New Statement: For the past 5 years (60 months), there is statistically
significant global warming in the two satellite datasets, the surface datasets indicate a non-significant warming trend.
Satellites show no warming in the troposphere «Satellite measurements indicate an absence of
significant global warming since 1979, the very period that human carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing rapidly.
has an excellent overview of energy trends in the world — and what would need to happen for the world to curtail its greenhouse gas emissions and
avoid significant global warming.
Not mentioned was that satellite measurements show no statistically
significant global warming over the past nearly two decades other than two large naturally occurring equatorial Pacific Ocean El Niño events in 1997 - 1998 and 2014 - 2016; or that such events typically cause more tropical cyclones in the Pacific, and fewer in the Atlantic.
I recognize there are costs and drawbacks that will result
from significant global warming, but there are benefits as well (e.g., fewer deaths from hypothermia in the high latitudes, improved agricultural output, improved climates in various regions, the flooding of IRS headquarters in Washington, D.C. etc..)
For this article, a statistically -
significant global warming means that the linear trend (slope of the trend line) is likely greater than zero with 95 % statistical confidence (i.e. the 95 % error bars do not include a possible 0.0 or negative temperature degree slope).
Because of the first of these reasons, were we to abruptly halt all emissions now, the sulfate aerosols would rapidly be removed from the atmosphere by precipitation whereas the CO2 concentration would remain elevated, and so there would be a significant further warming influence just as a result of past emissions; this warming would lead to the
quite significant global warming that Lindzen mentions.
Given its role as the
most significant global warming pollutant, this shouldn't exactly come as much of a surprise; what is unusual, however, is that relatively little has been said about some of the other GHG offenders.
Someone who is equipped to read the long version of the IPCC's report, and to understand the full implications of what's being discussed there, says that evidence supporting the idea that humans are causing
significant global warming appears to be weaker — not stronger — than it was seven years ago.
Anyone who claims that global warming «stopped» or similar since about 1997 or so has the burden of proof to demonstrate that the global temperature trend since this point in time, when global warming allegedly «stopped», is statistically significantly different from the previously statistically
significant global warming trend in the decades up to same point in time.
An article for CNSNews posted last September 30, cited a statement from Dr. John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH), that there has been no statistically
significant global warming for the past 17 years.
The International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook 2013 has an excellent overview of energy trends in the world — and what would need to happen for the world to curtail its greenhouse gas emissions and
avoid significant global warming.
With significant global warming (exceeding 1.5 - 2.5 °C), 20 to 30 % of plant and animal species assessed so far are likely to be at higher risk of extinction and major changes in ecosystems are expected, which would affect not only biodiversity, but also the supply of water and food.
The updated data shows a
statistically significant global warming trend over the 1998 - 2012 period and the authors note that their results «do not support the notion of a «slowdown» in the increase of global surface temperature.»
Its definition as a pollutant relies entirely on its alleged causation
of significant global warming and on the additional assumption that a warmer climate is damaging.
Last week, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and 10 other leading world bodies expressed the consensus view that «there is now strong evidence that
significant global warming is occurring» and that «It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities».
Despite
the significant global warming in the annual mean, there was a winter cooling in Eurasia.
The earth has had
significant Global Warming for some 20,000 years now... The only real argument is to the degree that mans activity has augmented that... We just came out of one - point - five - million years of continuous glaciation with sheets of two mile thick ice down past the 44th parallel... I will cheerfully deal with warming issues over that, any day...
Beyond that we can conclude (with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 2013 report) that it is extremely likely that
significant global warming is coming in our lifetimes.
In part the high SSTs were a consequence of the previous El Niño (Trenberth et al. 2002) but there is surely
a significant global warming component (Gillett et al. 2008).
CO2 doubling... can cause
any significant global warming or even a climate catastrophe».
I am yet to hear scientific evidence to satisfy me that if the very, very small amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (approximately 0.38 per cent) was increased, it could lead to
significant global warming.
He was asked: «Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically -
significant global warming?»