Oh dear  ;D


No Statistically Significant Satellite Warming For 23 Years (Now Includes February Data)


https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/detrend-0-199-3.png

In the above graphic, the green line is the slope since May 1993 without consideration of error bars. When including error bars, the range could be as low as zero as indicated by the blue line. It could also be an equal amount above the green line as indicated by the purple line.


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/07/no-statistically-significant-satellite-warming-for-23-years-now-includes-february-data/

Quote:

Myth One: There has been a pause in global warming Nope, the Earth continues to warm strongly. NASA, NOAA, the IPCC and a long list of other trusted organisations have confirmed that yearly global average temperature continues to climb. 2013 marked the 37th year in a row that the yearly global temperature was hotter than average. 13 of the hottest 14 years have occurred this century. The Earth continues to warm strongly which is why we keep seeing long standing temperature records broken. 2013 was the hottest year on record in Australia. Therefore it is misleading to say that there has been a "pause" in global warming. What fuels the myth that global warming has "paused" is that the rate of air temperature rise does fluctuate in the short term. In recent years the rate of air temperature rise has been slower. This is not unusual in the longer-term temperature record. Sometimes air temperature rises quickly and sometimes more slowly. It is crucial that we look at the long-term trend. The long-term trend is that temperature is rising. Each calendar year will not necessarily be warmer than the year before. But with the current level of greenhouse gas emissions, scientists expect each decade to be warmer than the previous one. The other aspect is that when most people think about climate change they only think about rising air temperatures. In fact the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases warms the air, the ocean, the Earth’s land surfaces, and melts ice and glaciers. The ocean is the big ticket item as 93% of the warming since 1955 has been absorbed by the world's oceans. In fact, the oceans have warmed strongly since 1998 - the year that the so-called "pause" began. Those seeking to mislead the public seek to cherry pick one part of the Earth’s system and short periods of time to imply that global warming has paused. Unfortunately media articles often state that there is a pause in warming, rather than referring to the fluctuation in the rate of air temperature rise. The reality is that the Earth continues to warm strongly with grave implications for humanity.

https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/pause-in-warming-debunked

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/alfred_e_neuman_2hbg_2.jpgMutually Assured Destruction indeed  :o

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 6:58pm:

In fact, the oceans have warmed strongly since 1998 - the year that the so-called "pause" began.

But according to CO2 theory, the heating should be accelerating, not merely "warming strongly".

According to NOAA, one of thise "trusted organisations" 1997 was "(t)he global average temperature (was) of 62.45 degrees Fahrenheit "

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/199713

2015 - "the average global temperature across land and ocean surface areas for 2015 was 0.90°C (1.62°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F)"  I.e 58.62°F

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201513

So comparing those two historical facts from the one organisation - global temperatures have increased by minus 3.83°F

lee wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 7:48pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 8th, 2016 at 6:58pm: In fact, the oceans have warmed strongly since 1998 - the year that the so-called "pause" began. But according to CO2 theory, the heating should be accelerating, not merely "warming strongly". According to NOAA, one of thise "trusted organisations" 1997 was "(t)he global average temperature (was) of 62.45 degrees Fahrenheit " https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/199713 2015 - "the average global temperature across land and ocean surface areas for 2015 was 0.90°C (1.62°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F)"  I.e 58.62°F http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201513 So comparing those two historical facts from the one organisation - global temperatures have increased by minus 3.83°F

According to what theory?

::)

Global warming is a Religion not a science. Everyone complains about the weather but no one does anything about it. Now we have a group of Zealots who think they can. It is all about governments finding a new way to tax and control populations.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 7:56pm:

According to what theory?

You know the one. CO2 cause the warming of the troposphere, the stratosphere, the oceans.


polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 6:58pm:

In fact the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases warms the air, the ocean, the Earth’s land surfaces, and melts ice and glaciers. The ocean is the big ticket item as 93% of the warming since 1955 has been absorbed by the world's oceans.

hmmm...

I'm sure Henny Penny said that Global Warming was real... !!!  :D :D :D :D

The Science is in...  :D :D :D :D

What other aspect of scientific concencus do you not agree with  Gravity ?

Dustwun wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 9:10pm:

What other aspect of scientific concencus do you not agree with  Gravity ?

The Garudian have dropped "The Consensus - the 97%"

I guess they ran out of CON.

lee wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 9:20pm:

Dustwun wrote on Apr 8th, 2016 at 9:10pm: What other aspect of scientific concencus do you not agree with  Gravity ? The Garudian have dropped "The Consensus - the 97%" I guess they ran out of CON.

I was actuality a gravity wave denier until recent.

“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.”

― Michael Crichton

lee wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 9:50pm:

“I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had. Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.” ― Michael Crichton

It really is that simple isn't it, but why do so many consensus supporters want to hijack science, for political reasons maybe?

There is nothing wrong with having a firm belief in man made global warming, the real problem is claiming its scientifically proven, we must defend real science, without it we have nothing, we cannot allow real science to be hijacked by others for financial and political reasons. 

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Apr 8^th, 2016 at 9:04pm:

hmmm... I'm sure Henny Penny said that Global Warming was real... !!!  :D :D :D :D The Science is in...  :D :D :D :D

Good of you to quote a chicken, Mechanic.