And they say it’s too short of a period of time. I say only going back to 1880 is not long enough either in order to get a true picture.

It's become a "disease", a "pandemic" actually; if it supports MY personal view, it's a FACT, if it supports a different view or opinion, then it's "dis-information" ! We don't even question the fallacy of using that method to determine "fact" any more. What will happen to the ACTUAL scientific method of investigation ? Will it not even be taught any more ? Everything seems to have gone emotionally based, all decisions, all facts, all arguments on all subjects from "effectiveness to masks" to the results of warming and cooling trends on earth, seem to be based on just "emotional feelings" ! ! I think we are in real trouble when we confuse science with emotions, and we vote, make purchases, choose our personal philosophy solely on FEELINGS ?

What matters is whether the "facts" being presented validate the point of view of the person reading them.

Or not.

It was recently explained to me on this very site that a fact checker is someone, usually with pink hair, that owns a printer and a computer.

The industrial revolution is a problem?

You didn't know that?:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

We built machines, that ran on coal and oil, and put out so called "greenhouse gases" for the last 150-200 years. So now, according to some, the world is going to end in our grandchildren's lifetime. And our influence, our "evil", will destroy the world by overriding millions and millions of years of climate cycles driven by the power of the sun, the Earth's orbit and variations in its axis. And all this is because you bought the latest SUV. Amazing, isn't it????

So let's all go back to living in caves in the dark and hunting our food with a bow and arrow. We will be "saving" the planet :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Actually, it DOES ! Go to the link on post # 2 and scroll down almost to the end. Then look right after the bold heading, " Climate Change measured in DECADES, not years. Look for a blue underlined sentence stated by an NOAA Climatologist that reads.........."Earth's global temperatures are RISING due to HUMAN-GENERATED greenhouse gases".

Then if anyone wants to know by how much is the global temperature RISING. The VERY FIRST sentence at the top of the link says, " Global Temperatures have been in increasing at a rate of 2 degrees Farenheight since 1880.

I believe that this link DEFINITIVELY proves that earth temperature is INCREASING and CAUSED by mankind !
(And now I can't wait to hear the rebuttals to the expert by our very own non-experts)

Of course!

I attended a Philosophy Club for a short time and found that the same thing happened. One not-so-bright man hogged all the mike time to the point that it got boring. And I had thought that a PHILOSOPHY Club would be filled with people that wanted a vibrant EXCHANGE of ideas. I was SO wrong - 90% of the people were very narrow-minded. It was surprising.
.........So, I can see how the weather club could be dominated by people with their own particular fixed agenda. That is a shame.

The size, power, and devastation of hurricanes have increased for the last 8 years, and since Climatologists predict that the Earth will continue warming for the NEXT 30 years.....it is reasonable to assume that hurricanes will get more devastating with each passing year. And that will make living in Florida especially tough. At least we are not on the coast
........If we could live another 100 years we might be living on the southern tip of Florida (without moving).

Coral reefs will be 90 % DEAD by 2090. Today they are unhealthful and DYING.

Clearly !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And for your first rebuttal:

Is that 2 degrees/year????? That would make it about 371F today-----But I'll only go out for 12 minutes so I'm medium rare.

2 degrees/ decade????---that would only make it 115.2 today

2 degrees/century?????-- maybe, but even that's high

There is nothing wrong with consensus. It represents only one point on a timeline. As long as scientific research continues, a new consensus can be reached. People just need to be open to that new consensus.

Studied this Philosopher of Science in college. Worth a look if you have not read anything by him. Thomas Kuhn - Wikipedia

He has a lot of critics out there as well.

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions - Wikipedia

One of the people who taught one of these classes was a Physics professor specializing in the weather. It was taught by three professors-- one in Philosophy, one in History and one in Physics.

Everything has pluses and minuses, even the industrial revolution. Which delivered a lot of wealth and products to the middle class. But, also delivered pollution, possible overpopulation, and weapons of mass destruction. Also the capacity for a greater spread of disease and Pandemics.
.........And it delivered the subject that we are now talking about..........namely Global Warming and glaciers melting.

How much did "man-made" CO2 warm the earth last year?

Sorry, NOT a good rebuttal. I quoted the article correctly - the earth's temperature increased by 2 degrees F since 1880. That is the rate that the NOAA Climatologist stated. There is nothing there about 2 degrees per year. Just a rate of 2 degrees F since 1880. That would be 2 divided by 142 which equals .014 degrees F per year.

nice try......feel free to try again!

Not ,evil". Lack of knowledge, education, understanding of the poisons and pollutants we unleashed upon the world. Not "evil". Just ignorant of the interdependence of all things. Like kids with new toys, no one told us of the harm our toys could do, so we went blindly on our way tearing down the land and polluting our rivers and oceans. Finally, one smart kid sees the smog, sees pollutants in the oceans and connects the dots. Other kids are to oblivious and can't connect the dots. Others are afraid that they are going to have to give up some of their favorite toys, so they balk at what the emerging picture shows. But, little by little, the picture becomes clear enough that all must acknowledge the big picture, whether they like it or not.

I calculated it to be 0.014 degrees F per year from the NOAA Climatologist.

Thanks !

Great post !

You did not answer the question. How much did "man-made" CO2 warm the earth last year?

