There is some debate about when the «Little Ice Age» — the last time when global average temperatures were falling — ended, but it is well documented that glaciers started receding around that time as a result of
the relative warming of the planet.
Not exact matches
«There is no agreement among climatologists as to the
relative contributions
of Man and Nature» to the
warming of the
planet that has already been observed, they claim.
A small amount
of regional cooling is possible, but more likely is a
relative cooling in the North Atlantic — i.e. it won't
warm as fast as the rest
of the
planet.
Burning all fossil fuels, if the CO2 is released into the air, would destroy creation, the
planet with its animal and plant life as it has existed for the past several thousand years, the time
of civilization, the Holocene, the period
of relative climate stability,
warm enough to keep ice sheets off North America and Eurasia, but cool enough to maintain Antarctic and Greenland ice, and thus a stable sea level.
The point is that,
relative to what astronomers call the effective temperature
of a
planet, CO2 is
warming the Earth.
Between 1976 and 2006, El Nino's were
relative more common than La Nina's (a condition that exists if there is a positive PDO), producing an overall
warming of the
planet.
What are the «benefits» to the
planet of warming and
of carbon dioxide,
relative to the harm?
Water vapor feedback in climate models is positive mainly because
of their roughly constant
relative humidity (i.e., increasing q) in the mid-to-upper troposphere as the
planet warms.