Soooooo, where is the Warming?

[Strange Brew]

I hope any Muskies in Ida's path have been able to evacuate.

Stay safe down there.

Agree but what does it have to do with this thread?

[Strange Brew]

An excellent piece in the WSJ, written by one of my favorite economics writers, Greg Ip. Link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/ipcc-cl...ts_pos1&page=1.

So basically, we it admit we were dead wrong about the severity and urgency but, but we must act now. That’s “ expert” level BS.

[paulxu]

Agree but what does it have to do with this thread?

Not much. Just didn't want to start a new thread and this was the closest I could get to a weather event.

[UCGRAD4X]

Paul - whether you realize it or not, you just unwittingly destroyed your own argument!!
Take a closer look at your first graph - how is it that co2 levels were higher on several occasions prior to humans? Moreover, doesn't the graph indicate cyclical trends - and we just so happen to be in a peaking level?
Additionally, with the graph you posted in #2115 from NASA, why is it that they only published data in a graph that goes back 800,000 years, when they obviously have data that goes back much further? Are they trying to fool the public?
NOAA even admits this point:
"The atmospheric burden of CO2 is now comparable to where it was during the Mid-Pliocene Warm Period around 3.6 million years ago, when concentrations of carbon dioxide ranged from about 380 to 450 parts per million. During that time sea level was about 78 feet higher than today, the average temperature was 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in pre-industrial times, and studies indicate large forests occupied areas of the Arctic that are now tundra."

https://research.noaa.gov/article/Ar...surged-in-2020
And why are they only looking at data from Arctic ice cores? Antarctic ice core data tells a different story. Why not tell the complete story?
"During this period, CO2 and temperatures are closely correlated, which means they rise and fall together. However, based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, as illustrated in Figure 1 below. This has led some to conclude that CO2 simply cannot be responsible for current global warming."
https://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

Also after the the change in orbital cycles. Perhaps the cycles were the cause of the increased CO2 and temperature? Again, both increased likely do to a much more impactful catalyst?

I'm sorry, but the entire climate science industry is fundamentally flawed as a result of data collection. I will never believe that we have anything approaching accurate world-wide temperature data from 1000, 10,000, 100,000, 1M years ago using ice core samples and tree ring data from a proportionally small area of the Earth, and then extrapolating that data onto the rest of the world. That method would never work or be accepted in any other field. There is no way the historic temperature data is anywhere near accurate. Without historic temperature data, we have nothing to compare to recent trends. And how far back do we truly have accurate world-wide temperature data? 50 years? How long have we been able to accurately measure temperatures in all the oceans, polar regions and other hostile places around the world that make up more than 75% of the planet?
I would argue the same holds true for historic co2 levels as well.

WTF are you guys even talking about? #settledscience

[XU_Lou]

WTF are you guys even talking about? #settledscience

Oh wow, I didn't realize this hashtag existed (#settledscience) - so I guess this means the debate's over....

[Strange Brew]

WTF are you guys even talking about? #settledscience

Sorry if some find the comments unsettling.

[Masterofreality]

From the Wall Street Journal today. Welp..

“ Hur*ri*cane sea*son has ar*rived in the At*lantic Ocean. Al*ready this sum*mer Hur*ri*canes Henri and Ida have caused head*line-gen*er*at*ing dam*age and flood*ing in the Gulf states, the South*east and the Mid*dle At*lantic states. Yet de*spite what you may have heard, At*lantic hur*ri*canes are not be*com*ing more fre*quent. In fact, the fre*quency of hur*ri*canes mak*ing land*fall in the con*ti*nen*tal U.S. has de*clined slightly since 1900.”

[chico]

From the Wall Street Journal today. Welp..

“ Hur*ri*cane sea*son has ar*rived in the At*lantic Ocean. Al*ready this sum*mer Hur*ri*canes Henri and Ida have caused head*line-gen*er*at*ing dam*age and flood*ing in the Gulf states, the South*east and the Mid*dle At*lantic states. Yet de*spite what you may have heard, At*lantic hur*ri*canes are not be*com*ing more fre*quent. In fact, the fre*quency of hur*ri*canes mak*ing land*fall in the con*ti*nen*tal U.S. has de*clined slightly since 1900.”

Damn I may cancel my subscription to the WSJ unless they hire some editors.

[Masterofreality]

Damn I may cancel my subscription to the WSJ unless they hire some editors.

For some reason, whenever I copy a section of an article from the WSJ it inserts asterisks. Don’t know why that happened.

[Masterofreality]

Hmmm. John Kerry is flying all over the world in jets using up plenty of CO2 and apologizing for America. BUT…

The country which emits more CO2 than all other developed nations combined is...drumroll please: CHINA! Source: https://bbc.in/2Vyx3Sy

And Anthony Blinken is so afraid of pissing off the CCP that he deletes and rewrites a tweet that says that Taiwan is it’s own country. My goodness.