NASA has been engaged in data manipulation for many years -- a great way to continue space exploration ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D4jbChREKE

E= corrupted science
 

so electing politicians who accept and advance your pov is " corrupted science'. Exactly who are you presenting your case to but us voters? IF YOU DON'T WANT VOTERS HELP TRY SKY WRITING

You seem like you might already have an answer you like. Why not share? Why make a game of it?
Remember, only man-made CO2. It can be part of more complex combinations of gasses, consider the chemical interactions. Site your sources, turn in your notes and worksheets. No getting answers from other students.
🙈🙉🙊

And here's a great example of "corrupted science" which we should worry about ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIu3OGOdN6c

Once again, I will give you information from the same website that you quote from:

Climate.gov--
"Over at least the past million years, glacial and interglacial cycles have been triggered by variations in how much sunlight reaches the Northern Hemisphere in the summer, which are driven by small variations in the geometry of Earth’s orbit around the Sun. But these fluctuations in sunlight aren’t enough on their own to bring about full-blown ice ages and interglacials. They trigger several feedback loops that amplify the original warming or cooling. During an interglacial,
sea ice and snow retreat, reducing the amount of sunlight the Earth reflects;
warming increases atmospheric water vapor, which is a powerful greenhouse gas;
permafrost thaws and decomposes, releasing more methane and carbon dioxide; and
the ocean warms and releases dissolved carbon dioxide, which traps even more heat.

These feedbacks amplify the initial warming until the Earth’s orbit goes through a phase during which the amount of Northern Hemisphere summer sunlight is minimized. Then these feedbacks operate in reverse, reinforcing the cooling trend."

So, has mankind increased the cycle of climate change, slowed it or made any difference whatsoever? I'd say anyone that supposes that mankind has changed the climate cycles is pretty arrogant to think that man has that much power. Did man cause the ice age or just the tropics? This is getting boring because the fact is that mankind has very little ability to change what is going to happen in this climatic change....if any at all. To be honest with you, I do not know or even care if NOAA is right or not. I have no plans to go back to transportation by horse, the telegraph versus telephone or even radio instead of TV. Man has produced comforts that has made him live a great lifestyle and other than air quality (which as gotten better since I was a child) I don't care. If you are worried about those living in the next century or millennium, I am sure they will be announcing that the "sky is falling" also. Actually, maybe an asteroid will strike the earth by then, anyway. Or maybe the moon and send the moon crashing into the earth, or maybe the great filament in the sun will finally burn out and no one will be around to worry about whether we should use paper or plastic bags when we shop.

Not a game. Many claim "man-made" CO2 is causing climate problems. In today's society, one is innocent until proven guilty. Therefore CO2 is innocent until proven guilty. I'm just looking for data supporting that claim -- I did not make that claim. Those making the claim must show sources, notes, worksheets, etc. Our climate is in great shape and getting better. All government data reflects that -- and I accept that data which shows severe weather and extreme weather events are decreasing.

We have been warming ever since leaving the Little Ice Age -- at about the year 1800 -- and accordingly as the oceans warm also do they release CO2 ... and we are still thawing out from that Little Ice Age. So, how much of today's increasing CO2 is "man-made" versus thawing-made?

Actually, wasn't "trying" anything (this time)
Just asking the time frame of the reported 2 degrees

To steal a line from a truly indoctrinated anthropogenic climate change believer:

GREAT POST!!!!!

Oh, so we actually have “global cooling”…thanks, Al, for getting everyone’s panties in a twist over nothing…

I'm so disappointed. Never thought you would steal. Borrow, alright. But not steal. Tsk, tsk!
And I thought the post was waaay to long when the point, hidden in all that verbosity was, "I don't care".
Disappointing Post, if you ask me (which you won't because I am one of those "truly indoctrinated anthropogenic climate change believer"s).
😎

And just wait till the chilling 2022 data is compiled. It supports the fact that hurricanes have dramatically decreased the past 2 years -- and yet the UN's IPCC temperature forecasts keep claiming soaring forecasts. I wonder if the GNP glaciers validate those forecasts?

Another farcical attempt to deny what a huge majority of climate scientists and the data have clearly shown : the last few decades have had a significant increase in land temperature, sea temperature, glacial melting etc. And sounding using the last seven years to attempt to convince readers that we are in a cooling period is propagandist lying. We have had this before when the deniers used a particular hot year, 1997, to attempt to show there was no global warming. Seven years ago was a hot year. A very hot year.
Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it | Daily Mail Online

Take a look at the graph. Notice the trend. Take a look at 1997 and how it was an outlier which all the deniers used as a baseline to try to tell us that nothing was happening because the temperature dropped from 1997 to 2011. See how they could bloviate about global cooling over the last 14 years by cherry picking?

And here we have more of that. Just look at the bigger picture. Air temperature is just one of the indicators of global temperature change. It is the one we best understand. But increased heat is not just in the air, it is in the soil, it is also in the water surface and deep ocean, it is used to melt glaciers. When you melt ice the energy of melting does not change the temperature of the material It is 32 ice then it is 32 water. But lots of energy get used. The amount of energy to melt a unit of ice, with no temperature change, just a phase change is the same as required to then heat that unit of water from 32 degrees to 176 degrees. A huge amount of energy.

The glaciers in the national park that have been there for nearly 10000 years have shrunk in recent years. The glaciers in Greenland, Alaska, and Antarctica are melting. That is not a cooling trend.

yes it is a FACT that 2021 was cooler than seven years ago, a completely misleading fact the obfuscates the clear trend of higher temps, melting glaciers, sea level rise.

BELIEFS and CONSENSUS have NO value in science. Beliefs drive religion -- Consensus drives politics -- and DATA drives science.

Regarding your attached NOAA temperature graph ... what month(s) does it represent?

All 12 months for each year.

That is not correct. This time please display the data "criteria" which is shown to the upper-left of the diagram. The criteria that was used to create the diagram you provided were selected to maximize a "warming" graph. Thank you for showing data, but knowing what data is being used can make a difference.