All which was falsified a months later when NOAA was forced to admit that it was infilling data with non-existent, zombie, stations and that we haven't warmed in the US since the 30s.
You looked it up on a site the lies. Harries 2001 is an old study. Harries did a more complete study in 2007 and didn't find the dimming in the CO2 band. The reason Harries got a dimming was because the 2001 study sampled only 2 summers the first of which was during one of the strongest la ninas ever recorded the second during the strongest el nino ever recorded. The dimming in the CO2 band is actually just dimming due the ENSO effect on water vapor in the pacific in those respective years, nothing more. The liars at SS know this. That is why they chose to use the 2001 study and not the more accurate 2007 in an article they wrote in 2009. They use the out of date study because it paints a better picture and they know that their readers are gullible enough to fall for it.
Global warming is a propaganda campaign to enact carbon credits. Corporate giants will use carbon credits to monopolize business to the point where small business will be eliminated and only Mega Corporations will be left. Take carbon credits off the table and the whole global warming controversy will disappear overnight. It is ironic how the so called progressives are in fact just the puppets of the Mega Corporations who they claim to hate. If you want to find the truth in any controversy, just follow the money...
Amazing isn't it? Progressives believe the "data" which is produced from studies financed by "corporations" who have a vested interest in gaining market share by use of carbon credits to make small business impossible. I have not seen a scam like this since the corporate / government cartel convinced women that they were being "liberated" by working a 40 hr. week on top of doing everything else they still had to do and then jacked up the cost of living so that it required 2 incomes just to survive. In one move the corporate / government cartel nearly doubled the workforce increasing tax revenue and putting downward pressure on wages and creating a much larger credit market.... you have to hand it to those guys, they are scary good at what they do.
Invasive species that thrive in a new environment? So what? Global warming is utter progressive leftist absolute control mechanism and its solution is 'carbon credits' not science or reducing pollution. Its a political Ponzi scheme and only suckers buy into it.
Link, please. Also, we're talking about GLOBAL warming, not just the U.S. even if you are correct (which I seriously doubt). In the meantime, I found this nifty article for you to maybe, just maybe, learn something. Enjoy. And then wonder who's been lying to you.
You don't know what's been going on, do you? Especially why warmer weather can lead to more winter wet stuff. Or affect the jet stream. Which could cause some serious cold. Might want to look into that.
This is more a matter of Transportation and import of invasive species than Global Warming. Might as well blame Pythons in the Everglades on climate change as well.
The pythons and kudzu are two entirely different situations. I also refer you to the last part of the OP: This isn't anything new. There have been a lot of changes due to the warming. While some have been good, most have not and will get worse.
Since it has been getting cooler in the US, how is that possible? Also, since 01 the alleged global temperature decadal trend has not changed. Check it out yourself on NOAA using 2001 and decadal trend. Check out June. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-s...ase=10&firsttrendyear=2001&lasttrendyear=2014 The USA has been cooling in the 21st century at a rate of -0.09F/decade (-0.05C/decade).
Well, yes it has been getting warmer in the U.S. I suggest you look at temps over a 12 month period instead of picking one month. Results in a very different graph. Anyway, what happens here is immaterial because GLOBAL climate change is what we're talking about. But thanks for the link. Will come in handy.
Dumb, dishonest OP article includes proselytizing by an obviously biased, partisan source. Even without the truly slight increase in temperature over time, kudzu would thrive and spread just fine at the exact same rate, because even the baseline prior temperature would support such invasive growth. Source in the OP dishonestly slides in a global warming religious platitude where such is neither appropriate nor accurate. Once again, the left conflates science with politics towards promoting the scholasticism of the leftist religion.
We are talking about GLOBAL climate change if you cared to review the graph from the NOAA. Picking any month on a decadal scale and it show either no warming or insignificant cooling or warming. Picking a 12 month period is ludicrous for a decadal scale. This poses a serious problem for the politically driven IPCC. You can't say 20th century warming is caused solely by CO2 when there is no warming in the 21st century with even increasing CO2. There have been a host of such rescue attempts post CO2 prediction for no warming, that Chinese coal burning is causing the pause, that the Montreal Protocol caused the pause, that volcanic aerosols caused the pause, that a slow down in Pacific trade winds caused the pause, and on and on. What this means is that the models are wrong and they are in trouble. How can you prove the IPCC is politically driven. Look at the 95 IPCC and it is clear. Draft: After sending the drafts to governments for review, this is what shows up in the final: In my more than 60 years as a member of the American scientific community, including service as president of both the National Academy of Sciences and the American Physical Society, I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report. A comparison between the report approved by the contributing scientists and the published version reveals that key changes were made after the scientists had met and accepted what they thought was the final peer-reviewed version. ~ Frederich Seitz
Whatever. I guess the answer is you pick whichever scale seems to make your point, but that's really not the whole picture, is it? Sorry. That supposed statement of fact ... isn't. And I don't believe I or anyone said global warming is due SOLELY to increases in SO2. Sure. As new data is received, it must be accounted for. That, dear friend, is science. And the truth is that there are many causes but you cannot walk away with the actions of people on the current situation. Is that the 1995 IPCC and if so, what relevance does it have today, almost 20 years later? There have been mountains of evidence accumulated and integrated since then, regardless of what they said or didn't say.
The politically driven IPCC has not changed since it's inception. It has total relevance especially now that the observational science does not match the IPCC predictions. - - - Updated - - - LOL, we are talking about Kudzu in the US or did you miss that?
OK, got it. The world's scientists (or at least the vast majority) who contribute to the subject of climate and climate change are little but a politically driven pack of hacks engaged in a massive conspiracy to dupe the governments of the world into spending money and ruin hard working businessmen. That may be a bit of an oversimplified statement, but how close am I? If not at all close, then we can discuss why some scientific predictions don't come true and others do, particularly in those sciences which are just beginning to be understood. - - - Updated - - - ?? Do tell.
Which is only a problem in the southeastern US, and according to your own link it has been warming 0.2°F per decade since 2001.
You can look up the NOAA "correction" yourself. What is this we? You are the OP. You made the original post that was talking about kudzu growth in the US, not the globe. Is that not your OP? Do you deny what you wrote in your OP? Your OP was solely about US temperatures and kudzu growth in the US. You were trying to US and the US alone as evidence of global warming where you not? Now with your feet to the fire over the inaccurate statement about US temperatures in your own OP you are trying to change the subject of your OP in an argument that is a blatant and intellectually insulting to others lie. Its time for your to leave your own thread. Your current posts are an embarrassment.
