so hermione is safe?

I am pretty sure I know a lot more about the science than you since I am a retired research meteorologist. There is considerable short term variation in temperature data. If you are interested in anthropogenic changes then you need to consider long time periods and also compute running means. The original dataset has over 40 years of data from passive radiometers and shows a clear warming trend in the troposphere. Cherry picking a small subset (about 1/6 of the data) from the original dataset is not sound, particularly when you pick a high point as your starting point in an attempt to try to disprove an idea supported by a large amount of peer reviewed, sound research. Sounds like you are another person who doesn’t know what a logarithm is.

Not exactly. We know we are in an interglacial period that started about 12,000 years ago. The concern is that additional anthropogenic warming on top of the interglacial warming will be an issue. The time scale of concern is primarily the next 100 years or so. Estimates put the anthropogenic warming at about 1C. The concerns are that it could be an additional several degrees by the end of the century. While that may not sound like a lot but that is a global change. The regional impacts would be large and could create political upheaval due to migrations away from those regions most impacted.

Might as well bring up mythology with dragons why stop at witches? I have concluded from the weather post discussions a visit to the Science & Weather Club would be a waste of my valuable time others may enjoy it.

All the scientific stuff is way above my pay grade, but it is obvious that there is a change. The bit I cannot get my head round is that it is man made.
80+ years ago when I was growing up in UK, the air quality was dire. Smog, smoke from coal fires, lead from car exhausts, it was a killer.
Now the air has never been cleaner, but the 'Greens' claim it is still our fault and conditions are getting worse! How?
That's what I find hard to even start to believe.

An article from today's BBC UK service.
The BBC are Climate change zealots.

What is climate change? A really simple guide - BBC News

Please pseudo-scientists, return to your armchairs and let us all listen to what the overwhelming majority of scientists are telling us - there is a significant and accelerating change in the climate and it is warming.

Where is this energy being stored? It’s in the oceans as you would expect if you think about it. One of the ways we see this is through the melting ice caps both at the polar regions and various countries with significant amounts of snow and ice.

The real question is how will this impact life? It could be positive or negative - that’s probably the real question once we accept the reality of the situation. Water levels are rising - is that a big problem? I’m not saying either way.

So we need to stop turning it into a political battle and start thinking of the consequences and what if anything we need or want to do about it. Eg if polar bears become extinct as a result do we really care given it doesn’t impact our daily lives? Or if there’s more hurricanes do I really care if I live in a part of the country that is rarely impacted by them? Life is certainly going to be different in many ways that we haven’t really thought through but that we now have little control over given the time it takes for this slow moving ship to change course.

:BigApplause:

Or, you could have said:

I pretty sure you can't fix stupid.

:icon_wink:

Smog, smoke was worse in most highly populated and industrialized area. Now it is cleaner. The reason it is cleaner is thanks to the efforts of the "Greens" to bring attention to the problem, source of the problem and force, through law, the polluters to clean up their act. The ones at fault are usually the ones who's battle cry is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

80 years ago, the only 'greens' around were brassicas, and gays were just happy people!
The UK Clean Air Act of 1956 was introduced as a response to the 1952 Great Smog.
Nothing to do with any Environmental groups.
It was a time when politicians actually worked to solve problems, and not just spend all their time raising money to get reelected.

What's your point? Are you a global warming/climate change scientist? If not, is your purpose for this thread to imply that legitimate scientists' analysis and predictions are incorrect? Next time indicate reason for posting. Otherwise, your thread is useless!











is your purpose for this tread to imply that scientist are incorrect in the analysis and predictions

Why start at 2015? Was the data not available before this year? If it was then why didn't you post it?

Oh great.......now he's talking about witches.:ohdear:

Many have problems with predictions of only doom and gloom. Assuming your temperature predictions are close, maybe that will lead to a much better world. More CO2 means more plant and tree growth. Additional new warmer regions become the best farm land in the history of the earth. As the population grows, newer more moderate areas will attract people to help reduce existing city overpopulation issues. If there is more precipitation, droughts will end.

Weather cycles are thousands of years long. Perhaps millions. Both warming and cooling. The speck of time is a blip on that scale. Weather forecasting is often still a 50/50 guess even 24 hours in the future. Predicting 100 years is impossible. Especially with the "long range" (3 to 6 month) forecasts being wrong more than they are right. There are too many unpredictable and unknown external factors that cause a shift.

climate change
 

The planet has been going through warming and cooling cycles for millions of years, and will continue. I think it is foolish to think that man can do anything about it!

never let science get in the way of a good story