Humans have been warming the climate for nearly 200 years, scientists say

This story originally appeared on the Guardian and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Continents and oceans in the northern hemisphere began to warm with industrial-era fossil fuel emissions nearly 200 years ago, pushing back the origins of human-induced climate change to the mid-19th century.

The first signs of warming from the rise in greenhouse gases which came hand-in-hand with the Industrial Revolution appear as early as 1830 in the tropical oceans and the Arctic, meaning that climate change witnessed today began about 180 years ago.

Researchers in Australia found evidence for the early onset of warming after trawling through 500 years of data on tree rings, corals and ice cores that together form a natural archive of Earth’s historical temperatures.

Much of what is known about Earth’s climate history is based on instruments that have monitored temperatures from the 1880s onwards. But while these capture the changing conditions seen in the 20th century, they miss the start of the warming trend.

“A lot is known about the climate record for the time when we have instrumental records,” said Nerilie Abram, a climate scientist at the Australian National University. “We wanted to look at whether these records give us the full picture.”

Pooling the data, the scientists found that temperatures in the tropical oceans and in the air above northern hemisphere land-masses began to rise above natural variations in the 1830s, just as greenhouse gas emissions edged upwards.

The scientists first thought that they were seeing the climate rebound after a period of natural cooling brought on by particles thrown high into the atmosphere from volcanic eruptions. But climate simulations showed that the warming they observed could be explained purely by the small rise in greenhouse gas emissions.

“The changes in greenhouse gases in the 19th century were small compared with the fairly rapid changes we see now, so seeing the climate respond this way was a surprise,” said Abram.

Tommy Monk wrote:http://www.history.com/news/little-ice-age-big-consequences

https://www.eh-resources.org/little-ice-age/

So, how do we make documentary evidence more reliable and how do we reconstruct past climates when there are no written records available at all?
Proxydata
To work out how the climate has changed over time, climate scientists need long-term records. Historical records do not provide this, and that is why other indicators such as growth bands in trees, deposits in lake beds, ice cores and dating peat layers provide such valuable evidence. These sources are called “proxy” or indirect data. Here is a selective overview of the proxy data used for climate and environmental reconstruction.
Here we will discuss:
• The use of ice cores
• Pollen analysis
• Raised or drowned beaches
• Tree ring dating

Ice cores

Ice core from Greenland.
(Image courtesy NOAA/ Anthony Gow,
United States Army Corps of Engineers)
Located high in mountains in glaciers and deep in polar ice caps, such as on Antarctica or Greenland, ice has accumulated from snowfall over many centuries. Glacial ice contains dust, air bubbles, or isotopes of oxygen that can be used to interpret the past climate at the time the snow fell and formed the ice. The thick layers of ice that accumulated over thousands of years provide a convincing summary record of the past global climate and scientists drill deep into icecaps to collect ice cores in order to obtain this data. Two well known examples of such ice core projects are the Greenland Ice Core Project and the Vostok Ice Core Project in Antarctica. Both cores provide climate data for tens of thousands of years.
Pollen

Pollen from a variety of plants.
(source: Wikimedia Commons)
Palynology is the analysis of fossil pollen and is used to reconstruct long run changes in vegetation and climate. Each species of plants produces pollen grains, which have a distinct shape. These shapes can be used to identify the type of plant from which they came. Since pollen grains rarely rot, they are well preserved in the sediment layers that form at the bottom of a pond, lake or in blanket peat. An analysis of the pollen grains in each layer can tell us what types of plants were growing when the sediment was deposited and then inferences can then be made about the climate based on the types of plants found in each layer. Pollen can also be used to determine human impact on environments such as deforestation or the extent of agriculture by counting the number of tree or cereal pollen in a sample.
Raised or drowned beaches
Raised or drowned beaches are former beaches located above or below present day sea levels and are formed when sea levels drop or rise, or when land levels rise or fall. This may be caused by the formation and melting of extensive ice sheets during and after a major glaciation (ice age). The disappearance of ice sheets also resulted in a so-called glacial rebound, that is, a springing back of land after the weight of the ice had been removed by melting. This happened in Scotland and Scandinavia. The dating of raised beaches can tell us something about the climate on earth and related sea level changes. Fossil coral reefs stranded on top of islands can also be used for the same purpose.
Coral reefs
Corals build their hard skeletons from calcium carbonate, a mineral extracted from seawater. The carbonate contains oxygen and the isotopes of oxygen, as well as trace metals, that can be used to determine the temperature of the water in which the coral was formed as well as the composition of the atmosphere at a certain time. These indirect temperature recordings can then be used to reconstruct climate during the period of time that the coral lived.
Lake and ocean sediments

