How can global warming have stopped if it never existed in the first place?
For years many of the climate change skeptics were telling us that global warming didn’t exist (it was a lie, invented by Al Gore, tax scam etc). Now we have a situation where many of the same skeptics are saying that global warming has stopped.
But how can something that never existed, have stopped?
It seems some of the skeptics have got themselves in a bit of a muddle, especially those who simultaneously make both claims.
- PindarLv 77 years agoFavorite Answer
It's good to see that you've finally had a turn of logic and joined the skeptic side side to denounce the agw scam.
- Dana1981Lv 77 years ago
Skeptical Science has a massive database of "skeptic" arguments that are self-contradictory. The issue is that most "skepticism" isn't real skepticism; it's based on an ideological bias where the answer (humans can't be causing global warming) is predetermined, and the mind works backwards to justify that predetermined answer. The result is that contrarians will make any argument that seems to support their predetermined conclusion, even if those arguments are completely self-contradictory.
A few people claimed the supposed global warming 'pause' is somehow contradictory. It's not. Quite simply, surface air warming has slowed because more heat has been transferred to the oceans over the past decade or so. There have been a number of recent papers illustrating this. The explanation may not be as simple as we might like, but the climate system is complicated. Complexity is not the same as being contradictory.
Contrarian arguments on the other hand are not complex. "It's not happening" and "it's the sun" and "it's galactic cosmic rays" and "it was happening but now it's stopped" simply cannot coexist. At least not if you're being honestly skeptical, rather than trying to justify an ideologically based predetermined conclusion.Source(s): http://www.skepticalscience.com/contradictions.php http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-cons...
- 7 years ago
Firstly, global average surface temperature anomaly is such a convoluted measure that it is meaningless in my view.
For instance, February could be colder than January but show up as an increase in temperature anomaly.
It is a number you can't use for anything useful. You cannot convert it to energy, for instance. Energy content will depend on local humidity not just temperature. All it can be used for is alarming the population. When it stops increasing, the alarmists move the goalposts and turn their attention to something else. Now it is energy hiding in the oceans.
Now I am going to do something you seem not to understand. I am going to give another reason why I am sceptical about global warming but it is based on admitting to global average surface temperature anomalies. It does not mean that I have changed my view from the above just that I need to engage with you from some sort of common base.
Global average surface temperature anomaly is a plot of temperature against time. Conclusions from any chaotic time series can be skewed by choosing different timescales for analysis. So choosing the last few years shows a decrease. Take a few more and it is level, a few more still and it shows an increase. Go back to any of the "warm periods" (medieval, roman, minoan etc) and no increase is evident. Go back to the end of the last glacial period and the increase has been huge, go back to the last interglacial and we are now at a lower temperature.
What I am trying to describe is that even if we start from your belief in GASTAs then you cannot draw the conclusions that you do. It does not mean that I have changed my belief.
-------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- --------------------
PS I know I am a real sceptic now because I am prevented from accessing Hey Dook's questions! How secure can you be in your belief if you need to ban dissenting voices?
- Anonymous7 years ago
NOTE: I don't actually believe it has stopped, I'm pointing out how squishy science is and why you shouldn't expect science to give you a hard yes/no answer to anything:
Because skeptics are using more hairspray:
But in order to accept the above science as proof of anything, you must accept that people can affect the climate, so QED
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 7 years ago
No one is denying that global warming (and cooling) is taking place. The +problem+ is that there bad decisions being made with information from the hysteria which is being created by the alarmists.
International Socialists like Gore are creating a false hysteria in order to scare the masses into giving up freedom and to submit to more government control, more “international” government control. Wake up, America! He who controls energy controls the world.
As Margaret Thatcher put it: global warming is proving to be “a marvelous excuse for international socialism.”
Global warming is indeed real and has been documented with ice cores dating back tens of thousands of years.
What is NOT real is the quackery that humans caused (or can even affect) global warming.
The scare tactics being perpetrated upon us are only a money/power grab scheme by bottom-feeder politicians accompanied by their so-easily-led sheeple who take their prattle, even their movies, as hard science..
To find that my statement above is true, follow the money. See just who it is who will profit from the carbon offset, carbon tax, & etc.
