CO2 levels higher than any time in last 800,000 years

True believers like you are left with politics and personal attacks but not science. The CO2 hypothesis has already been falsified if you knew anything about how science actually works but this isn't about science for you, just a political side.

Failed tests include:
— that global cooling has occurred since 1998 despite an increase in carbon dioxide of 5%;

— the lack of detailed correlation between the carbon dioxide and temperature records over the last 100 years;

— consideration of cause and effect timing of past carbon dioxide and temperature levels in ice core records;

— the absence of the model-predicted temperature hotspot high in the tropical troposphere;

— the low sensitivity of climate to carbon dioxide forcing as judged against empirical tests; and

— the demonstrable failure of computer GCMs to predict future climate. …

 

Still trying to sell that story? Let me know when it starts cooling.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/03/updated-satellite-data-shows-more-warming/

[video=youtube;WX7aWsxe9yw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WX7aWsxe9yw[/video]

 

LOL, for one Mears just re-adjusted the RSS data to make it warmer. Mears is an AGW advocate and the RSS just wasn't showing enough warming so he left bad satellite data that he excluded before this time around.

There are also some misdirection there including the adjustments to surface data which has been massively adjusted, homogenized, guessed at, moved around, stations coming online or offline, again guessed at, and only covers 25% of the globe. One of the speakers even said 'instrument data gets in the way' which shoots the surface data all to hell. Pay attention to the ship bucket data. The recent 'adjustment' to the surface data was to match the ARGO (scientific) data to match the ship intake and bucket data, the alleged 'pause buster' data. It is a fact that there is great agreement between the satellite data and the radiosonde data.

Satellite data was considered the best data because of fewer adjustments and much better coverage until they showed the pause.

To say that NOAA satellite data is no good flies in the face of the facts. Getting a bunch of AGW advocates together without any counter to the propaganda is even worse.

 

There is no misdirection when the methods behind those adjustments have been published, reviewed and accepted by other climate scientists.

Satellites do not measure temperature, they measure the amount of microwave radiation emitted from a surface, and you cannot convert it to temperature without a baseline measurement. They are great for filling in the gaps between surface stations, but they still must be calibrated based on those same surface readings.

Get a bunch of climate scientists together and they will tell you with 97% certainty that global temperature is rising and that human activity is the primary cause.

 

Ground sensors also do not measure temperature directly, or didn't you know that. They measure resistance. You must agree with Karl et. al. that ARGO sensors designed for science are not as good as ship bucket temperatures.

 

Resistance temperature detectors are not only far more accurate and easier to calibrate than advanced microwave sounding units, they are also located where the temperature is being measured, not 22,000 miles above it.

You mean Karl et al 2015, Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus, which says:

and:

 

According to the CO2 hypothesis, the troposphere is where the warming is supposed to show first and because it hasn't, it is called the missing hot spot.

Yes, the disputed manipulation of ocean data where Karl et. al. adjusted the data, not to match the ARGO data which showed no warming but up to match the problematic ship engine intake and bucket data. If you know anything about ocean temperature recordings you would know that compared to satellite data, the sampling area is very very small. This came out just before the COP21 meeting and instead of explaining the hiatus just conveniently made it go away. Whistle blowers complained and there is an investigation.

 

Except it isn't missing. You really need to keep up with the science.

Sherwood & Nishant (2015):

Po-Chedley et al 2015:

Except Karl et al didn't make any adjustments to ARGO data. The correction was developed and applied in the Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature (ERSST) data set version 4, as explained in Huang et al 2015.

 

No explanation needed. Considering how climate alarmists have manipulated data, and flat out lied about it, you can hardly believe a word they say. Man made global warming is a fairy tale for grownups.

 

Sherwood is a known climate alarmist. Yes, they take radiosonde data and put in in a structural model, homoganize it, and voila, they get what they want.

From the University of Graz:

From John R. Christy and Roy W. Spencer:

More: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/...-criticism-of-the-uah-satellite-temperatures/

Patrick J. Michaels, Richard S. Lindzen, Paul C. Knappenberger

Just because someone wrote a paper doesn't make it fact. Most papers never stand the test of time.

