Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right

U.S. Leadership and the Historic Paris Agreement to Combat Climate Change

President Obama and Xi Jinping Take Big Step on Climate Change Ahead of G20

There is also a report about Obama barging into a meeting on the final day and getting everyone to hammer out the final details of the Paris Accord, but I'll have to circle back to finding that one later. Got a toddler to deal with.

 

There is a saying in science. All models are wrong. The idea of basing policy on a least likely/worst case scenario computer model is simply insanity.

 

Yep, Obama was great at giving away money for foolish things.

 

LOL Nothing in those links prove China, and the rest of the world, are signatories to the Paris Climate Accord explicitly because America did something about man made climate change.

Is that why you couldn't quote them Legal?

This isn't a ragu commercial. You don't throw links out then claim the evidence is there, somewhere.

Either quote where it did specifically what you claimed or admit your mistake.

 

You are invited to actually click on the link of the paper to discover which computer models were studied.

 

If you want to make the argument that actively publishing climatologists are likely to be substantially different in their opinions regarding climate change as compared to the non-actively publishing climatologists, that is your burden to bear. It does not make the 97% fact any less important though.

 

Fact is basing projections on a cherry picked staring point is more misdirection. If you have not been following this, and you haven’t, you can be fooled by an article.

 

No sport its your burden since you are the one claiming the number has meaning for your argument.

 

Paris Climate Accord is not lip service.

It is an extremely significant step on the way to addressing Climate Change. You can argue that it does not go far enough and you would be correct, but a first very significant step is still very significant.

 

I did not think I needed to explain that an international agreement on climate change is doing something about climate change.

 

Nah.

 

Well that depends on who is allowed to be published. If you don’t follow the dogma, publishing is less likely. Fact is, only older scientists that no longer rely on employment or position are the ones speaking out against the destruction of science happening with the politicization of climate science.

 

Which models did NASA study?

 

Any chance those folks get their money from fossil fuel organizations?

 

Wrong. It was only a feel good message that had no teeth and still allowed any country to do what it wanted, of course with your taxpayer dollars.

 

And there is the conspiracy lunacy that accompanies every accusation against inconvenient science.

Scientists that push the dogma are pure as the driven snow.

Scientists that provide inconvenient science are to be vilified.

Thanks again for proving how little you know about what is happening in climate science.

 

ROFL

It wasn't, it was all lip service.

 

It's not anything.

Yes lip service.

It's a bunch of government's jerking each other off. Not sure how that does anything.

 

"Proven actual numbers" is your example of "actual physical evidence" that would qualify to you as proof for those challenges?

 

About 360 million years ago, there was something called the Carboniferous Period. Can you explain why there was a sudden cooling off that caused a mass extinction event? There were no humans around at that time, so what happened? Why were oxygen levels so much higher at that time?

Do you understand geological time, geological era's and how silly it looks to think we can measure "global climate" starting in the late 1880's?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...it-walk-away-from-the-paris-climate-deal.html

 

Have you ever heard of the false choice fallacy? You are essentially arguing that either humans had to be the cause for every climate change or they can never be the cause of climate change.

In regards to your specific question, the late Denovian extinction event from ~360 million years ago was actually a series of extinction pulses that occurred over the course of 500,000 years up to roughly 25 million years. The causes were probably volcanoes and asteroids.

Neither asteroids or volcanoes explain the current warming trend.

Also, my understanding is that climatologists generally agree that data over 30 years is sufficient to identify the climate.

 

I am basically proving your study is garbage because climate change has been happening in many forms for many many reasons over the course of the billions of years that the earth has been able to sustain life.

There is a lot more to it than just asteroids or volcanoes. Things like shallow seas caused by plate tectonics, glaciation, Sun (gradually increasing) insolation and weather patterns had a huge effect upon oxygen and C02 levels as well as temperatures.

The "current warming trend" is not all that unique. In fact, the earth at one time didn't even have polar caps.

Besides, your real argument and something worth championing is actually plastics in the world oceans. If that is not cleaned up and brought to a quick end, we could really do some serious damage to the population and the resources we vitally need. But The Paris Agreement isn't going to help that. People actually cleaning and stopping heavy plastic use will have to be the answer.

 

I absolutely agree with the need to address plastics.

You are not disproving the study from the OP at all by discussing other possible explanations for the current warming trend. All of the reasons you mention - do any of them explain the current warming trend?

That warming trend, by the way, is moving at roughly 100x faster than the rate of warming seen after the end of the last ice age. That is why it is unique. Or at least unique in the absence of an asteroid or massive volcanic eruption. And I see zero reason to think it will suddenly reverse without coming up with some way of capturing greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere.

As for other previous climates, I dont want to live in a climate with no polar ice caps. It is something I would very much like to avoid.

 

Southern California is getting more rain than I can remember since 1985 when I moved here..........keep the warming coming.