Here is truth about global warming:
Global warming is one-half of the climatic cycle of warming and cooling.
The earth's mean temperature cycles around the freezing point of water.
This is a completely natural phenomenon which has been going on since there has been water on this planet. It is driven by the sun.
Our planet is currently emerging from a 'mini ice age', so is
becoming warmer and may return to the point at which Greenland is again usable as farmland (as it has been in recorded history).
As the polar ice caps decrease, the amount of fresh water mixing with oceanic water will slow and perhaps stop the thermohaline cycle (the oceanic heat 'conveyor' which, among other things, keeps the U.S. east coast warm).
When this cycle slows/stops, the planet will cool again and begin to enter another ice age.
It's been happening for millions of years.
The worrisome and brutal predictions of drastic climate effects are based on computer models, NOT CLIMATE HISTORY.
As you probably know, computer models are not the most reliable of sources, especially when used to 'predict' chaotic systems such as weather.
Global warming (AKA "climate change")
Humans did not cause it
Humans cannot stop it
Global warming is indeed real and has been documented with ice cores dating back tens of thousands of years. What is NOT real is the quackery that humans caused (or can even affect) global warming.
The scare tactics being perpetrated upon us are only a money/power grab scheme by bottom-feeder politicians accompanied by their so-easily-led sheeple who take their prattle, even their movies, as hard science.
To find that my statement above is true, follow the money. See just who it is who will profit from the carbon offset, carbon tax, and other so-called green enterprises.
- 7 years ago
I don't know why these people are saying this, maybe they're hiding the truth. The amount of fossil fuels consumed daily is at astonishingly dangerous levels, severely endangering animal and human life. In 100 years oil will probably run out and by that time the changes taken place will be immense. Sea levels, droughts storms fish dying are just some things that will happen. We depend on energy so much and without it, the whole cycle of the daily world would collapse
Sorry for going on such a rampage on global warming issues, but I do find it a massive problem! :)
- Anonymous7 years ago
its all ways existed thing the Various ice ages we hav hadSource(s): self
- SagebrushLv 77 years ago
The warming of the earth has stopped.
You fellows are too busy looking for the missing heat to understand science. BTW. Who is writing your questions now days, Dork?
AGW actually does exist, in the minds of the insane. A real scientist would never ask such a stupid question. Read what a real scientist has to say on the subject.
Quote by Will Happer, Princeton University physicist, former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy: “I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism....I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect....Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science. The earth's climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past.”
What these gentle true scientists are saying, is that if it ever did, it now has stopped. That is how you treat mental patients. You let them down easy, so that you don't smash their delicate mental attitudes. It is sort of like when you tell your children that there is no Santa Claus, you let them down gently.
Now we all know that you are a protected species on this site and get favorable attention. So we are delicately telling you that AGW is a scam. We have been saying that for years now. You should have listened to us long ago, for we have real science on our side along with over 31,000 true scientists who are not so delusional as to be swayed by Al Gore. Al Gore is a proven fraud. Now just like Santa Claus you have to come to that reality sometime.
- BBLv 77 years ago
Are you referring to CAGW or the type of warming that one would expect following an ice age?
I think that skeptics are referring to the claim of CAGW....which has yet to find credible, unmanipulted scientific data to support it.
- MoeLv 67 years ago
Anthropogenic, unprecedented, the never ending barrage of claims of the disastrous effects of the small amount of warming will bring, the continual links made to natural disasters but not any disasters in general but some nonsense about loaded dice, claims of small amounts of CO2 being similar to the effects of cyanide, failed predictions made by climate scientists being unimportant because they were taken out of context, the prediction may still happen in the future, it wasn't put in a peer reviewed paper, or the media blew it out of proportion, the idea that the more uncertain you are the more scared we should be. That is what we have to be skeptical about.
- Anonymous7 years ago
I don't know, but when I saw Madd Maxx' response, it looked like you had a echo.
Regarding Nigel W's answer, don't just TD it. Report it.
<Anthropogenic, unprecedented, the never ending barrage of claims of the disastrous effects of the small amount of warming will bring,>
A few degrees of warming and cooling caused this.