Four foraminiferans
(Courtesy US Geological Survey)
Billions of tons of sediment accumulate on the ocean floor and in lake basins each year. Ocean and lake sediments consist of biological and other materials that were produced in the lake/ocean or that washed in from nearby land. These materials are deprived of oxygen and are thus preserved as tiny fossils and chemicals in the sediments and can be used to interpret past climate. Scientist drill cores of sediments buried below the ocean floor in order to get a sequence of changing climate over time. The most important fossils are shells from so called forams (foraminiferan), tiny creatures living in the worlds oceans that produce shells which sink to the ocean floor after the creatures die. There are different types of forams living in water of different temperature. Particular forams found in different layers are a measure of the temperature at a certain time. The carbon and isotope content of the form shells provides information about the composition of the atmosphere in the past.
Tree ring dating

Tree growth rings. (Source:
Wikimedia Commons/ Adrian Pingstone)
Dendrochronology or tree-ring dating is the method of scientific dating based on the analysis of tree ring growth patterns. Since tree growth is influenced by climatic conditions, such as temperature and precipitation, patterns in tree-ring widths, density, and isotopic composition reflect annual variations in climate. In temperate regions where there is a distinct growing season, trees generally produce one ring a year, and thus record the climatic conditions of each year. Trees can grow to be hundreds of years old and so contain annual records of climate conditions.
Combining historical and proxy data
Environmental and climate historians often use additional sources, called proxy data, to complement the written documents that conventional historians rely on. These can all be used in different ways to put together a complete picture of the historical climate puzzle. Proxy-data records changes over time as a result of the environmental interactions between nature and culture. Historical documents and cultural artefacts contribute to an understanding of change in human societies. Taken together, proxy-data, artefacts and documents combined tell us more about the past interaction between environment and culture than either could do alone. For this reason, historians who want to understand the relationship between climate and culture in the past must collaborate with specialists from other disciplines including archaeology, anthropology and the natural sciences.
Whatever source you are using you must keep in mind that both written and proxy records all have their problems: tree rings can reflect the effects of rainfall as well as temperature, for instance. The uncertainties also become greater the further back you go in time, as the evidence becomes sparser and in some cases there is no data at all.
There are dozens of temperature reconstructions for the northern hemisphere that go back beyond 1600. All these studies suggest there was a period of unusual warmth from around AD 900 to AD 1300, the so called Medieval Climate Optimum followed by a colder period called the Little Ice Age.

eddie wrote:Climate change topics are like Groundhog Day.

Ben Reilly wrote:The whole Maunder minimum thing was way overblown, and you've already been told this many times and provided supporting links from reputable scientific publications.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:The whole Maunder minimum thing was way overblown, and you've already been told this many times and provided supporting links from reputable scientific publications.

Some have tried to waffle away the 'inconvenient truth' because it shows up their lies...

Tommy Monk wrote:When you are so twisted up that you dismiss every fact you don't want to believe, as 'right wing bizarro'... then you no longer have the power of independent thought!!!
And you forget that your so called left wing Democrats are more right wing than our so called right wing conservatives!
The IPCC even say that the overall temp rise from 1880 to present date has been only 0.85 degrees centigrade!!!
Do you know who the IPCC are...!!!???   YOU CAN'T READ - WHAT DEFERENCE DOES YOUR PARROT ROUTINE MAKE 
And as you have seen and posted up yourself... there is a direct correlation in the increase in solar activity over this time with the increase in temp!!!

I can lead a horse to water... NOOOOO, not hardly, Tommykins ...you couldn't lead a blind man to the correct toilet and get the gender identity door CORRECT

4EVER2 wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:When you are so twisted up that you dismiss every fact you don't want to believe, as 'right wing bizarro'... then you no longer have the power of independent thought!!!
And you forget that your so called left wing Democrats are more right wing than our so called right wing conservatives!
The IPCC even say that the overall temp rise from 1880 to present date has been only 0.85 degrees centigrade!!!
Do you know who the IPCC are...!!!???   YOU CAN'T READ - WHAT DEFERENCE DOES YOUR PARROT ROUTINE MAKE 
And as you have seen and posted up yourself... there is a direct correlation in the increase in solar activity over this time with the increase in temp!!!

