Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right

97% of Actively Publishing Climatologists.

 

I don't want the currently existing plants and animals to go extinct?

 

You are free to use the beliefs of people living in the dark ages to help guide your opinions today, but I would not recommend it.

 

Has the average global temperature increased over the last 50 years?

 

Since the end of the Little Ice Age.

 

Does the warming trend from the last 50 years differ in any way from the rate of warming seen since the end of the Little Ice Age?

 

So what? Over the course of the past 1 billion years, it's not really all that different nor is it really unique.

Earth at one time had no ice caps, you know that, right? Life still survived, lived, bred, etc, etc, etc.

 

As for other previous climates, I don't want to live in a climate with no polar ice caps. It is something I would very much like to avoid.

I do not worry that climate change will eliminate Life. I worry that climate change will eliminate Life as I know it.

 

Which is a subset.

 

Don't care. I'll be gone way before that and so will you.

 

We're living in the dark ages compared to people who may live a thousand years from now. They'll judge our beliefs as archaic just as you do now for those who believed in what I said previously.

 

Not enough data to arrive at a conclusion either way.

 

Same trend as from 1900 to 1940’s.

 

Did the Little Ice Age end in 1900 or something?

 

No silly, he gave you another range of data to compare. Next try 1850 to 1900. Oh wait, you can't as there's no data...

 

The trend for Central England has been .026 c/decade since the end of the Little Ice Age according to HADSET and according to HADCRUT4 for Central England it has been .001 or virtually zero increase.

 

...Central England? That's the limit of your effort to evaluate the Average Global Temperature?

 

If you can't get data from 1850-1900 (and you can, but whatever), then there is zero way that he could argue the warming trend from the last 50 years is the same as the warming trend since the end of the Little Ice Age.

 

For the lower troposphere, UAH found a global average trend between 1978 and 2019 of 0.130 degrees Celsius per decade.[2] RSS found a trend of 0.148 degrees Celsius per decade, to January 2011.[3]

In 2004 Fu et al. found trends of +0.19 degrees Celsius per decade when applied to the RSS dataset.[4] Vinnikov and Grody found 0.20 degrees Celsius per decade up between 1978 and 2005, since which the dataset has not been updated.[5]

 

The following chart is from NASA data of combined land-surface air and sea-surface water temperature anomalies.

Years Temperature anomaly, °C (°F) from 1951–1980 mean Change from previous decade, °C (°F)
1880–1889 −0.274 °C (−0.493 °F) N/A
1890–1899 −0.254 °C (−0.457 °F) +0.020 °C (0.0360 °F)
1900–1909 −0.259 °C (−0.466 °F) −0.005 °C (−0.00900 °F)
1910–1919 −0.276 °C (−0.497 °F) −0.017 °C (−0.0306 °F)
1920–1929 −0.175 °C (−0.315 °F) +0.101 °C (0.182 °F)
1930–1939 −0.043 °C (−0.0774 °F) +0.132 °C (0.238 °F)
1940–1949 0.035 °C (0.0630 °F) +0.078 °C (0.140 °F)
1950–1959 −0.02 °C (−0.0360 °F) −0.055 °C (−0.0990 °F)
1960–1969 −0.014 °C (−0.0252 °F) +0.006 °C (0.0108 °F)
1970–1979 −0.001 °C (−0.00180 °F) +0.013 °C (0.0234 °F)
1980–1989 0.176 °C (0.317 °F) +0.177 °C (0.319 °F)
1990–1999 0.313 °C (0.563 °F) +0.137 °C (0.247 °F)
2000–2009 0.513 °C (0.923 °F) +0.200 °C (0.360 °F)
2010–2019 (incomplete) 0.733 °C (1.32 °F) +0.265 °C (0.477 °F)

 

I don't suppose that it will effect you, but your assertion is, in fact, inaccurate. Further, it represents only 30% of respondents of publications not the whole population surveyed as represented, by you. So, you're factually in error continuing to write this assertion. Again, I doubt it will stop you from claiming this erroneous fact, but at least the rest of us will be aware...

 

Do you know how many studies have been conducted and independently reach the ~97% claim?

Also, if you need an education about Statistical Sampling or Margin of Error, I would be happy to walk you through the concept.

 

He never learn...

 

I suppose that it doesn't matter that those studies simply verified the original claim, from Cook et al that derived it, and have subsequently said that yes, in fact, those ~30% or so of respondents did, at ~97% agree with the sentiment. It does not, however, not refute what I have written than the other 70% of studies reviewed, or opinions generated did not, in fact support the sentiment. I know, you didn't know this, and now that you do, it likely still won't matter cause... I don't know... "feelz",, or some other BS...

 

What you have is a tiny limited set of data, not even a global one. There were no weather stations in most of the world to record temperature. Prior to the advent of flight most weather stations were in ports. After the advent of flight most airfield start recording weather data but even then you didn't have enough coverage to accurately measure temperature trends. Only with the advent of satellite that we can get global coverage and recording. So no, you don't have enough data to say that man is the cause for global rise of temperature, especially since we all know that the earth was both colder and hoter before the advent of man.

Also, while CO2 is a greenhouse gas, metane and plain old water are even worst greenhouse gas.

https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/...cenarratives/its-water-vapor-not-the-co2.html