Clear Evidence of Global Warming

otisptoadwater wrote: Meanwhile...

A SEVERE cold snap gripping central and eastern Europe has killed dozens of people in recent days, as blizzards swept the region and temperatures plunged following a relatively mild start to the winter.

More than 60 people have died as a deep freeze settled across countries stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea, with the death toll highest in Ukraine and transport chaos most severe in Romania and Bulgaria.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2012/0201/1224311049519.html

I'm just posting what I see in the news; Algore and his followers are free to believe what they want. If your sky is green and grass is blue you might want to take another look at the data and see if that is actually the case.

[youtube:1snd5sjm][/youtube:1snd5sjm]

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... d-climate/
Chaos and Climate
— william @ 4 November 2005

By climate, we mean the statistics of weather, averaged over suitable time and perhaps space scales (more on this below). We cannot hope to accurately predict the temperature in Swindon at 9am on the 23rd July 2050, but we can be highly confident that the average temperature in the UK in that year will be substantially higher in July than in January. Of course, we don’t need a model to work that out – historical observations already give strong evidence for this prediction. But models based on physical principles also reproduce the response to seasonal and spatial changes in radiative forcing fairly well, which is one of the many lines of evidence that supports their use in their prediction of the response to anthropogenic forcing.

Fortunately, the calculation of climatic variables (i.e., long-term averages) is much easier than weather forecasting, since weather is ruled by the vagaries of stochastic fluctuations, while climate is not. Imagine a pot of boiling water. A weather forecast is like the attempt to predict where the next bubble is going to rise (physically this is an initial value problem). A climate statement would be that the average temperature of the boiling water is 100ºC at normal pressure, while it is only 90ºC at 2,500 meters altitude in the mountains, due to the lower pressure (that is a boundary value problem).

[youtube:1snd5sjm][/youtube:1snd5sjm]

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: The rest of the story...

In spite of a multidecade international campaign to enforce the message that increasing amounts of the "pollutant" carbon dioxide will destroy civilization, large numbers of scientists, many very prominent, share the opinions of Dr. Giaever. And the number of scientific "heretics" is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts.

Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now. This is known to the warming establishment, as one can see from the 2009 "Climategate" email of climate scientist Kevin Trenberth: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." But the warming is only missing if one believes computer models where so-called feedbacks involving water vapor and clouds greatly amplify the small effect of CO2.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21366.html

Read the whole letter... sign by...


Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.
[/i]

grist.org/list/wsj-will-publish-literall...utes-global-warming/
WSJ will publish literally anything, as long as it disputes global warming
By Jess Zimmerman
30 Jan 2012

Ready for a little peek behind the editorial decision-making curtain at the Wall Street Journal? On Friday, the paper published an op-ed disputing anthropogenic global warming, on the strength of its being signed by 16 scientists. Sixteen, wow, that’s a lot! Except that in May 2010, 255 members of the National Academy of Science wrote an op-ed laying out the actual facts about global warming, and the WSJ turned it down. (It was published in Science instead.) Wait, is it possible this isn’t about the number of scientists at all??

What’s extra funny/horrible is that, surprise! The 16 “scientists” who wrote the published op-ed aren’t even climate scientists, for the most part — they’re meteorologists, astrophysicists, engineers, and so forth.

And that doesn't even count the 18 most respected scientific organizations in countries across the world who have publicly supported the research, or the thousands of scientists who do climate research, 97% of whom agree that anthropogenic global warming is occurring and we are the driving force of it in this cycle. Yes, 16 people is an overwhelming amount of support that there's still indecision in the scientific community on this topic.

More on Claude Allegre: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... -imposter/
Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism??? How is citing a geneticist support for their case? That would be like climate scientists using me as an expert witness. Hey, I may be cute and all rofllol , but I ain't all that and a bag of chips when it comes to this field.

Lack of warming for the last 10 years? Look at all the data - not just that since 1998 (see my post on Pg 1 for their graph vs reality)