I can lead a horse to water... NOOOOO, not hardly, Tommykins ...you couldn't lead a blind man to the correct toilet and get the gender identity door CORRECT

Like a broken record, we keep posting current data & reports as they come available and you just keep dragging your old refuted BS around like it's your PACIFIER - SECURITY BLANKY ...still doesn't change or improve your MISINFORMATION you cling too

Tommy Monk wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:
Like a broken record, we keep posting current data & reports as they come available and you just keep dragging your old refuted BS around like it's your PACIFIER - SECURITY BLANKY ...still doesn't change or improve your MISINFORMATION you cling too

No...!!!
You keep posting hyperbolic fear mongering waffle and completely made up 'predictions' of the future!!!
Even when I quote what the IPCC themselves say is the temp rise from 1880 to present date of 0.85 degrees centigrade... YOU DISMISS THIS AS BULLSHIT!!!
The fact you still don't know who the IPCC are... and that you still dismiss what they say as bullshit... while trying to argue on the side of the 'climate change' camp...!!!
This has got to be one of the funniest things I've ever seen on a forum!!!  Nooo, this image I have of you getting all 'PISSY' and then calling me your immature little names you were told to STOP ...this is how I see you

Most amusing!!!  Yes, INDEED ...Tommykins very - very amusing!

Tommy Monk wrote: You must like liking stupid!!!

Even when I quote what the IPCC themselves say is the temp rise from 1880 to present date of 0.85 degrees centigrade... YOU DISMISS THIS AS BULLSHIT!!!


The fact you still don't know who the IPCC are... and that you still dismiss what they say as bullshit... while trying to argue on the side of the 'climate change' camp...!!!


This has got to be one of the funniest things I've ever seen on a forum!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:
So what the IPCC says is childish nonsense is it...!?  NO, your inability to READ your own linked data and comprehend what those long - long written descriptive printed words mean just blow through your head as if there's nothing to slow the air stream!

IPCC REPORTS

The first IPCC report was published in 1990. More was added to that report in 1992.

The second report was published in 1995, the third was published in 2001, and a fourth in 2007. Each report is in three books called Working Groups 1, 2 and 3. Most times "the IPCC report" means the Working Group I report, which is about basic climate change.IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007

The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) was completed in early 2007. Like earlier IPCC reports, it contains four reports, three of them from its working groups.
Working Group 1 was about the "Physical Science Basis of Climate Change." The Working Group 1 report was published on February 2 2007 and revised on February 2007. There was also a February 2 2007 press release. The full Working Group 1 report was published in March. The main report says:

• Warming of the climate system is unequivocal.
  
• Most of the increase in globally averaged temperatures since the middle of the 20th century is very likely to be caused by humans using gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and CFCs.
  
• Warming and sea level rise will continue for centuries, even if greenhouse gas was not used any more, the amount of warming and sea level rise depends on how much fossil fuel is burnt for the next 100 years (pages 14 and 18).
  
• The chance that global warming and rising sea levels is natural is less than 5%.
  
• World temperatures could rise by between 1.1 and 6.4 °C (2.0 and 11.5 °F) during the 21st century (table 3) and:
  
  
  
  • Sea levels may rise by 18 to 59 cm (7.08 to 23.22 in) [table 3].
    
  
  
  
• Both past and future carbon dioxide production will continue to make global warming and sea level rise for more than a thousand years.
  
• Carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere have increased a lot because of human activities since 1750
  
  The Summary for Policymakers for the Working Group 2 (IPCC wg2) report was published on April 6, 2007. The Summary for Policymakers for the Working Group 3 report  was published on May 4, 2007.
  

