Sentences with phrase «claiming unprecedented warming»

So comments claiming unprecedented warming are wrong and have misinterpreted the paper.

He also addresses the stunning admission that a widely publicized study claiming unprecedented warming in the past 100 years was not «statistically robust» — another way of admitting that their conclusions are scientifically baseless.

Not exact matches

And if they are unable to caputure historical warming, then the claim that 20th century climate is unprecedented is unfounded.

Because without the stick, we have NO BASIS to claim that the current warming is unprecedented or even unusual.

It has been claimed that late 20th Century was unprecedented in temperature and that nothing could have caused the warming except CO2.

But if the MWP was restricted to mild local warming, it would mean that present - day global warming is unprecedented for the past 1,000 years, as claimed by climatologist Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University, University Park, in his famous «hockey stick» global temperature reconstruction3.

(May 26, 2011) A linchpin in the global warming theory is the claim that we now live in a time of unprecedented warmth.

200 Non-Hockey Stick Graphs Published Since 2017 Invalidate Claims Of Unprecedented, Global - Scale Warming.

Existence of this Medieval Warm Period (MWP) contradicted the claim that post-industrial human CO2 was causing unprecedented warming.

I linked to the Phil Jones article, that said the late 20th century, warming was not statistically different to early similar periods of warming, thus we can discard the unprecedented claim for late 2oth century rates of warming.

At a stroke, put the end to the claim that the rate of warming was «unprecedented» (thus un-natural cause — man made)

Over the years I had heard various predictions and what I considered extreme claims like «Arctic warming is unprecedented» which conflicted with historical and archaeological evidence.

TJA claims [wrongly] «There is no study [except maybe THIS ONE and also THIS ONE] that shows the current warming is unprecedented in the past 1500 years.»

Consequently, the next time a serious drought takes hold of some part of the world and the likes of Al Gore blame it on the «carbon footprints» of you and your family, ask them why just the opposite of what their hypothesis suggests actually occurred over the course of the 20th century, i.e., why, when the earth warmed - and at a rate and to a degree that they claim was unprecedented overthousands of years - the rate - of - occurrence of severe regional droughts actually declined.»

Even if it has been warmer at times during the current and previous interglacials, showing that the forcing is unprecedented, rising and currently overwhelming natural variation can be seen of itself to be sufficient cause for alarm (that it be overwhelming is not quite what the IPCC report states but the more than half post 1950 claim is similar).

It is reminiscent, in its exaggeration, of the AGW promoters who claim Katrina and Sandy as harbingers of unprecedented warming.

The IPCC and associated Climategate scientists have claimed that human - induced global warming was producing unprecedented storm activity, with greater frequency and intensity.

UPDATE: New paper: http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.de/2015/06/new-paper-shows-n-greenland-was-warmer.html ===================================== By Ed Caryl The climate calamity crowd claims that the warming we experienced in the Twentieth Century is unprecedented... it has never happened before in human history.

If the earlier warm period was comparable to the recent warm period, then claims that recent global temperature trends are unprecedented or unusual will need to be re-evaluated.

The 1,018 - page report convincingly and systematically challenges IPCC claims that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing «dangerous» global warming and climate change; that IPCC computer models can be relied on for alarming climate forecasts and scenarios; and that we need to take immediate, drastic action to prevent «unprecedented» climate and weather events that are no more frequent or unusual than what humans have had to adapt to and deal with for thousands of years.

If the claim of the paper is going to be about about annual temperature changes and unprecedented warming and not confined to a claim about SONDJF then I would think annual temperatures should be used for the (incorrect) post fact proxy selection criteria.

And don't forget, that for a brief period, the IPCC's «consensus experts» attempted to claim that modern global warming was unprecedented.

The rationale was we need to hide the decline from the policy makers lest the figure out just how weak the claim was for «unprecedented» warming.

It supported the hockey stick claim of unprecedented late 20th century warming.

Consensus scientist claim that the «global warming» is unprecedented.

Yet, we continue to be deluged with heaping, steaming, piles of crap that regardless the weather, claim global warming is unprecedented and that unless we start redistributing the world's wealth, we're all gonna die.