plant growth.
Where do you go to get the data and information you trust?
OTOH I do not trust government sites for models or model outputs or other deriviative or predictive information. Probably polluted with politics.
Thank you!
Long term satellite survey ( last three decades ) indicates an increase of vegetation in warm arid regions worldwide as Co2 has risen.
Re: “About 5% but still nontrivial.”
I was using your data, up 120 PPM since the Little Ice Age.
I assumed it was up about 100 PPM in 2000, and the 22 PPM in the following decade brought it to about 120 PPM.
Re: “Hint, science won’t have to look for the cold. It won’t be hiding.”
“Best LOL Insight On This Thread”
Makes sense. I have read studies showing that higher CO2 lets many plants survive drought better.
Sorry I meant a rise of 120 since the Little Ice Age. From 280 to about 400 now.
Yes, that’s exactly what I thought you meant.
According to “Watt’s Up With That,” atmospheric CO2 went up 22 PPM from 2000-2010.
I was shocked to realize how much of the 120 PPM increase has appeared just in the last few decades.
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.