IPCC Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001

The Third Assessment Report (TAR) contains four reports, three of them from its working groups:

• Working Group 1: The Scientific Basis
  
• Working Group 2: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
  
• Working Group 3: Mitigation
  
• Synthesis Report
  

The "headlines" from the Summary for Policymakers in The Scientific Basis were:

1. More scientists are believing in a warming world and other changes in climate (The average global temperature has increased during the 20th century by about 0.6 °C; Temperatures have risen during the past four decades in the lowest 8 kilometers of the atmosphere; Snow and ice have decreased)
   
2. Emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols due to human activities continue to change the atmosphere in ways that are expected to affect the climate
   
3. More scientists believe future climate change can be predicted. Climate prediction has improved but not enough
   
4. There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming over the past 50 years was caused by humans
   
5. Humans will continue to change atmosphere in the 21st century
   
6. Global average temperature and sea level are projected to rise by the IPCC SRES scenarios
   

The estimate for the climate sensitivity was 1.5 to 4.5 °C; and the average temperature was predicted to increase by 1.4 to 5.8 Celsius degrees between 1990 and 2100, and the sea level was predicted to rise between 0.1 and 0.9 meters. The range of predictions is based on different levels of human carbon dioxide production. Each prediction has different possible outcomes.

Changing scientists reports

MIT professor Richard Lindzen, who works for the IPCC Working Group 1, claims some of the IPCC reports are wrong. He told the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation that he was unhappy about the Executive Summary based on his work in May 2001. He said that he told the IPCC they were making mistakes and the Working Group 1 report said that meant they were "making improvements".
Professor Lindzen said:
The summary does not reflect the full document... For example, I worked on Chapter 7, Physical Processes. This chapter dealt with the nature of the basic processes which determine the response of climate, and found numerous problems with model treatments – including those of clouds and water vapor. The chapter was summarized with the following sentence: 'Understanding of climate processes and their incorporation in climate models have improved, including water vapor, sea-ice dynamics, and ocean heat transport.'
The Working Group 1 report said:

• Coupled models can provide credible simulations of both the present annual mean climate and the climatological seasonal cycle over broad continental scales for most variables of interest for climate change. Clouds and humidity remain sources of significant uncertainty but there have been incremental improvements in simulations of these quantities.
  
• Confidence in the ability of models to project future climates is increased by the ability of several models to reproduce the warming trend in 20th century surface air temperature when driven by radiative forcing due to increasing greenhouse gases and sulphate aerosols. However, only idealised scenarios of only sulphate aerosols have been used.
  

IPCC Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995

Climate Change 1995, the IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR), was finished in 1996. It was made in four parts:

• A synthesis to help interpret UNFCCC article 2.
  
• The Science of Climate Change (Working Group 1)
  
• Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change (Working Group 2)
  
• Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change (Working Group 3)
  

Each of the working groups was made by its own working group, and each has a Summary for Policymakers (SPM) that is a list of agreements by governments. The Summary for Policy Makers of the Working Group 1 report says:

1. Greenhouse gas has continued to increase
   
2. CFC aerosols make radiation in the atmosphere
   
3. Climate has changed over the past century (air temperature has increased by between 0.3 and 0.6 °C since the late 19th century; this is almost the same as the 1990 report).
   
4. The evidence is that humans are changing the Earths climate (a lot of extra work was done since the 1990 report to see the difference between natural climate change and human changes, for example: the effects of aerosol gases)
   
5. Climate is will continue to change in the future
   
6. We cannot be sure of how much human effects will happen in future
   

Changing what the scientists say

Three scientists involved in climate research believe that the IPCC reports do not accurately summarize the state of knowledge.
On December 20, 1995, Reuters news agency claimed a British scientist Keith Shine, one of IPCC's most important authors, talking about the Policymakers' Summary, said: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report". Keith Shine did not say what differences the changes make.
Frederick Seitz, a physicist of Rockefeller University, said the IPCC report was not good, writing "I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report". He opposed it in the Leipzig Declaration of S. Fred Singer's Science and Environmental Policy Project.
Professor Seitzs comments were opposed by the presidents of the American Meteorological Society and University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, who wrote about an effort by some people make it seem that humans had not changed the climate. Special insert.
S. Fred Singer said that:

1. Chapter 8 was changed;
   
2. Three important parts — the views of the authors, contributors, and reviewers — should have been put in the Summary but they were deleted;
   

Benjamin D. Santer, Lead Author of Chapter 8 of 1995 IPCC Working Group 1 report, said:

1. The purpose was to produce the best possible and most clear report of the science, and was under his full control.
   
2. None of the changes were politically motivated.
   

Economic report

The Second Assessment Report was the only one with a chapter on the economic effect of climate change. This part of the report was thought to be unfair because the value of life in poorer countries was less.

