Global Temperature Trends From 2500BC to 2040AD:
Posted on 07/16/2024 10:15:24 PM PDT by pigeoninthepark
So I was thinking recently about how the man-made climate change promoters discuss the topic like a proven fact on the scientific level. I then remembered what the scientific method involves:
1. Ask a Question 2. Do Background Research 3. Construct a Hypothesis 4. Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment 5. Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion 6. Communicate Your Results
Notice step 4: "Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment"
Has this ever been done? Every time I see this topic pushed around as fact, I never ever hear about tests on any scale being done to back up their argument. Obviously we cannot make a perfect replica of the earth on any scale, but I have never even heard of one test done in a lab, or some greenhouse experiment using plants, lights and carbon, or even some computer simulation. Maybe I am wrong and there have been tests done, but if so then why have I never heard of these?
Many brilliant scientists have concluded that global warming is a farce but if people want to believe it and commit stupid it’s all up to them
I am one of the maverick climate researchers referred to earlier ... and I have available very large data sets going back as far as reliable data goes back (in most cases, the mid-19th century, in a few cases, a bit further).
No doubt there has been a warming trend since 1980 in most northern hemisphere data (not all), more variable trends in southern hemisphere.
The main question is to separate out potential natural variability causes from increasing greenhouse gas and its contributions. Those who do not subscribe to party line science usually have in mind some division like 70-30, 50-50 on those factors, reducing the magnitude of the human contribution. Very few active researchers still believe all observed change is natural variability.
Another key question is, will these warming trends stop, or even reverse, at any point in this century? If so, why? There have been pauses in the warming trends, 1990 to 2006 saw faster warming, another spike took place around 2015-16. This leads to another poorly resolved variable, El Nino which acts as a global warming mechanism and is a key component of the stronger warmings mentioned. Linking El Nino to any outside variable in any cause-and-effect relation (even solar variations) has proven to be notoriously difficult.
It leaves us with another set of similar difficult questions, will El Nino events change in frequency and if so, in what direction? A climate with few and weaker El Nino events will likely cool or at least stabilize against an ongoing weak human modification signal.
As to the politics based on whatever science is accepted (the key word, not proven, but accepted) ... that also is full of unresolved questions such as whether or not it is worth enduring predictable social and economic stresses to achieve negligible results. At this point, even if all fuel-driven cars and planes were removed from usage, greenhouse gas levels would only drift down very slowly over decades. If the trend is towards a 50-50 mix of fuel and electric, an almost identical result will occur.
I don’t view the science as entirely bogus but more like inflated or distorted. And my social and political conclusions are along the lines of preferring mitigation to control, it will be cheaper, easier, and flexible to include acceptance of positive results of warming.
The related stuff about more frequent severe weather is closer to being bogus and contradicts evidence easily available. The points made about displaced polar vortices are ridiculous and laughable because the same people claim that what we must do is to make the world cooler, and then they cite occasional cold waves as a problem. If their science were sound and they succeeded, they would return the climate to a 19th century balance where severe cold waves were commonplace and frequent. So their arguments make no sense. The displaced polar vortices, if we are causing them, are what will bring about a cooler climate if we can increase their frequency. I don’t personally believe their cause and effect explanations and figure the “polar vortex” events would have occurred in exactly the same way they did, regardless of our technological level or presence on the planet. Our modification is basically an ongoing increase in overnight temperatures, an increase in cloudiness as jet contrails spread out, and basically a blanding effect on the atmosphere. If anything, we are creating more placid weather that is increasingly boring to the minds of most weather enthusiasts out there. This is the opposite of the party line and the cognitive dissonance factor is increasing.
If I remember right, in the 70s, they were saying we were headed for another ice age. I guess that didn’t get much traction, so maybe they decided to try global warming.
My short internet search on “bttt” came up with a big fat zero,
so if you would like to tell me what it is that you were trying
to say, that would be great (-:
There is no way to test the GW theory, and that is why they chose carbon as the evil element to control us! And it, science, is NEVER over, settled, finished, especially when there are so many factors involved that affect the outcome.
This is about power, not the climate. It is about making us give up our rights voluntarily for what is being sold as the common good in a communistic lie.
This is the politics of peer pressure propaganda, to propagate power plays against our individual constitutional rights.
Galileo Galilei and Nicolaus Copernicus went against the established “settled science” ...
The scientific method is NOT being applied to climate change by the rabid left, while at the same time those rabid leftists are claiming to represent “science”.
