Is global warming bogus?

[Linebacker]

The Ozone hole doesnt look small at all.

[Hong Key]

They should have chosen the name Climate Change from the beginning but Global Warming sounded more terrifying. In the 80's (I think) a small group started with the meme Global Warming is a hoax but it wasn't till the Russian hackers hacked the English "scientists" that Global Warming is a hoax became real (oooops) and now they are trying to push Climate Change. If they would have started with Climate Change and not worried about how it sounded they might still be in the game but no one (in there right mind) trusts anything they say now. Of course there is Climate Change, there is also solar/cosmic change, things always change. Idiots! Now there is a legitimate question of how much of the change is caused by humans. I do not know, I do know they are trying to control us by any means necessary, so I do not trust anything those on top of western civilization say at all.

[Linebacker]

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories...ozonehole.html

It is decreasing, it's not just bullshit.

Sure is.


Look at the hole's shapeshifting throughout the years.There are periods when it got smalled and then it got bigger again.We are just in that period now.Its shrinking a little,and then its going to grow even bigger.

[Styrian Mujo]

Can we predict an Ice age?

[Raven_]

No, it is not.


Globally averaged surface air temperature has slowed its rate of increase since the late 1990s. This is not in conflict with our basic understanding of global warming and its primary cause. The decade of 2000 to 2009 was still the warmest decade on record. In addition, global surface air temperature does not always increase steadily. This time period is too short to signify a change in the warming trend, as climate trends are measured over periods of decades, not years.,,,, Such decade-long slowdowns or even reversals in trend have occurred before in the global instrumental record (for example, 1900-1910 and 1940-1950; see Figure 2.2), including three decade-long periods since 1970, each followed by a sharp temperature rise. Nonetheless, satellite and ocean observations indicate that the Earth-atmosphere climate system has continued to gain heat energy.

There are a number of possible contributions to the lower rate of increase over the last 15 years. First, the solar output during the latest 11-year solar cycle has been lower over the past 15 years than the past 60 years. Second, a series of mildly explosive volcanoes, which increased stratospheric particles, likely had more of a cooling effect than previously recognized.,,Third, the high incidence of La Niña events in the last 15 years has played a role in the observed trends. Recent analyses suggest that more of the increase in heat energy during this period has been transferred to the deep ocean than previously. While this might temporarily slow the rate of increase in surface air temperature, ultimately it will prolong the effects of global warming because the oceans hold heat for longer than the atmosphere does.

Climate models are not intended to match the real-world timing of natural climate variations – instead, models have their own internal timing for such variations. Most modeling studies do not yet account for the observed changes in solar and volcanic forcing mentioned in the previous paragraph. Therefore, it is not surprising that the timing of such a slowdown in the rate of increase in the models would be different than that observed, although it is important to note that such periods have been simulated by climate models, with the deep oceans absorbing the extra heat during those decades.





Figure 2.3: Observed global average changes (black line), model simulations using only changes in natural factors (solar and volcanic) in green, and model simulations with the addition of human-induced emissions (blue). Climate changes since 1950 cannot be explained by natural factors or variability, and can only be explained by human factors. (Figure source: adapted from Huber and Knutti).


SOURCE

[Äijä]

Only thing Finns need to worry about is the Ice Age, if that happens we have to invade some place in the south.

[Äijä]

Can we predict an Ice age?

Not too accurate from what I have read but it could start developing any time.

[Styrian Mujo]

Not too accurate from what I have read but it could start developing any time.

The sooner the better. We need more natural selection.

[Äijä]

The sooner the better. We need more natural selection.

Been there done that, we can do the selecting when we come down.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

No, it is not.


Globally averaged surface air temperature has slowed its rate of increase since the late 1990s. This is not in conflict with our basic understanding of global warming and its primary cause. The decade of 2000 to 2009 was still the warmest decade on record. In addition, global surface air temperature does not always increase steadily. This time period is too short to signify a change in the warming trend, as climate trends are measured over periods of decades, not years.,,,, Such decade-long slowdowns or even reversals in trend have occurred before in the global instrumental record (for example, 1900-1910 and 1940-1950; see Figure 2.2), including three decade-long periods since 1970, each followed by a sharp temperature rise. Nonetheless, satellite and ocean observations indicate that the Earth-atmosphere climate system has continued to gain heat energy.

There are a number of possible contributions to the lower rate of increase over the last 15 years. First, the solar output during the latest 11-year solar cycle has been lower over the past 15 years than the past 60 years. Second, a series of mildly explosive volcanoes, which increased stratospheric particles, likely had more of a cooling effect than previously recognized.,,Third, the high incidence of La Niña events in the last 15 years has played a role in the observed trends. Recent analyses suggest that more of the increase in heat energy during this period has been transferred to the deep ocean than previously. While this might temporarily slow the rate of increase in surface air temperature, ultimately it will prolong the effects of global warming because the oceans hold heat for longer than the atmosphere does.

Climate models are not intended to match the real-world timing of natural climate variations – instead, models have their own internal timing for such variations. Most modeling studies do not yet account for the observed changes in solar and volcanic forcing mentioned in the previous paragraph. Therefore, it is not surprising that the timing of such a slowdown in the rate of increase in the models would be different than that observed, although it is important to note that such periods have been simulated by climate models, with the deep oceans absorbing the extra heat during those decades.





Figure 2.3: Observed global average changes (black line), model simulations using only changes in natural factors (solar and volcanic) in green, and model simulations with the addition of human-induced emissions (blue). Climate changes since 1950 cannot be explained by natural factors or variability, and can only be explained by human factors. (Figure source: adapted from Huber and Knutti).


SOURCE

But again, read the article. The data used for such graphs is a lie. It's made up, and they have been caught making it up many times. And other data when asked its source, they claim they lost all the original data.