IPCC Supplementary Report: 1992

The 1992 supplementary report was an update of the 1990 report, requested for the Framework Convention on Climate Change at the Earth Summit (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.
It did not make any important changes to the 1990 report. It claimed the prediction methods in the First Assessment Report, were now improved, but did not include aerosol or ozone changes.

IPCC First Assessment Report: 1990

The IPCC first assessment report was completed in 1990, and used to make the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
The Working Group 1 report says:

• We are certain there is a natural greenhouse effect...; humans are making the greenhouse effect stronger by releasing these gases: carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane, CFC gases and nitrous oxide gas. These gases trap heat on the Earth.
  
• We calculate that: ...CO₂ has been responsible for over half the stronger greenhouse effect; gases that stay in the air for a long time need to be used 60% less to stop making the greenhouse effect even stronger
  
• We predict: global temperature during the [21st] century will rise by 0.3 ^oC per decade (but possibly between 0.2 to 0.5 ^oC per decade); this is more warming than the past 10,000 years; Some other sudies predict that temperature will rise between 0.2 ^oC and 0.1 ^oC per decade.
  
• The predictions are not exact because we do not yet understand the effects of clouds, ice sheets, oceans and other important parts.
  
• We believe that world temperature has increased by 0.3 to 0.6 ^oC over the last 100 years...; This warming does not appear to be caused by humans but it is possible that humans have caused this warming. We will not be sure how much of the warming has been caused by humans for a decade or more.
  

IPCC structure

The Chairperson of the IPCC is Rajendra K. Pachauri, elected in May 2002; before that Robert Watson headed the IPCC. The chairperson is helped by an elected Bureau including vice-chairpersons, Working Group co-chairpersons and a Secretariat (see below).
The IPCC Panel is made of people from governments and other groups. Scientific experts are preferred. Meetings of the IPCC and IPCC Working Groups are held by members of governments. Non-Governmental and Intergovernmenta Organizations may be allowed to attend as observers. Meetings of the IPCC Bureau, workshops, experts and lead authors are by invitation only.  350 government officials and climate change experts visited the 2003 meeting. The meeting report  says there were 322 persons in attendance at meetings with about seven-eighths of visitors being from governments.

Major groups

There are several major groups:

• IPCC Panel: Meets about once a year and controls the organization. The Panel is the IPCC corporate entity.
  
• Chairperson: Elected by the Panel.
  
• Secretariat: Controls all activities. Supported by UNEP and WMO.
  
• Bureau: Elected by the Panel. Chaired by the Chair. 30 members include IPCC Vice-Chairpersons, Co-Chairpersons and Vice-Chairpersons of Working Groups and Task Force.
  
• Working Groups: Each has two Co-Chairpersons, one from a richer country and one from a poorer country, and a technical support unit.
  
  
  
  • Working Group 1: Studies the science of the climate system and climate change.
    
  • Working Group 2: Studies the effects and dangers of human activity in relation to climate change and gives ideas for how to change human activity.
    
  • Working Group 3: Studies options for limiting greenhouse gas and other ways to reduce climate change.
    
  
  
  
• Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
  

The IPCC receives funding from UNEP, WMO, and its own Trust Fund which gets money from governments.

Contributors

People from over 130 countries contributed to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report over 6 years. These people included more than 2500 scientific expert reviewers, more than 800 contributing authors, and more than 450 lead authors.^[23]
The Working Group 1 report of 2007 (including the summary for policy makers) included contributions by 600 authors from 40 countries, over 620 expert reviewers, a large number of government reviewers, and representatives from 113 governments. 
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change

• Figure 1. Average Global Sea Surface Temperature, 1880–2015
     
   
   
  This graph shows how the average surface temperature of the world’s oceans has changed since 1880. This graph uses the 1971 to 2000 average as a baseline for depicting change. Choosing a different baseline period would not change the shape of the data over time. The shaded band shows the range of uncertainty in the data, based on the number of measurements collected and the precision of the methods used.
  Data source: NOAA, 2016⁶
  Web update: August 2016
  
  
  

Tommy Monk wrote:"...The estimate for the climate sensitivity was 1.5 to 4.5 °C; and the average temperature was predicted to increase by 1.4 to 5.8 Celsius degrees between 1990 and 2100, and the sea level was predicted to rise between 0.1 and 0.9 meters. The range of predictions is based on different levels of human carbon dioxide production. Each prediction has different possible outcomes..."

