We're burning up.
The other 96% came from natural events.
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
More propaganda from the climate change crowd who must explain why their climate models are not working and why we have had close to two decades without any global warming. Pure BS,
That’s the ticket.
They never let being 100% wrong stop them from predicting dire consequences if we don’t all get rid of our cars and start living like third world peasants, cooking and heating with fires made from dried animal dung. Well, not ALL of us, just the people who don’t believe in globull warming.
The world doesn’t conform to our theory. Therefore the world is wrong.
I'll bet the Canadians would love to be a major exporter of fine wines again.
internal variability = Constipation
3.5% to be exact. But nature's 200 Gt per year gets reabsorbed in the spring and summer and man's 7Gt is all output. Therefore the increase in CO2 in atmosphere that is being observed is 100% manmade.
Another way to look at it, were the CO2 rise natural, it would amount to 5-10 ppm due to the warming after the Little Ice Age. Instead we have gone from 280 to 400 and rising. For that to be natural, there would have be a 10-12C ocean warming within the last few centuries or so. That's not at all plausible.
Today I was talking to another person that I know voted for Obama twice, they have all said the same thing. “ all politicians are evil, both sides are no good”. In other words I am not willing to say that my votes for Obama were stupid.
In other words, assuming our models are correct, it had to be natural variability. Therefore, our models are correct.
Oh, and of course, IT’S WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT!
That would be Michael Mann, inventor of the fraudulent Hockey Stick, wouldn’t it? Yeah. Thought so.
...computer models...phttt...
There is not one that has been shown to be accurate.
Show me one that if you plug-in the data from the year 1900
that it will predict the year 2000 data.
It does not exist.
So, as the article states, they take the predictions
from over 100 computer models and average the results.
How does averaging 100 “wrong answers” yield a “right answer”?
“Scientists now know”
Uhh if they’re so certain, then why do they use these words and phrases???.
may persist
it appears
good chance
odds that
whenever
could mean
could occur
this all suggests
very possible
could continue
we expect
Proof that the article is regurgitated propaganda. There's no point in paying attention to anything the article says.
Liberal sponsored genocide called by a more benevolent sounding name will eliminate us much sooner than global warming or climate change does.
The largest fraud ever perpetuated.
Blaming CO2 (.04% of atmosphere) for catastrophic climate disrution that is not happening.
If you want something to worry about, we’re overdue for an Ice Age.
Figure out how to survive that.
Warm I can deal with, freezing, not so much.
The earth has spent more of its billions of years covered in ice than like it is now.
Sun cycles. When the source of all of our heat cycles down, we get cold. Sometimes very cold. Imagine Chicago under 5 miles of ice.
The much beloved and non=controversial Michael E. Mann is the second author on the article!! I have a feeling that it will not take long for the flaws in this Science article to emerge. One clue is that it took 6 months for it to get accepted.
Headline couldn’t be more inaccurate and misleading.
The real problem is going to be if there is any period of warming these people will really go crazy and ruin society even more.
Isn’t it interesting how idiots like Obama give speeches and tell crowds how they are experiencing first hand the effects of warming? When the whole point of this article is why there hasn’t been any warming.