The lies of the left used against the truth in the name of control are never ending.
Their lies have to be called out.
bttt=back to the top. It puts the story (thread) back to the top so people just logging on will see it. Also some will type bump , for bump up my post to the top.
this climate change business is meant to establish a brow beating priesthood who preach a salvation of denial, tax-tithing, and forever subjugation for an adjusted target level plus one.
People don’t realize that cows are not the only ruminants on this planet. Over 100 years ago, millions of buffalo roamed the plains, very likely more than all the cows now being raised here by farmers in the US combined. And that doesn’t include elk, deer, goats, and moose.
Nor is the US the only country losing native ruminants.
Animals That Are Ruminants
https://www.animalwised.com/animals-that-are-ruminants-206.html
“Types of ruminant animals
The different types of ruminant animals that exist can be divided into the following families:
-Antilocapridae: native to North America. Although similar in appearance to antelope, they are related to giraffes.
-Giraffidae: giraffes and okapis.
Cervidae: a rather varied group that includes, moose, reindeer or caribou, white-tailed deer, muntjac, red deer and roe deer, among others.
-Bovidae: includes domesticated animals such as cattle, buffalo, bison, antelope and goats.
-Moschidae: here we find species known as musk deer.”
“Notice step 4: “Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment””
With the best scientific technology on the planet, the best the warmageddon scientists can come up with is, “could cause” a catastrophe. “Could” means they don’t know.
However, in the name of science I propose the following.
1. Israel & Egypt collaborate and pick a spot in Sinai for a new Palestinian homeland.
2. Israel along with other countries leverage their technology and build the new Palestinian state as a “100% green” country. This means all infrastructure, vehicles, and other materials used are only green.
3. The UN moves to the new Palestinian country to show global unity around this historical moment in history.
5. Palestinians from around the world move to the new Palestine.
6. Dignitaries from around the world come to the new Palestinian country to celebrate the ribbon cutting of the new Palestine and laud the new “Green Country” as the model for the rest of the world.
Then, nuke the place from orbit just to be sure.
Joe Bastardi of WeatherBell is NOT a global warmingist.
He says the factor driving the warming oceans is undersea volcanoes. And is ticked that nobody is considering that in the global warming scam.
“Obviously we cannot make a perfect replica of the earth on any scale,”
Actually we can..sort of.
Mars is smaller than earth but has a land area close enough (no oceans). The suns rays are less powerful there,but during the martian summer the surface temperature reaches 25 C at midday. The atmosphere, though thin, is 93% CO2, but at night it does not hold any heat. It all radiates away. in absolute terms there is 10X the amount of CO2 as there is on earth. in the thin atmosphere we still fly a helicopter there.
No discernible greenhouse effect to see on mars.
Global Temperature Trends From 2500BC to 2040AD:
Took me years to figure that one out. What I concluded was that it puts the thread back at the top of the comments or activity if you are scanning articles by comment instead of *Activity* or *Comments* instead of *Article*.
It’s the tabs right under the awesome picture of Trump and the FReepathon update.
It’s fear mongering by the left to scam more money and more restrictions and regulations out of we the people.
They don’t have to be scientific. They use the ‘media’.
Now, anyone who deals with data or statistics or simulations etc. understands that forecasts come with errors, and that some models are just Bad. For people in this line of work, that’s life. We learn, fix, correct, dust ourselves off, then try again. This is how inquiry and discovery works.
However, one element of this discussion was that unspoken, was that there was a “consensus” that the planet will warm 1-2 degrees C unless “we do something.” Thus, these hot models are not just a problem because they don’t tow the Party Line, but they may cast doubt on the whole practice of temperature forecasting.
I am open to the possibility that it’s gotten warmer over the past few summers. In the Northeast this has been the case. Further, while some of the winter storms have been nasty, snowfall hasn’t been as massive as it was in the past. There are views that can be validated factually. Parenthetically, it is also likely that we had a 1-in-a-50-year storm system pass this past winter - that’s not due to global warming. That is nature.
But to jump from hotter summers and less winter snow to “the government must stop you driving your ICE car and make you become a vegan” is Crazy Talk. THAT kind of “science” which is really Political Science is what causes people to go to their corners.
bttt
This is good data. Thank you.
In the Northeast where many of us live, we are having a warm summer. I greet these events like I do a mass shooting…prayers for the impacted and bracing for the politics of the matter.
I would like for the temperature to go above 85 without facing an assault on my being a carnivore or driving a gas -powered car.
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.