re: are there still people who still believe the earth is warming and man caused it?

Whenever there are record highs, the first folks who post that you can't take a few days of high temperatures into account in analyzing GW are the first who start threads when it's freezing.

quote:

---

Exactly, and points like OP is making about weather have no place in the discussion.

---

Yes and no. Certainly a single weather event doesn't prove anything about multi-decodal cyclical trend.

But it does highlight fact that natural variation > the cumulative effect of "global warming". It would seem clear that CO2 is not the determining driver of surface temps some make it out to be.

It's also curious to see how attitudes about the significance of weather events have changed since the 2005 hurricane season...

quote:

---

It's also curious to see how attitudes about the significance of weather events have changed since the 2005 hurricane season...

---

The dearth of hurricanes is man's fault.

LINK

Literally cannot make this up. If there are too many? Man's fault. Not enough? Man's fault. But they cannot tell us the "just right" number of North Atlantic hurricanes for a season.

This would just go easier if we shut up and gave them our money, wouldn't it?

This might surprise you but when it's winter here, it's summer in the Southern Hemisphere and they're experiencing record heat:

Blistering heat that formed over the Nullarbor at the end of December and continues over parts of inland Australia smashed temperature records and was a “highly significant” event, the Bureau of Meteorology said.

In a special climate statement released late on Monday, the bureau said the latest heatwave, while less extensive and prolonged as the record-breaking hot spell to start 2013, was still a remarkable event. The report comes just days after the bureau confirmed last year was Australia’s hottest in more than a century of records, easily beating 2005.

“A major feature of the (latest) heatwave was the very large margin by which some records were broken, particularly in northern New South Wales,” the bureau said. “At Narrabri (in NSW), the 47.8 degrees observed on 3 January surpassed the previous record by 3.6 degrees, the largest such margin at any Australian location with 40 or more years of data.”

Read more: LINK

quote:

---

So, what's your point?

---

quote:

---

The report comes just days after the bureau confirmed last year was Australia’s hottest in more than a century of records, easily beating 2005.

---

And pink unicorns exist on Mars.

Are you guys going to quit circle jerking your unsupported claims or are you actually going to try and link something like, I don't know, actual unbiased sources that support your arguments.

Can anyone post a picture of the Bloomberg cover after Hurricane Sandy, titled "It's Global Warming, Stupid"?

quote:

---

Multiple lines of evidence indicate that the earth has warmed since the mid 1800s by an amount that normally takes hundreds, if not thousands of years

---

Look up "little ice age."

Also, since you seem to know so much about it, maybe YOU can tell me what the Earth's global temperature is SUPPOSED to be.

You see, the paleoclimatic record reflects that the Earth's been a shitload warmer that it is right now (or even where the most dire AGW/CC prediction models claim), as well as a shitload cooler (which is why we don't have a mile+ ice sheet on top of Chicago right now) - ALL of this without a single SUV or coal burning power plant.

In fact, the temperature variances show that the northern hemisphere was substantially warmer than it is now (or is projected to be in most AGW/CC models) within the last 1000 years (Medieval Climate Optimum), which is why Greenland was called that, and why you used to be able to grow wine grapes in Britain.

So, again, what is the "global" temperature SUPPOSED to be? Because it seems THAT is the question that MUST be answered before we start wringing our hands.

quote:

---

Multiple lines of evidence indicate that the earth has warmed in the last century by an amount that normally takes hundreds, if not thousands of years.

---

Apples to oranges comparisons of data, notwithstanding, I concede there has been a warming trend. I don't know about "hundreds" of years (which is still, statistically zero, in geological time) and certainly not "thousands" of years. We're still only talking a few tenths at this point, perhaps up to a full degree - even if the "dire predictions" are correct and man is 100% responsible for the warming (both of which are quite dubious).

quote:

---

We know that we are adding to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and numerous experiments and calculations indicate that CO2 contributes to global heat retention.

---

But CO2 is absolutely essential to life, it's neither toxic nor a pollutant under normal circumstances.

So, I ask again - what are appropriate concentrations and what is an appropriate surface temperature average temperature? All I see are the goalposts moving - any time the empirical data does not fit the agenda.