Drawing from both social psychology and climate science, the new model investigates how human behavioral changes evolve in response to extreme climate events and
affect global temperature change.
A great many climate scientists acknowledge the difficulty I've raised, and their response is based on their analysis of the various
forcings affecting global temperatures, NOT the simplistic juggling of arcane statistical formulae.
Marcott says that one of the natural factors
affecting global temperatures during the last 11,300 years is a gradual change in the distribution of solar insolation linked with Earth's position relative to the sun.
As discussed last week, several reports have shown in the last year or two that carbon dioxide (CO2) does not
significantly affect global temperatures, contrary to endless repetitions to the contrary by climate alarmists and the mainstream press.
That's unlike the many on the right who imagined either that (i) the data
revisions affected the global temperature record (ii) anyone, prior to this, had made anything of the significance of 1998 as regards the continental US.
Whether global warming is influencing El Niño, especially given the remarkable El Niño of 1997/98, is a key question (Trenberth, 1998b), especially as El
Niño affects global temperature itself (Section 2.2 and Chapter 7).
First,
substantially affecting global temperature in the first half of the century is all but impossible; even to secure temperature reductions in the second half of the century, a rapid transition to clean energy needs to begin immediately.
To make a climate skeptic sputter, you need to as ask him for real evidence — published in a respected, peer - reviewed scientific journal and authored by a scientist with a Ph.D. in climatology — that atmospheric concentrations of CO2 can rise above 450 parts per million (ppm)
without affecting global temperatures.
The pattern of warming that we have observed, in which warming has occurred in the lower portions of the atmosphere (the troposphere) and cooling has occurred at higher levels (the stratosphere), is consistent with how greenhouse gases work — and inconsistent with other factors that can
affect the global temperature over many decades, like changes in the sun's energy.
Sen. Marco Rubio disputed the idea that he's a climate skeptic in the second GOP debate, asserting instead that he opposes policies to reduce emissions if they burden the U.S. economy while failing to
affect global temperatures.
As example of how greenhouse gases have
affected global temperatures, 2016 was almost 0.5 °F (0.9 °C) warmer than 1998, both years that experienced comparably strong El Niños.
How much this will
affect global temperatures, which are currently projected to rise as much as 9 °F by 2100, is impossible to say.
Dr. Sami Solanki — director and scientific member at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany, who argues that changes in the Sun's state, not human activity, may be the principal cause of global warming: «The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be
affecting global temperatures.»
In certain circumstances, ENSO and volcanoes are examples, even though we lack the wit to be able to predict the future course of such events; provided we are reasonably sure that
they affect the global temperature record we can attribute some of the records variance to them and so clean up the record.
What surprised me was that such a significant effect was unrecognized in all the years that the pan evaporation rate had been measured, even though it has been
affecting global temperatures.
Your «fact» that temperature rise has not been continuous even though CO2 rise has been «constant» would only be a reasonable conclusion if CO2 was the only thing that
affected global temperatures.
Although CO2 and other GHGs are widely thought to
affect global temperature the more I think about it the less I see how!