 

There are more Ocean Water Heat Transference Currents than just the North Atlantic System.

The North Atlantic Heat Transference System has warm Gulf of Mexico Salt Water that flows around the tip of Florida and up North and some across to the U.K.....that water is LIGHT SALT WATER and it flows ON TOP of the much heavier and denser COLD SALT WATER that comes down from the Arctic Ocean.

Problem is the Cold Polar and Glacier FRESH WATER ICE MELT....is about the SAME WEIGHT as WARM SALT WATER.

When too much Cold Fresh Water is mixed in with the Cold Salt Water that is traveling SOUTH under the traveling NORTH...Warm Salt Water.....since the Cold Fresh Water is about the same weight and density as the Warm Salt Water....the 2 Currents STALL....as they now will WEIGH THE SAME....and the Cold Water no longer travels UNDER the Warm Water as too much FRESH WATER in the system screws everything up!!

No there are Heat Transference Currents all over the PLANETS OCEANS and at the SOUTH POLE....what is happening is the Warm Salt Water traveling SOUTH....is STALLING....when it encounters Cold Fresh Water melted from the South Pole....traveling NORTH.

Thing is when the Earth's Ocean Current Heat Transfer System STALLS.....and it HAS STALLED BEFORE IN THE PAST.....the Earth begins to slide IMMEDIATELY INTO AN ICE AGE!!!

Usually the North Atlantic Current fails first and as this has happened in the past the results were an ICE AGE in a matter of a VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME!!!

So short that Woolly Mammoths were found with mouthfuls of Green Grass and Flowers in their Mouths and Stomachs indicating they were FLASH FROZEN as they were grazing in flowers and grasses in Siberia and Alaska in the Spring where temps. existed at 42 Degrees F.....and then the Temps. DROPPED TO -150 Degrees below zero F....in MINUTES!!!

This was a 192 DEGREE F. TEMP. DROP IN MINUTES....in order for these Woolly Mammoths to be PERFECTLY PRESERVED with mouths and stomachs full of Green Grasses and Colorful Flowers!!!

This is how the last ice age came ROARING IN!!

And it was a result of the North Atlantic Current STALLING....as Temps. back over 100,000 years ago were VERY WARM and high in CO2 and CH4 Methane Gas.....and the Earth being a SELF CORRECTING SYSTEM....as it is thought the massive amount of CO2 in the atmosphere back then was caused by massive Volcanic Activity which allowed the CO2 to increase Ocean Temps. which resulted in CH4 Methane Gel to bubble up as CH4 Methane Gas which holds heat in the Earth's atmosphere 72 TIMES GREATER THAN CO2.... to the point most of the Polar and Glacier Ice Melted resulting in STALLING THE NORTH ATLANTIC HEAT TRANSFERENCE SYSTEM....RESULTING IN AN IMMEDIATE ICE AGE!!!

AA

 

There are lots of ocean thermal currents, but they only move heat from one part of the globe to another, they do not change the overall heat content of the planet. Atmospheric CO2 is trapping heat which otherwise would have radiated back into space. That is why it can cause global mean temperature to increase.

You're apparently talking about the Berezovka mammoth, which was likely buried in a landslide, then preserved when permafrost froze the carcass.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mammoths.html

 

It is the OCEAN TEMPS. that we must concern ourselves with.

The Earth's Oceans basically regulate Air Temp. and when Ocean Temps. increase just a degree or two....this causes the massive amounts of CH4 Gel or Methane Gel which exists at the bottom of all of Earth's Oceans, Seas and Arctic Lakes as well as trapped in Permafrost to BUBBLE UP AND OUT AS METHANE GAS.

This is what is happening NOW.

CH4 or Methane Gas holds heat in Earth's atmosphere 72 TIMES GREATER THAN CO2.

AA

 

I agree that it is the AVERAGE ocean temps which we must be concerned with, and that it is rising significantly. Ocean currents are important for understanding the local effects of climate change, but we're not in danger of being flash frozen or boiled any time soon. That doesn't mean that current temperature trends are not dangerous, since most of the plant and animal species we rely on are not as adaptable as we are.

