Why is it Polar bears having to swim long distance and cracks in ice makes the front page, but we see nothing of raw scientific data that casts doubt on the AGW theory?
Additional Details
1 week ago
Satelite data shows that since 1998, the peak of El nino the earth has cooled slightly. If you take 2002 as your reference point the temperature has been static. Do you think those awesome computer models or AGW proponents predicted this. It sure doesn%26#039;t compliment their theory. Some have said natural factors have overwhelmed the CO2 factor. Is %26quot;waffling%26quot; a scientific term?1 week ago
Bob. Did not the UN itself acknowledge the apparrent stall in the warming in the last decade?1 week ago
Marohasy: %26quot;Actually, no. The head of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has actually acknowledged it. He talks about the apparent plateau in temperatures so far this century. So he recognises that in this century, over the past eight years, temperatures have plateaued ... This is not what you%26#039;d expect, as I said, because if carbon dioxide is driving temperature then you%26#039;d expect that, given carbon dioxide levels have been continuing to increase, temperatures should be going up ... So (it%26#039;s) very unexpected, not something that%26#039;s being discussed. It should be being discussed, though, because it%26#039;s very significant.%26quot;1 week ago
To the believers. It%26#039;s not so much that the cooling is significant. It%26#039;s the fact that according to your theory it should be warming significantly. It is not.1 week ago
And Bob, The temperature data from the last hundred years is not very convincing. The cooling in the mid twentieth century does not compliment your theory. And if like you say you look at long term data sets, those that show the MWP and others before it is even less convincing.* You must be logged into Answers to add comments. Sign in or Register.
Other Answers (14)
-
careful you%26#039;ll anger the cult! but seriously why would the UN accept it? It%26#039;s obvoiusly a distraction from our real problems [wars,econmey,dieseases.ect] also going green generates billions of tax dollars for ANY nation, also AGW was thought of by a man who has no degree in science what so ever and if you remember he said anyone who doubts AGW is stupid[not the true words but its what he meant] so thats many scientests even the guy who owns the weather channle! the one person who would most likely know alot about the climate! why would the gov.s want you to know about, our other problems also 52% of our[in the USA] econmy is based off of medicine? so its also taking away valubal time and money that could be used to cure theese deseiases[cancer %26amp; aids for the most part] so its turning our[USA%26#039;s] time and money away from making the medicines that support our econmy as you can see with stocks contiung to drop. so see its all for money as always
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabled...
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/rese...
http://www.remss.com/pub/msu/monthly_tim...
To use the data, first %26#039;save as%26#039; and open in Excel using %26#039;fixed width%26#039;.
Have some fun comparing these to CO2 emissions from Mauna Loa.
http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/data/mlo.html
Data from other CO2 sites are to be found here.
http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/data/data.htm...
there%26#039;s a piece of Antarctica that seems cooler.
that does seem the exception, however.
We%26#039;re still warming. -
Answer hidden due to its low rating
Your %26quot;cooling%26quot; is based on one unusually warm year. The past decade has been essentially the warmest on record--so much for the cooling idea.