No global warming at all for 1. Yet the 2. 25 months since then show no global warming at all.
What is Global Warming and Climate Change? Global warming and climate change refer to an increase in average global temperatures. Natural events and human activities are believed to be contributing to an increase in average. Explore Earth's Kids Climate Change & Global Warming What Everyone Should Know. And What Each of Us Can Do About It. We On February 17, 2005 Scientists at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography reported that. The farm animal sector is the single largest anthropogenic user of land, contributing to many environmental problems, including global warming and climate change. An analysis of meat, egg, and milk production. The effects of global warming include effects on human health. The observed and projected increased frequency and severity of climate related impacts will further exacerbate the effects on human health. This article describes.
Prompt action can slow global warming and reduce some of its impact. Time to push back against the global warming Nazis February 20th, 2014 by Roy W. Learn how disease threatens native wildlife. Disease is a normal part of the natural world. Most ecosystems include organisms such as viruses, bacteria, fungi and parasites that cause disease. Climate change is a global reality. Extreme weather events are taking a toll on the daily lives of people around the world. If climate change is already fueling powerful storms, long-lasting droughts and more frequent floods.
Yet the 2. 25 months since then show no global warming at all (Fig. The least- squares linear- regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean surface temperature anomaly dataset shows no global warming for 1.
February 1. 99. 7, though one- third of all anthropogenic forcings have occurred during the period of the Pause. The accidental delegate from Burma provoked shrieks of fury from the congregation during the final benediction in Doha three years ago, when he said the Pause had endured for 1. Now, almost three years later, the Pause is almost three years longer. It is worth understanding just how surprised the modelers ought to be by the persistence of the Pause.
NOAA, in a very rare fit of honesty, admitted in its 2. State of the Climate report that 1. Professor Richard Lindzen. But, despite the very substantial forcings in the 1. February 1. 99. 7, not a flicker of warming has resulted. Figure 1a: Models predict rapid initial warming in response to a forcing.
Instead, no warming at all is occurring. Based on Roe (2. 00. At the Heartland and Philip Foster events in Paris, I shall reveal in detail the three serious errors that have led the models to over- predict warming so grossly.
The current el Ni. The RSS temperature record is beginning to reflect its magnitude. From next month on, the Pause will probably shorten dramatically and may disappear altogether for a time.
Lovelock, on BBC TV, slams the global warming claims including those of of the United Nations climate panel. And a whole group of them meet together and encourage each other’s guesses.' Lovelock was once.
However, if there is a following la Ni. The start date is not cherry- picked: it is calculated. And the graph does not mean there is no such thing as global warming. Going back further shows a small warming rate. And yes, the start- date for the Pause has been inching forward, though just a little more slowly than the end- date, which is why the Pause continues on average to lengthen.
So long a stasis in global temperature is simply inconsistent not only with the extremist predictions of the computer models but also with the panic whipped up by the rent- seeking profiteers of doom rubbing their hands with glee in Paris. The UAH dataset shows a Pause almost as long as the RSS dataset. However, the much- altered surface tamperature datasets show a small warming rate (Fig. The least- squares linear- regression trend on the mean of the GISS, Had.
CRUT4 and NCDC terrestrial monthly global mean surface temperature anomaly datasets shows global warming at a rate equivalent to 1. C. Merely because there has been little or no warming in recent decades, one may not draw the conclusion that warming has ended forever. The trend lines measure what has occurred: they do not predict what will occur. The Pause . 3), on the one hand, and the observed outturn, on the other, continues to widen. If the Pause lengthens just a little more, the rate of warming in the quarter- century since the IPCC. Near- term projections of warming at a rate equivalent to 2. Predicted temperature change, January 2.
September 2. 01. 5, at a rate equivalent to 1. In a rational scientific discourse, those who had advocated extreme measures to prevent global warming would now be withdrawing and calmly rethinking their hypotheses. However, this is not a rational scientific discourse.
The New Superstition is no fides quaerens intellectum. Key facts about global temperature. These facts should be shown to anyone who persists in believing that, in the words of Mr Obama. This is well within natural variability and may not have much to do with us. The fastest warming rate lasting 1. It was equivalent to 2. C. The IPCC had predicted close to thrice as much.
To meet the IPCC. It is as simple as that. Technical note. Our latest topical graph shows the least- squares linear- regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean lower- troposphere dataset for as far back as it is possible to go and still find a zero trend. The start- date is not . Instead, it is calculated so as to find the longest period with a zero trend. The fact of a long Pause is an indication of the widening discrepancy between prediction and reality in the temperature record.
