BBC: 'Very accurate' confirmation of global warming

[twa]

your question is immaterial as is the attempted housing bubble defection

The answer to your question is in our manufacturing capacity and other areas

Outsourcing pollution in a global environment has costs ,but keep telling yourself buying solar and wind products from China is green goodness or oil from dirtier foreign sources is better.

while ya watch unemployment grow

[PeterMP]

your question is immaterial as is the attempted housing bubble defection

The answer to your question is in our manufacturing capacity and other areas

Outsourcing pollution in a global environment has costs ,but keep telling yourself buying solar and wind products from China is green goodness or oil from dirtier foreign sources is better.

while ya watch unemployment grow

What answer?

The reason jobs are leaving the US for China has multiple related variables, including the pegging of the yuan to the dollar, which has NOTHING to do with environmental regulations and US government policies that favor outsourcing.

The other thing you are ignoring is that China is also pays a costs for their environmental policy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21937089
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21695220
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21266437

And don't even get me started on the true costs of oil development in many area's of the world.

[Thiebear]

So you see my chart and raise your own? Thats fine, I couldn't get it to go to page 20 at work, kept (not responding).
Though it seemed to hover between 100-1000 years?

Climate by definition is long term?
If you look at the below we seem to be following a pattern the Earth has seen many times before in JUST the last 400,000 years.
If you want to Argue Mankind has kept it warmer for the last 100years due to industrialization I wont argue that, though the counter argument to that is we are just prolonging the inevitiable cooling.

The build ups look the same
The time periods look the same
The time of each rise is close to the same
The Peak of this one isn't as warm as the last 4. (there have been 8 that look the same going back 1 million years).

[Larry]

Oh, look! Another use of the "if you pick the scale of the graph such that the entire industrial revolution is smaller than one tenth of a pixel, then the effects of the industrial revolution don't show up" argument.

.

[Thiebear]

Oh look if we use the last 20,000 years it looks like we set the earth on fire.
Yet it somehow matches the same 20,000 years from the last incident when we emerged.


I know i break this chart out every time but it is my favorite:
The Earth is the object we are discussing?
In JUST the last 65million years we are colder now than we have ever been before?
And the Earths Poles are covered in ice year round... a new thing for the earth since the dino's left.

[twa]

He is simply using the same argument Peter uses for the decline
the warming is insignificant in the longer trend

[AsburySkinsFan]

the warming is insignificant in the longer trend

How do you know? Oh...you don't.

[twa]

How do you know? Oh...you don't.

and how do you know the next ice age isn't starting?

[AsburySkinsFan]

and how do you know the next ice age isn't starting?

Warming...ice...hmmmmm
I don't know about you but my freezer doesn't get warmer before it gets colder. But, your continual refusal to do anything about it is at least consistent...ironically more consistent than world temps.
Either way though, if it is man made then wouldn't that mean we should do something about it?

I guess the thing that drives me crazy the most is the fact that the Right which has from day one screamed that global warming is a scam (for IMO political reasons) have been proved wrong every step of the way with actual science and data and yet they never change their tune except to call for more ignorance. Take the GOP strategist that was on the Daily Show the other night for instance....
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...at-s-it-up-to-
So instead of acknowledging that they were wrong and global warming is a real phenomenon which is being contributed to if not caused by the massive amounts of pollution, they go full on stupid.

[Larry]

Oh look if we use the last 20,000 years it looks like we set the earth on fire.

Ah, so now we turn from reducing the entire industrial revolution into a fraction of a pixel, to try to hide it, to turning the entire duration of humanity into one pixel.

You know, I hear that 200 million years ago, the Earth was completely molten, and didn't even have a solid crust*.

Therefore, obviously, we shouldn't attempt to reduce out pollution until it's hotter than that, right?

* (Actually, I pulled that number out of my Philly, because I don't really feel like going out there and trying to find a pretty chart to demonstrate something meaningless.)

[twa]

Warming...ice...hmmmmm

Warming that is stopped or declining for over a decade by this studies numbers despite co2 rising
How's that polar ice melting working out for ya?

Funny the extreme cold seems to have opened a ozone hole
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...r-hole-expands

but then it is climate change now,not global warming right? ....be afraid...and send me a check

[alexey]

and how do you know the next ice age isn't starting?

You are posting this in a thread titled:

BBC: 'Very accurate' confirmation of global warming

[PeterMP]

So you see my chart and raise your own? Thats fine, I couldn't get it to go to page 20 at work, kept (not responding).
Though it seemed to hover between 100-1000 years?

Climate by definition is long term?
If you look at the below we seem to be following a pattern the Earth has seen many times before in JUST the last 400,000 years.
If you want to Argue Mankind has kept it warmer for the last 100years due to industrialization I wont argue that, though the counter argument to that is we are just prolonging the inevitiable cooling.

The invevitable cooling that is not going to happen for at least another 50,000 years.

The build ups look the same
The time periods look the same
The time of each rise is close to the same
The Peak of this one isn't as warm as the last 4. (there have been 8 that look the same going back 1 million years).

All of these graphs are related to long term and very slow changes in climate. These are primarily controlled by changes in the Earth's orbital pattern. I've already given you the wiki link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

They don't cause changes of temperature on the century time scale, much less the decade level time scale.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You are posting this in a thread titled:

Hey if he's going to deny it he might as well go all the way in the opposite direction.

[PeterMP]

Warming that is stopped or declining for over a decade by this studies numbers despite co2 rising
How's that polar ice melting working out for ya?

Funny the extreme cold seems to have opened a ozone hole
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...r-hole-expands

but then it is climate change now,not global warming right? ....be afraid...and send me a check

When I plot Spencer's data, I get a positive (not necessiarly significant) trend starting from 2010 back any number of years (e.g. 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, etc).

http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt

Now, it helps that last year was one of the warmest years on record. Do you have anything that actually says there hasn't been warming over the last decade that takes into account last year?

Arctic ice is well below known historical norms, can be fitted by a nice downward trend line, and this summer reached one of the lowest two levels on record (depending on what measure you want to use).

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/