3 ms·

It's an indication of what is happening in Scotland. Scotland would be very sensitive to small changes in the Gulf Stream, which are chaotic in nature. As far

It's an indication of what is happening in Scotland. Scotland would be very sensitive to small changes in the Gulf Stream, which are chaotic in nature. As far as the planet goes, the global troposphere's temperature has increased by only about 0.52C over the last forty years, as measured by satellite.[0] We are still coming out of both a major ice age, from 15,000 years ago, and a minor ice age, from 250 years ago, so some warming is expected. These changes are largely due to the Earth's orbit and inclination, and possibly to changes in the Sun's activity. The Earth is currently in a cold period compared to the historical record, though at times in the remote past the oceans have frozen almost completely.[1] There is always regional climate change. Deserts become wetter, then drier. The North Pole warms more rapidly than the South Pole, and then the opposite occurs. [0] https://www.drroyspencer.com/2022/10/uah-global-temperature-update-for-september-2022-0-24-deg-c/ https://www.drroyspencer.com/2022/10/uah-global-temperature-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_and_icehouse_Earth#Modern_conditions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_and_icehouse_Earth#...

scaramanga 4y ago
What you are describing is not "climate change" but "climate staying the same". Climate change refers to the climate moving in to a new state, not the usual oscillation between ice-ages and interglacials which is a state the climate has been in during the whole period humans existed (actually upright apes of all kinds, modern humans haven't been around that long anyway). Your first link is a well known climate denialist who also believes in other bunk such as intelligent design.
- wrycoder 4y ago
  Roy Spencer is skeptical about the more extreme climate predictions that arise from the computer models. If you read his work, you'll find out that he is a climate "luke-warmer" (like me): he believes that the global climate is gradually warming, but it's not yet clear how much of a part we humans actually play, or that the observed warming is detrimental. Spencer is responsible for making actual satellite temperature measurements: Before becoming a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in 2001, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, where he and Dr. John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites. Dr. Spencer’s work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite. "Climate Change" has been the new term for "Global Warming" for some time now. It is used because it's more flexible - most any change can be reported in an alarmist way. If you want to discuss the greening of the Sahara, that's local climate change. If you want to discuss the global warming of the troposphere, possibly due to increased global levels of CO2, that's "Global Warming", but "Lets call that Climate Change now". All the international concern and science activity is about the latter, not local climate change. I'm pointing out that the Global Warming forecasts are based on a large number of computer models, not on measurements of actual global reality. You'll notice that the IPCC is gradually abandoning its most extreme models, since their predictions have not actually occurred. It appears that the computer models and reality will converge at around a 1.3C per century increase, starting from 1980.

scaramanga 4y ago

What you are describing is not "climate change" but "climate staying the same". Climate change refers to the climate moving in to a new state, not the usual oscillation between ice-ages and interglacials which is a state the climate has been in during the whole period humans existed (actually upright apes of all kinds, modern humans haven't been around that long anyway). Your first link is a well known climate denialist who also believes in other bunk such as intelligent design.

wrycoder 4y ago
Roy Spencer is skeptical about the more extreme climate predictions that arise from the computer models. If you read his work, you'll find out that he is a climate "luke-warmer" (like me): he believes that the global climate is gradually warming, but it's not yet clear how much of a part we humans actually play, or that the observed warming is detrimental. Spencer is responsible for making actual satellite temperature measurements: Before becoming a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in 2001, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, where he and Dr. John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites. Dr. Spencer’s work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite. "Climate Change" has been the new term for "Global Warming" for some time now. It is used because it's more flexible - most any change can be reported in an alarmist way. If you want to discuss the greening of the Sahara, that's local climate change. If you want to discuss the global warming of the troposphere, possibly due to increased global levels of CO2, that's "Global Warming", but "Lets call that Climate Change now". All the international concern and science activity is about the latter, not local climate change. I'm pointing out that the Global Warming forecasts are based on a large number of computer models, not on measurements of actual global reality. You'll notice that the IPCC is gradually abandoning its most extreme models, since their predictions have not actually occurred. It appears that the computer models and reality will converge at around a 1.3C per century increase, starting from 1980.