tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post809150474166228498..comments2024-02-29T00:46:38.800-08:00Comments on Washingtons Blog: World Temperatures Did Not Rise from 1998 to 2008, While Manmade Emissions of Carbon Dioxide from Burning Fossil Fuel Grew by Nearly a ThirdUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-78124619474331018322011-07-08T10:46:29.957-07:002011-07-08T10:46:29.957-07:00Indeed, the first sentence of the scientific artic...Indeed, the first sentence of the scientific article reads:<br /><br />Given the widely noted increase in the warming effects of rising greenhouse gas concentrations, it has been unclear why global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and 2008.<br /><br />But if you would read the second and third:<br /><br />We find that this hiatus in warming coincides with a period of little increase in the sum of anthropogenic and natural forcings. Declining solar insolation as part of a normal eleven-year cycle, and a cyclical change from an El Nino to a La Nina dominate our measure of anthropogenic effects because rapid growth in short-lived sulfur emissions partially offsets rising greenhouse gas concentrations.<br /><br />...you would understand that the apparent lack of global warming from 1998 (which was an exceptionally hot year) to 2008 is explained by 1) the solar activity decreasing (as a part of the 11-year cycle of the sun), 2) the exceptionally strong El Niño of 1998 fading, and 3) the short-lived sulphur emissions in China temporarily masking the man-made global warming – indeed, 2010 was the hottest year in recorded history. Solar cycles and El Niños come and go, and as they swing the other way, we'll get a spell of really fast warming.Harri Haanpäähttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03671671400518889533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-40064284457931337072011-07-08T08:09:41.623-07:002011-07-08T08:09:41.623-07:00This whole debate hinges on climate sensitivity. T...This whole debate hinges on climate sensitivity. There is a large body of evidence pointing to a value of 3 +/- 1.5*C, and a handful of papers pointing to lower values, most of which take a narrow data band to work with. <br /><br />It is up to the sceptics to try to avoid refutation of their low CS value.DocRichardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08903964792092284406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-30591304560881383912011-07-05T23:50:08.328-07:002011-07-05T23:50:08.328-07:00Amazing how you quote practically the whole articl...Amazing how you quote practically the whole article except this bit:<br /><br />"Subsequent years have still included nine of the top 10 hottest years on record, while the U.N. World Meteorological Organization said 2010 was tied for the record."<br /><br />Funny how the world can be getting hotter and not getting hotter at the same time.<br /><br />And why is that? Why do they choose 1998?<br /><br />"A peak in temperatures in 1998 coincided with a strong El Nino weather event, a natural shift which brings warm waters to the surface of the Pacific Ocean every few years."<br /><br />But...<br /><br />"Natural cooling effects included a declining solar cycle after 2002, meaning the sun's output fell."<br /><br />So, let's wrap up the WHOLE story shall we?<br /><br />In 1998 a record El Nino drove global temperatures into record high territories. By 2008, we had an almost unprecedented solar cooling effect among others and yet last year was TIED with 1998.<br /><br />Clearly if you subtract the natural variability, temperatures HAVE increased.Karmakazehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12476162430367956026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-30638026195306000542011-07-05T22:20:59.325-07:002011-07-05T22:20:59.325-07:00Well said!
But the facts and science are irreleva...Well said!<br /><br />But the facts and science are irrelevant. This is a political matter aimed at India and China. They will emit massive CO2 as they equalize with the west. It may be a convenient subtext for WAR!<br /><br />In the meantime, it will be eventually used to justify trade barriers. If the pols still have control by then. Since they are incompetent they will soon be changed.Fungus the Photo!https://www.blogger.com/profile/14879977479841544025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-11773510245408578302011-07-05T15:54:36.740-07:002011-07-05T15:54:36.740-07:00Please get in a fight with Max Keiser about Anthro...Please get in a fight with Max Keiser about Anthropogenic Global Warming.<br /><br />I would like to see that.<br /><br />I would like to see him lose that.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08607172324979900707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-85883958001057116772011-07-05T13:53:25.279-07:002011-07-05T13:53:25.279-07:00The sun. The sun. Hey look up there it's the S...The sun. The sun. Hey look up there it's the SUN, and it's responsible for cooling and warming. Right now it's cooling...we even know the mechanism for it. Less solar activity means more cosmic rays, which means more high clouds, which means COOLER temps. Higher solar activity mean fewer cosmic rays hit earth which means few clouds which mean warmer temps.<br /><br />Sulfur and carbon make acids that cause acid rain...but their effect on global temp is negligible compared to the SUN. Solar physicists and other guys that can do math tend to disagree with the gas emissions theories of climate change...Crewton Ramone's Blog Of Mathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07368472360048802880noreply@blogger.com