NYTimes: Global warming has largely stalled since 1998

Space, the environment, new discoveries and new uses for old ones
User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

NYTimes: Global warming has largely stalled since 1998

Postby kramer » Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:59 am

The focus of those questioning the importance of greenhouse-driven warming is not so much the forecast downgrade itself, but how it would, if it holds up, create a statistically significant span in which global temperatures have not markedly risen. While global temperatures are the highest they’ve been since formal records began in the 19th century, warming has largely stalled since 1998.

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/ ... -forecast/


I wonder how this could happen when the biggest global warming control knob in the world has been turning up year after year since 1998?


“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

User avatar
kramer
Posts: 8852
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:38 pm

Re: NYTimes: Global warming has largely stalled since 1998

Postby kramer » Sat Apr 20, 2013 5:42 pm

(Reuters) - Scientists are struggling to explain a slowdown in climate change that has exposed gaps in their understanding and defies a rise in global greenhouse gas emissions.

"The science is settled, Gore told the lawmakers."
-From George Soros news (aka NPR), 2007
[question: If the science was settled back in 2007, then shouldn't we be now funding climate 'science' at about the same amount as we fund the science of gravity?...]



Often focused on century-long trends, most climate models failed to predict that the temperature rise would slow, starting around 2000. Scientists are now intent on figuring out the causes and determining whether the respite will be brief or a more lasting phenomenon.

"...many results, such as the warming effect of increasing greenhouse gases that was first demonstrated in much simpler models decades ago, have proved extremely robust."
- NASA, 2007



Getting this right is essential for the short and long-term planning of governments and businesses ranging from energy to construction, from agriculture to insurance. Many scientists say they expect a revival of warming in coming years.
[Certainly possible...]



Theories for the pause include that deep oceans have taken up more heat with the result that the surface is cooler than expected, that industrial pollution in Asia or clouds are blocking the sun, or that greenhouse gases trap less heat than previously believed.

[How about it's partly that CO2 traps less heat than previously believed along with a natural cycle that was predicted back in 1979?...]
Image
link to the above article



The change may be a result of an observed decline in heat-trapping water vapor in the high atmosphere, for unknown reasons. It could be a combination of factors or some as yet unknown natural variations, scientists say.

[See the 1979 article above. And there are no "unknown natural variations," the science was settled back in 2007.]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/ ... AJ20130416
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”

- Scientist James Lovelock

Return to “Science and Technology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest