Error in major climate study revealed – warming NOT higher than expected

That retort makes no sense

In part because murder is almost as old as dying of natural causes

Climate change otoh has always been natural

 

Doesn't mean it is natural this time. Or that humans have not contributed to it.

CO2 is, demonstrably, a greenhouse gas. The prevalence of it in the atmosphere has increased from about 285 parts per million in 1800 to over 400 ppm today. Those are facts.





Most people who deny the science do so because they don't like the policies that are suggested as a consequence of the science. I also wonder whether the fact that it was Al Gore who produced "An Inconvenient Truth" is a factor. Republicans didn't like Gore, so rejected anything he said.

I prefer to divorce the policies from the science. The science overwhelmingly concludes that the planet is warming because of our use of fossil fuels. That is something that everyone who accepts the scientific method should accept. What to do about it - that is a different question. But concern about the policies should not be a reason to deny the science.

 

republicans need to work to find solutions, not nit pick if a t was crossed or a i was dotted as proof the other side is lying, evil, whatevers

I have no issue with you deciding to give birth or not to a baby when it's your womb.... just like it's your choice to give up a kidney, not the governments choice to take it from you and give it to someone else to save their life

 

It's accurate if the predictions are correct and the neglect continues.

 

Where did the article state that they were still over-estimating?

 

Very true. Fortunately C02 is not a contaminate

 

The story is that the planet is warming at an exceptional rate never seen before and the error shows this is not true and we are warming at roughly the same rate we have been since the last ice age ended.

 

Sure. How about their predictions that Himalayan glaciers that are actually growing as we speak would be gone by 2030.

 

Inspiring words that we should base energy and economic policy policy on.lmao

 

As the OP shows we are not warming at a pace "never seen before" which is the false fact your theory revolves around so your theory is moot. We are warming at roughly the same rate we have been since the ice age ended and no competing theory is necessary to validate that real fact. Pack your bags and go home, the AGW party is over.

 

Who made the prediction that Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2030?
Link, please.

And who says they are growing? Everything I have found says the opposite.
https://lcluc.umd.edu/hotspot/glacial-retreat-himalayas

 

I would ask several things there. What is the right temperature? Is it the same for everywhere? And if not, why not? Yes, CO2 is demonstrably a green house gas. And so is H2O, in fact which has a much greater impact, doesn't it. So which is it? Science, or politics here.

Do you know why folks ridicule Al Gore? Is it because his lifestyle and his preaching are so fundamentally dissonant? When he jets around the globe, can you justify this waste he creates and then reconcile that with the tyranny he would impose on the rest of us? Folks don't hate Al because he's a democrat, they despise him because he's such an obvious hypocrite. And what is worse, you'd support the guy. I think it indicates a certain level of conspiracy here. Like somehow, you believe that because you're on his side that his tyranny won't effect you. Like somehow you fit neatly into that "chosen" status so often found in religious faith. That seems a smidge disingenuous then.

The problem with the vast majority of the science we have that attempts to describe the atmospheric dynamics of our world is so immature. It wasn't all that long ago that doctors thought that using leaches was an appropriate treatment. We are ever thankful that medicine matured. And someday, our science may improve in trying to describe our climates.

 

A kidney is an organ in the human body not the human being itself

Children who are killed in the womb have a kidney of their own

 

Troublesome Karakoram glaciers getting bigger, new study suggests


"Despite the global temperature increase and the overall shrinking of the world's glaciers, some glaciers in the Karakoram mountains have actually grown over the past decade, according to a new study.


Channi Anand
US where, according to a 2011 Harris Poll,public belief in manmade warming dropped from 71 percent in 2007 to 44 percent in 2011.

This research, led by glaciologist Julie Gardelle of the University of Grenoble, has confirmed suspicions about the massive glaciers in the Karakoram Mountains along the border of India, Pakistan and China. The researchers analyzed satellite images of a 2,168 square-mile area, and found that the glaciers are not losing ice, but probably gaining it. The study's results were recently published in Nature Geoscience.

"Though scientifically intriguing, the scientists involved in this study are wary of the political impact of these results; especially in light of the2007 snafu involving the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s mistaken assertion that the Himalayan glaciers would be eradicated by 2035, and the damage to the credibility of the IPCC’s otherwise robust body of research."

https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2...am-glaciers-getting-bigger-new-study-suggests

 

The left has to dramatize the man-made-global-warming hoax as part of the hustle

If they can convince us that we face utter catastrophe if we dont do something NOW then they can take control over our lives without firing a shot in anger

 

Its not accurate

But if the left plans to use violence against “Deniers” then labeling them as terrorists is the logical next step in the escalating war of words that libs are waging I suppose

 

Which has only ever been the point of all of this.

 

So some glaciers in one specific region may be growing (not certainly, just "probably" according to your story), whereas most Himalayan glaciers are receding rapidly.
And yes, the IPCC got it wrong over a decade ago.
None of that changes the fact that the earth is warming.

 

What a stupid comment and wholly false accusation.

 

Many people actually believe the man-made-doomsday-global warming hoax

They are victims of the bullshit as well as purveyors of it themselves

Some people really are convinced that civilization as we know it is going to end thanks to the use of fossel fuels

And actually far more than a few

So in some ways they just cant help themselves

 

As it has been since the last ice age and not at some record pace which is what The AGW bunch has been saying for years. The OP shows that is wrong just as were predictions of a glacier free Himalayas by 2035.

 

The error found in the OP is really a bombshell that blows the foundation out from under the entire AGW hypothesis which revolves around the false "fact" that the earth is warming at a rate never seen before. This is effectively the end of the global warming hysteria it at least should be.
Looking back you have to wonder about all these peer reviewed papers. If this obvious error was missed by so many for so long it begs the question of if all these papers actually were reviewed or were they just rubber stamped and shoved along by scientist with an agenda?

 

Not if libs choose to ignore their own facts

 

Hard to let go of something that is just part of who they are at this point. Without global warming they will be ships at sea with a broken rudder.

 

This isn't correct. Arctic sea ice has been in a secular decline. You can view the raw data here.

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/seaice_analysis

Al Gore certainly made the claim. But, he's no scientist. And 2013 isn't even remotely close to what the scientific consensus was predicting.

Yes. You were wrong.

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/seaice_analysis

And if your strategy is to cherry-pick a starting point that was low and an ending point that was high to justify your error then you'll have to agree that I am equally allowed to do the same thing in reverse. Right? So if you want to play this game we can. But, fair warning. It's going to a lot more fun for me than it is for you,.

Well yes. That is the point; at least one of them. Science in general is about making predictions. And climate science is no different.

You're being a merchant of doubt here. You twisting the context of "settled" to fit your ideology. I could use the same strategy you are using here to say general relativity isn't settled science because it can't explain what happens in a black hole. I could use the same strategy to undermine just about anything in science actually. It certainly works on some people. But most of us are on to the ruse.

That doesn't make any sense. Someone else found the mistake. The original authors were notified, acknowledged it, and then corrected it.

https://judithcurry.com/2018/11/06/a-major-problem-with-the-resplandy-et-al-ocean-heat-uptake-paper/