Earth Is Heating Faster Than We Realized

So warming in one place supplants CO2 increases with cooling over the globe?

 

Well, for one, I don't know how a study from 2007 could predict ice loss by 2000. And your link does not say what the other headline says other.

 

Nobody has linked to that blog in this thread. I have linked to papers, which are mostly ignored by the true believers as is much of the information given but instead we get silly name calling like you do.

 

That's right because the news went out that the models did not predict enough loss. The ice free nonsense came from the science circles and now we have two years of 60% growth in ice.

 

You called someone out for linking to a "cartoonist" website, but deny that your fellow acolytes link to the most prominent climate denier blog? Spare me your righteous indignation. I honestly haven't read much of the OP, let alone whatever you're linking to, I just popped in and saw what I posted about. I'll take a look in the morning, but seeing as I've never read one honest argument from any AGW denier on this forum, I'm not expecting much.

 

Global Sea Ice has recovered to the mean. That wasn't supposed to happen.

 

Link?

So you are suggesting that scientists spend a decade (or more) in school to do fake research and get fake results to get more grants to do more fake research just so they can go on living a middle class lifestyle?

 

Righteous indignation? Seems to me you are being the righteous one here by bringing up something that hasn't happened. Since you ignore the science presented here, I doubt you will ever expect much if it does not fit your world view.

 

Link to that claim?

 

Ask yourself why the skeptics are the older and more experienced scientists that don't rely on grants to have a job anymore.

- - - Updated - - -

Sigh, if you are not even aware of what is going on in Climate Science, why are you even on this thread?

 

It's ironic that someone who has to jump through mental hoops of increasing magnitude to keep up the charade of a global climate change conspiracy is accusing me of motivated reasoning. I'm not frantically grasping at straws in a feeble attempt to dispute every new climate change development.

 

Lol. Silly. Plenty of climate scientists are older. I ask myself why people trust the words of a few who make claims that are not based on research and deny the research and conclusions of tens of thousands of scientists that have been researching this for decades

.Are you implying that anyone who relies on grants has unreliable research? Because that means almost ALL research is unreliable for ALL factions of science.

Another interesting thought here, I guess you are implying that it is the government who wants research to favor climate change. Does that mean that republican administrations such as Reagan and the Bushes were in on it too? Climate change research has been around for a long time. And also all the other world governments have also been in on this too? Climate change research isn't unique to America.
- - - Updated - - -

So that is a no on the link? Does that mean you do not have one? See it's easy for you to make a claim without context and no one to vet the validity.

 

Care to provide some context for that?

 

What is ironic is that there is no critical thinking about a paper, the OP, that adjusts measured temperatures based on models.

 

I assume the :"60%" figure comes from this.

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ep/09/climate-change-arctic-sea-ice-delusions

While there is indeed less melt then the record breaking 2012 season, that does not mean that sea ice is recovering in anyway. We are still waaaay down.

This figure is quite accurate, I hope it works.

 

Did you read the study? They took both direct and satellite temperature readings and compared them with models. It wasn't just adjusted models that determined the results.

http://www.newscientist.com/article...ming-faster-than-we-thought.html#.VDNrSfldVXO

 

As a Theist...… I personally attribute this to the mercy/ grace of a being/beings/Being composed of fundamental energy who have invested an astonishing amount of energy and "time" into this four dimensional space- time continuum!

www.CarbonBias.blogspot.ca/

.... but...… sheer area of ice is not as important as the altitude of the ice and where that altitude of ice happens to be at exactly?!

http://www.habtheory.com/1/101.php

 

No warming for 18 years so far.

 

we adjust the poorly constrained Southern Hemisphere observed warming estimates so that hemispheric ratios are consistent with the broad range of modelled results.

 

Forgive us if we don't believe people who say they can fix global warming if we just give them more money to study it. Unless any of the sky is falling crowd have found a new viable fuel source to oil, what exactly do you expect to occur? One volcano can put out more CO2 than man ever has, this has happened since the Earth formed and will occur long after man is a forgotten spec in the timeline. The ground you are sitting on is in motion, the earth is in motion, the solar system is in motion, the galaxy is in motion, the universe is in motion. Only a fool expects the earth climate not to change. The Sahara was once a lake, now ....not so much, was that big oil? No. What happened? Animals adapted or died. Same as we will do.
If you really want to do something about it, I would begin with the Earths growing population. Leftists give prizes to women who have multiple children in order to keep them on assistance. Those children will most likely grow up and produce an increasing carbon footprint. Instead we focus on banana peels in the trash dump. (which by the way produces methane which can be used as clean burning fuel where water vapor and CO2 are the by product. In a compost it produces CO2 anyways without the fuel benefit)
Now what is the new fuel source lefties have found that can run tractor trailers across the globe?
Also, you are using an internet system powered by coal fired electricity. Shouldn't you stand by your principles and not use the internet? If not I guess its do as I say not as I do right?

 

You are making an assumption that the climate scientists that are skeptical of the IPCC and computer models are not based on science.

- - - Updated - - -

Global - of or relating to the whole world; worldwide.

 

All this back and forth BS is worthless and pointless. If indeed the warming crowd is correct there is absolutely nothing we can do to prevent it. If instead the denial crowd is correct, we have nothing to worry about.

Either way this is little more than a frustrated Circle Jerk.

 

Did you read the study? They adjusted the measured readings based on a computer model.

 

You should probably find something written after 2004 on this.

 

Still overall this past year is in the top rank of hottest years recorded.