 

New paper: "ocean dominates the planetary heat budget and takes thousands of years to equilibrate" to alleged AGW

Nonlinearities in patterns of long term ocean warming

- - - Updated - - -

New paper shows there was a global warming hiatus this century

 

I never said we would be flash frozen or boiled.

I am saying that IF.....and right now it is more a question of WHEN...the North Atlantic Heat Transference System and other Heat Transfer systems STALL.....we will be heading into an ICE AGE.

It has happened before....and it will happen again.

AA

 

Our lake ice went out this past weekend. We have live here for 21 years and the earliest the ice has ever gone out is one month from now, the middle of April. Last year, we had 100 inches of snow in February to the middle of March, the most snow ever in these months. The sign of climate change is not one or another. It is the extremes of weather events and the unpredictability. We have just set records on both ends of the spectrum.

 

Yes.....as I was posting back to a few members who were saying that there was more snow covering more area of Antarctica this past year than ever before....I explained that snow fall was indeed covering area but the VOLUME of Antarctic Pack Ice was dramatically and quickly decreasing.

Global Warming puts more water vapor into the Atmosphere thus more snow fall but this snow is light and not the dense Ice Pack that was melting quickly and it did not equal even 1/1,000,000th of the amount of ice that was being lost in a single month.

AA

 

Last year's snow fall was indeed very light. Even though it was deep, we had one of the driest springs with very little run off. It was as you say.

 

My appologies. When you said that temperatures had "DROPPED TO -150 Degrees below zero F....in MINUTES" causing Woolly Mammoths to be "FLASH FROZEN as they were grazing", I was under the impression that you thought this would happen again if the North Atlantic Heat Transference System shut down.

 

I totally agree with you. When you consider that temperature is only a proxy for the energy in a given system, increasing mean surface temperature tells us that there is more energy in Earth's climate system, which will lead to more extreme weather. Even the blizzards in the Northeastern US the last couple of years required energy to form as they did.

 

In the winter, it manifest itself with a greater temperature difference between the Warmer ocean waters and the cool air from the north. Our dirt road actually had less frost accumulation, even with these colder storms because of the low moisture content. Lot's of good skiing for a short time, but the snow literally evaporated rather then create much ice and water run off. It was a strange year. This year's winter, it's just warm and dry. The deer ticks are taking over it seems. Migration north of some species with corresponding losses of others is mother nature's way of telling us what is happening.

 

Due to the sun and wind driven El Nino.

 

Sure, that accounts for the last five years. Not the last 40 years. Nor does it account for the last 1000 plus years where tree and growth ring studies yield similar events.....nor the migration patterns which from fossil remains have never occurred before.........all of science agrees, not just those in climate related fields.
Keep letting Faux feed you their false science based on fossil fuel greed.


Funny, one of the most elaborate studies on climate change was done by scientists from the energy corporations who agreed decades ago. Then when the plans for dealing with it did not coincide wth their ledger sheets, they and the GOP switched gears. They used to believe in climate change till their pocketbook was involved.

 

Of late again, oOil corporations are now back on board.

"Big Oil on emissions and climate change in 2012
Below are some quotes from the big four oil companies’ websites:

Exxon: "Rising greenhouse gas emissions pose significant risks to society and ecosystems."

Shell: "…CO2 emissions must be reduced to avoid serious climate change. To manage CO2, governments and industry must work together. Government action is needed and we support an international framework that puts a price on CO2, encouraging the use of all CO2-reducing technologies."

BP: "According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), warming of the climate system is happening and is caused mainly by the increase in greenhouse gas emissions and the increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Results from models assessed by the IPCC suggest that to stand a reasonable chance of limiting warming to no more than 2˚C, global emissions should peak before 2020 and be cut by between 50-85% by 2050."

Chevron: "At Chevron, we recognize and share the concerns of governments and the public about climate change. The use of fossil fuels to meet the world's energy needs is a contributor to an increase in greenhouse gases (GHGs)—mainly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane—in the Earth's atmosphere. There is a widespread view that this increase is leading to climate change, with adverse effects on the environment."