But  in the last 20 years the temp has not changed significantly at all...
And they are predicting nonsense because it is the increase in solar activity that has caused the 0.85 degrees warming since 1880... and which has now leveled off!!!

Try thinking about it 4everatwit!!!    

eddie wrote:
So what if you don't agree with him? It's called a debate forum and he's debating his point, whether you agree with him, or not.

................................

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:
So what if you don't agree with him? It's called a debate forum and he's debating his point, whether you agree with him, or not.

................................

A balanced "debate" deserves to have the antagonist (i.e. Tommy..) attempt to both address his opponents arguments, and to provide some genuine evidence to back his nonsensical claims...

Ben, Victor, veya, 4ever, and occasionally l'il ol'me, have all produced evidence-backed and scientifically argued positions that prove his opinions wrong..

And yet Tommy keeps on dragging up the same old denialist nonsense.
The prat is a real menace to any attempt at balanced debate on the subject -- he is the one who should leave threads on scientific subjects alone --  not any of the rest of us.    

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:



A balanced "debate" deserves to have the antagonist (i.e. Tommy..) attempt to both address his opponents arguments, and to provide some genuine evidence to back his nonsensical claims...

Ben, Victor, veya, 4ever, and occasionally l'il ol'me, have all produced evidence-backed and scientifically argued positions that prove his opinions wrong..

And yet Tommy keeps on dragging up the same old denialist nonsense.
The prat is a real menace to any attempt at balanced debate on the subject -- he is the one who should leave threads on scientific subjects alone --  not any of the rest of us.    

Oh I completely agree with you, from what I've seen his points don't add up to me, but instead of getting abusive, ignore him or debate.
Don't attack on a daily basis please wolf.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:
So what if you don't agree with him? It's called a debate forum and he's debating his point, whether you agree with him, or not.

................................

A balanced "debate" deserves to have the antagonist (i.e. Tommy..) attempt to both address his opponents arguments, and to provide some genuine evidence to back his nonsensical claims...

Ben, Victor, veya, 4ever, and occasionally l'il ol'me, have all produced evidence-backed and scientifically argued positions that prove his opinions wrong..

And yet Tommy keeps on dragging up the same old denialist nonsense.
The prat is a real menace to any attempt at balanced debate on the subject -- he is the one who should leave threads on scientific subjects alone --  not any of the rest of us.    

sassy wrote:There is a direct correlation between increased solar activity and increased global temperatures here on earth.


No there isn't.   As I posted NASA has said there has been a DECREASE in solar activity and the main rise in temperature has been in the last 30 years.

Tommy Monk wrote:Listen wolfboy... I have never denied that Temps have increased over last 100 years or so...
I have produced the actual facts about how much this rise has been and when...
This has always been the facts the ipcc and nasa and others have actually said... but I have told the facts without adding the hyperbolic waffle that others have used in their articles...
From 1880 to now there has been an estimated temp rise of 0.85 degrees centigrade.
Over the last 20 years there has been no significant temp rise at all, and coincidentally, solar activity has remained constant level over this time too... (estimated 0.06 degrees centigrade change over last 20 years)
Solar activity has increased significantly over the last 100 years or so.

There is a direct correlation between increased solar activity and increased global temperatures here on earth.
Other planets in our solar system have also seen a rise in their global temperatures over this same time.

Look at the facts I tell you... think about them... check them out yourself if you dont believe me...   And for every new link - every new topic - every new discussion we all bring in here to discuss this 'Global Warming/Climate Change' issue you just keep dragging in your old regurgitatied BS and spewing it NON-STOP! 
NO, WE DO NOT BELIEVE YOU - We have pointed out your data - your own links - your own articles have clearly stated they are based on faulty information processes and you still don't GET IT!

Think Texas is hot now? Wait 85 years

Question 4everatwat...?
Why do you keep on repeating the same discredited bullshit...!?
And with ever increasingly laughable excuses for what has been proven to be bullshit based deception on an industrial scale...!?
Have some facts...
HOW MUCH HAS THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RISEN SINCE 1880?
Averaged over all land and ocean surfaces, temperatures warmed roughly 0.85 degrees Celsius from 1880 to 2012, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see page 3 of the 2013 summary report).
https://www2.ucar.edu/climate/faq/how-much-has-global-temperature-risen-last-100-years
And given the increased solar activity over this period... there is nothing at all surprising or unusual about the subsequent temperature rise.
Solar activity and temperatures have now risen back to normal levels that we had before the unusual previous 200 year cold period known as 'the mini ice age'.
Do some research into what I'm saying and stop being a mindless gullible fool spouting nonsense!!!
Thank you!

