Global Quackery: Earth Has Not Warmed For Past 19 Years, New Study Finds

Another nail in the coffin to the conspiracy theory called global warming by humans. Will the far left blame this on Trump as well? Will there finally be some sanity brought in that the science is indeed not settled?


For former president Barack Obama, the ever-changing and often contradictory "facts" about global warming (which liberals now call climate change because the globe stopped warming) was simply "settled science."

But now it turns out the Arctic sea ice is thicker than ever and, oh yeah, the global temperature trend has not warmed for 19 years. That's right -- 19 years!

The Telegraph newspaper in the UK has published a fascinating article detailing data from the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI).

Ever since December temperatures in the Arctic have consistently been lower than minus 20 C. In April the extent of Arctic sea ice was back to where it was in April 13 years ago. Furthermore, whereas in 2008 most of the ice was extremely thin, this year most has been at least two metres thick. The Greenland ice cap last winter increased in volume faster than at any time for years.

As for those record temperatures brought in 2016 by an exceptionally strong El Niño, the satellites now show that in recent months global temperatures have plummeted by more that 0.6 degrees: just as happened 17 years ago after a similarly strong El Niño had also made 1998 the “hottest year on record”.

This means the global temperature trend has now shown no further warming for 19 years. But the BBC won’t be telling us any of this. And we are still stuck with that insanely damaging Climate Change Act, which in this election will scarcely get a mention.


http://www.dailywire.com/news/16154..._content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro#

 

Obama Uses Private Jet, 14 Car Convoy to Get to European Climate Change Speech

It seems like Obama has taken a page out of Leonardo DiCaprio's book of “do as I say, not as I do” and took a private jet to Milan. Not only that, he had a 14 car convoy to get into the city, which also included protection from above with a helicopter.

During his post-presidency vacation, Obama spent many weeks in French Polynesia on music mogul David Geffen's 450ft superyacht, which surely does not frugally sip fossil fuels like he wants the rest of the country to do.

http://ijr.com/2017/05/867816-obama...ar-convoy-get-european-climate-change-speech/

They're Algorites - they're entitled.

 

What you normally won't hear in the press is the "promise" by the UN to reallocate trillions of dollars of capital to emerging economies. This global welfare is premised on the "rich" countries paying taxes against something and transferring this wealth to the emerging economies so they can actually grow and prosper. Which, frankly seems to undermine the taxation of CO2 as the progress in the emerging economies only further exacerbates the production of more CO2. Which is why it isn't being brought into the discussion because it completely undermines the Global climate change conversation.

 

The melting ice in Greenland, Arctic and Antarctic is an illusion?

 

If one truly buys into man made global warming then surely they don't use electricity or drive cars. Surely they don't eat food that wasn't produced by themselves from their own yards. Surely they aren't selfish enough to use electronics on a daily bases.

 

The smartest move is to buy land at least 300 feet above sea level and then relax.

The ice caps will either melt or not melt. Nothing we do will change that.

 

For the neutral observers in this thread, understand that what the OP is doing is attempting to rely on one arbitrary trend line in order to debunk the analysis of actual experts in the field. Consider this analogy:

Let's use the most recent Super Bowl. At the end of the game, the Patriots won 34-28. However, if you merely used the data from the first half, you would see the Falcons winning 21-3. In the second half (and OT), the Patriots outscored the Falcons 31-7. I can draw several trend lines in that data to establish just about any narrative that I want.

And that is what is going on here. 2014 was the hottest year on record until 2015 came along. 2015 was the hottest year on record until 2016 came along. The last 10 years have been the hottest 10 years on record. The last 20 years have been the hottest 20 years on record.

But instead of looking at all the data, the OP wants you to focus on one specific point from 1999 and compare that to one specific point today. Do not fall for this basic trick.

 

Oh dear, what will the eco-socialists do now about their Global Warming/Climate Change/Global Climate Disruption hobby horse - come up with a new euphemism?

Once again, let's thank the UN's former Warmer Chief for her unusual fit of "progressive" candor:

 

Ice melts. Make it unique and you might have something. As it is, the actual extent of ice in the Arctic this year is well within the norms, and frankly undermines all the hyperventilation about it's imminent demise. Greenland ADDED more ice this year. The Antarctic ADDED ice extent this year.

You seem to have run out of hyperbolic topics of conversation.

 

We are in a short warm period between 100k year long glacial periods and you find ice melting when it is warm unusual? Go figure.

 

So you have no evidence its false. Got it.

And this is hardly the first study to debunk your religious beliefs on global warming.

 

I never said your evidence or report is false. I said that it is misleading and irrelevant.

And I know that there are more studies which dispute (not disprove) Global Warming. They make up approximately 2-3% of the peer reviewed articles published on this subject.

 

When are you referring to, the time during the Roman era that they melted, or the Viking period where they also melted?

 

One Ben Shapiro right wing nutcase article and the opinion of 90% of climate scientists, nasa etc don't count?
False equivalence - it's like having an evolution debate between 2 people and implying they have equal weight.
Omg just realized 60% of Americans believe in evolution!!!

 

And probably 100 % of trumpies!!

 

Those Romans and Vikings must have been some carbon producin fools.

 

No one cares about your opinion if you have no evidence to support it.

Of course it does. Can't wait for you to back up that fabrication.

Ah another far left winger who thinks his religion of global warming is ok but others who believe in God are nuts. How deliciously hypocritical.

 

~97% of actively publishing climatologists accept the basic tenets of AGW and there are zero recognized groups of national or international scientists which maintain a dissenting opinion.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Opposing

#RealNews

 

97% acknowledge that climate change happens, and that man has some effect on climate change.

That 0.8 degree change in the last 150 years is gonna kill us in, oh, ten thousand years maybe.

 

Hush up, with all the people they killed, those funeral pyres add up.....

 

Is there someone who believes in global warming who has said we must immediately stop doing those things? We need to minimize the impact of them but we aren't yet at a point where all that activity must stop.

 

First, kudos for acknowledging the consensus.

As for the warming, the primary problem that you have here is that you assume that the warming is linear. The amount of pollution has accelerated in the later half of the century and the impact of positive feedback loops also poses a risk of drastically accelerating the warming.

 

No. There is no proof that there is a linear relationship between CO2 and global temperature.

CO2 levels and global temperatures clearly do not show a linear relationship.

 

I said actively publishing climatologists in my post. #LearnHowToRead

But when you sample ~4200 out of ~15000, you get a margin of error of 1%. So ~97% of all climatologists is still accurate as well. #LearnStatistics

 

Sea rise is already affecting US coastal cities.

http://reports.climatecentral.org/atlantic-city/sea-level-rise/