The satellite datasets are arguably less unreliable than other datasets in that they show the 1. Great El Ni. Thermometers correctly sited in rural areas away from manmade heat sources show warming rates below those that are published. The satellite datasets are based on reference measurements made by the most accurate thermometers available . It was by measuring minuscule variations in the cosmic background radiation that the NASA anisotropy probe determined the age of the Universe: 1. The RSS graph (Fig.
The data are lifted monthly straight from the RSS website. A computer algorithm reads them down from the text file and plots them automatically using an advanced routine that automatically adjusts the aspect ratio of the data window at both axes so as to show the data at maximum scale, for clarity. The latest monthly data point is visually inspected to ensure that it has been correctly positioned. The light blue trend line plotted across the dark blue spline- curve that shows the actual data is determined by the method of least- squares linear regression, which calculates the. Professor Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia recommends it in one of the Climategate emails.
The method is appropriate because global temperature records exhibit little auto- regression, since summer temperatures in one hemisphere are compensated by winter in the other. Therefore, an AR(n) model would generate results little different from a least- squares trend. Dr Stephen Farish, Professor of Epidemiological Statistics at the University of Melbourne, kindly verified the reliability of the algorithm that determines the trend on the graph and the correlation coefficient, which is very low because, though the data are highly variable, the trend is flat.
RSS itself is now taking a serious interest in the length of the Great Pause. Dr Carl Mears, the senior research scientist at RSS, discusses it at remss. Dr Mears. Output of 3. IPCC models (turquoise) compared with measured RSS global temperature change (black), 1. The transient coolings caused by the volcanic eruptions of Chich. The headline graph in these monthly reports begins in 1.
Fig. Graphs for RSS and GISS temperatures starting both in 1. For each dataset the trend- lines are near- identical, showing conclusively that the argument that the Pause was caused by the 1.
Nino is false (Werner Brozek and Professor Brown worked out this neat demonstration). Curiously, Dr Mears prefers the terrestrial datasets to the satellite datasets.
The UK Met Office, however, uses the satellite data to calibrate its own terrestrial record. The length of the Pause, significant though it now is, is of less importance than the ever- growing discrepancy between the temperature trends predicted by models and the far less exciting real- world temperature change that has been observed. Sources of the IPCC projections in Figs. The executive summary asked, . For the rate of global warming since 1. This will result in a likely increase in global mean temperature of about 1 C.
The rise will not be steady because of the influence of other factors. For values consistent with other estimates of global temperature rise, the numbers below should be reduced by 3. IPCC. Historical warming from 1. IPCC. To reach the 1 K central estimate of warming since 1.
That is not likely. But is the Pause perhaps caused by the fact that CO2 emissions have not been rising anything like as fast as the IPCC? No: CO2 emissions have risen rather above the Scenario- A prediction (Fig.
CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, etc., in 2. Le Qu. T4), for methane emissions, though largely uncontrolled, are simply not rising as the models had predicted. Here, too, all of the predictions were extravagantly baseless. The overall picture is clear.
Scenario A is the emissions scenario from 1. CO2 emissions outturn. Figure T4. Methane concentration as predicted in four IPCC Assessment Reports, together with (in black) the observed outturn, which is running along the bottom of the least prediction. This graph appeared in the pre- final draft of IPCC (2. IPCC did not want to display such a plain comparison between absurdly exaggerated predictions and unexciting reality.
To be precise, a quarter- century after 1. In fact, the outturn is visibly well below even the least estimate. In 1. 99. 0, the IPCC. Then it was 2. 8 C/century equivalent. T5 shows, even that is proving to be a substantial exaggeration. Is the ocean warming? One frequently- discussed explanation for the Great Pause is that the coupled ocean- atmosphere system has continued to accumulate heat at approximately the rate predicted by the models, but that in recent decades the heat has been removed from the atmosphere by the ocean and, since globally the near- surface strata show far less warming than the models had predicted, it is hypothesized that what is called the .
Plainly, the results on the basis of a resolution that sparse (which, as Willis Eschenbach puts it, is approximately the equivalent of trying to take a single temperature and salinity profile taken at a single point in Lake Superior less than once a year) are not going to be a lot better than guesswork. Unfortunately ARGO seems not to have updated the ocean dataset since December 2. However, what we have gives us 1. Results are plotted in Fig. The ocean warming, if ARGO is right, is equivalent to just 0.
C. The entire near- global ARGO 2 km ocean temperature dataset from January 2. December 2. 01. 4 (black spline- curve), with the least- squares linear- regression trend calculated from the data by the author (green arrow). Finally, though the ARGO buoys measure ocean temperature change directly, before publication NOAA craftily converts the temperature change into zettajoules of ocean heat content change, which make the change seem a whole lot larger. The terrifying- sounding heat content change of 2. ZJ from 1. 97. 0 to 2. Fig. T6) is equivalent to just 0.