4EVER2 wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Listen wolfboy... I have never denied that Temps have increased over last 100 years or so...
I have produced the actual facts about how much this rise has been and when...
This has always been the facts the ipcc and nasa and others have actually said... but I have told the facts without adding the hyperbolic waffle that others have used in their articles...
From 1880 to now there has been an estimated temp rise of 0.85 degrees centigrade.
Over the last 20 years there has been no significant temp rise at all, and coincidentally, solar activity has remained constant level over this time too... (estimated 0.06 degrees centigrade change over last 20 years)
Solar activity has increased significantly over the last 100 years or so.

There is a direct correlation between increased solar activity and increased global temperatures here on earth.
Other planets in our solar system have also seen a rise in their global temperatures over this same time.

Look at the facts I tell you... think about them... check them out yourself if you dont believe me...   And for every new link - every new topic - every new discussion we all bring in here to discuss this 'Global Warming/Climate Change' issue you just keep dragging in your old regurgitatied BS and spewing it NON-STOP! 
NO, WE DO NOT BELIEVE YOU - We have pointed out your data - your own links - your own articles have clearly stated they are based on faulty information processes and you still don't GET IT!

But now you're going to jump ship and claim that you've never stated otherwise when you entire history of blather is over there in your archival posting history

Think Texas is hot now? Wait 85 years

Question 4everatwat...?
Why do you keep on repeating the same discredited bullshit...!?
And with ever increasingly laughable excuses for what has been proven to be bullshit based deception on an industrial scale...!?
Have some facts...
HOW MUCH HAS THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RISEN SINCE 1880?
Averaged over all land and ocean surfaces, temperatures warmed roughly 0.85 degrees Celsius from 1880 to 2012, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see page 3 of the 2013 summary report).
https://www2.ucar.edu/climate/faq/how-much-has-global-temperature-risen-last-100-years
And given the increased solar activity over this period... there is nothing at all surprising or unusual about the subsequent temperature rise.
Solar activity and temperatures have now risen back to normal levels that we had before the unusual previous 200 year cold period known as 'the mini ice age'.
Do some research into what I'm saying and stop being a mindless gullible fool spouting nonsense!!!
Thank you!

Sweet Jesus, there's nothing I/we would enjoy more then have you pull up a chair and behave like an adult and have a rational discussion about these drastic global changes that are obviously taking place all around us ...but you've been such a 'FUCK-WIT' to deal with in any topic ...it's just futile to try.

And now you've jumped ship and claim you've never denied that 'Global Warming' isn't happening! 

Solar activity and temperatures have now risen back to normal levels that we had before the unusual previous 200 year cold period known as 'the mini ice age'.

4EVER2 wrote:

Solar activity and temperatures have now risen back to normal levels that we had before the unusual previous 200 year cold period known as 'the mini ice age'.

2 seconds that's all it took - it was right up there in your quoted post!
And if you need to go flush your head from all of your confusion - flip/flops and utter bafflements, please do so! 
And no, duffus one - I'll not be writing you an apology ...but do go ahead and hold your breath!  That will be a refreshing change!

4EVER2 wrote:

Solar activity and temperatures have now risen back to normal levels that we had before the unusual previous 200 year cold period known as 'the mini ice age'.

2 seconds that's all it took - it was right up there in your quoted post!
And if you need to go flush your head from all of your confusion - flip/flops and utter bafflements, please do so! 
And no, duffus one - I'll not be writing you an apology ...but do go ahead and hold your breath!  That will be a refreshing change!

Tommy Monk wrote:

sassy wrote:There is a direct correlation between increased solar activity and increased global temperatures here on earth.


No there isn't.   As I posted NASA has said there has been a DECREASE in solar activity and the main rise in temperature has been in the last 30 years.

No there hasn't... solar activity increased from 1900 to around 1980 (which is also where temps increased)... where level of solar activity has stayed at this much the same higher level over the last 30 years... and over the last 20 years there has been no significant temp change at all... estimated to be maybe 0.06 degrees if any...


The level of solar activity over the last 30 years is at a higher level than there was 100 years ago... and has remained about the same level now as it has been over this last 30 year period...