Dire outlook despite global warming 'pause': study

May 19, 2013
An island near Stockholm is shown lighted by a sunrise on June 15, 2009. A global warming "pause" over the past decade may invalidate the harshest climate change predictions for the next 50 to 100 years, a study said Sunday—though levels remain in the danger zone.

A global warming "pause" over the past decade may invalidate the harshest climate change predictions for the next 50 to 100 years, a study said Sunday—though levels remain in the danger zone.

Writing in the journal Nature Geoscience, an international team of climate scientists said a slower rate of warming increase observed from 2000 to 2009 suggested a "lower range of values" to be taken into account by policy makers.

While the last decade was the hottest since records began in 1880, the rate of increase showed a stabilisation despite ever-rising levels of Earth-warming greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Scientists have alternatively explained the flatter curve by oceanic heat capture, a decline in solar activity or an increase in volcanic aerosols that reflect the Sun's rays.

Because of the hiatus, warming in the next 50 to 100 years "is likely to lie within the range of current climate models, but not at the high end of this range," said Alexander Otto of Oxford University's Environmental Change Institute, co-author of the new study.

Otto and his team used up-to-date data on temperatures and levels of solar radiation trapped in the atmosphere by greenhouse gases, to make new projections for climate warming.

The United Nations is targeting a global average maximum temperature rise of two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) on pre-industrial levels, for what scientists believe would be manageable climate change.

In 2007, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned in a report of the temperature rising by as much as 6.4 degrees C in the worst emissions scenario.

Study co-author Reto Knutti of ETH Zurich said data ruling out the most extreme scenarios for near-term warming was clearly welcome news.

"But even if the response is at the low end of the current range of uncertainty, we are still looking at warming well over the two-degree goal that countries have agreed upon."

To meet the two-degree goal, countries are negotiating curbs to emissions of Earth-warming greenhouse gases released by fossil fuel burning.

Only last week, the level of carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere breached a threshold of 400 parts per million—a level never experienced by humans and considered the absolute maximum for the two-degree target to remain within reach.

Many scientists believe that on current trends, Earth is set for warming much higher than the two-degree target.

Commenting on the publication, University of New South Wales climate researcher Steven Sherwood said the conclusions "need to be taken with a large grain of salt until we see what happens to the oceans over the coming years."

The authors had partly based their finding on a higher-than-expected absorption of heat by the world's oceans, he said, but other research has suggested this storage may reverse due to natural phenomena such as El Nino.

Explore further: Spain defends Canaries oil drilling plan

More information: Paper: dx.doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1836

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Climate chief warns of 'urgency' as CO2 levels rise

Apr 29, 2013

The UN's climate chief called for urgency Monday as she opened a new round of global talks amid warnings that Earth-warming carbon dioxide levels were approaching a symbolic threshold never seen in human ...

US scientists report big jump in heat-trapping CO2 (Update)

Mar 05, 2013

The amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the air jumped dramatically in 2012, making it very unlikely that global warming can be limited to another 2 degrees (1.2 C) as many global leaders have hoped, new federal figures ...

2C warming goal now 'optimistic' - French scientists

Feb 09, 2012

French scientists unveiling new estimates for global warming said on Thursday the 2 C (3.6 F) goal enshrined by the United Nations was "the most optimistic" scenario left for greenhouse-gas emissions.

Recommended for you

Study shows no lead pollution in oilsands region

21 hours ago

New research from a world-renowned soil and water expert at the University of Alberta reveals that there's no atmospheric lead pollution in Alberta's oilsands region—a finding that contradicts current scientific ...

User comments : 78

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

VENDItardE
1.3 / 5 (36) May 19, 2013
alarmist nonsense.
dogbert
2 / 5 (43) May 19, 2013
The old "If things are not as bad as we thought, they are bound to get worse" foolishness.

Bad news is bad, Good news is bad. The sky is falling.

Chicken Little cannot be reasoned with.
Shootist
1.7 / 5 (30) May 19, 2013
Que es el diagnóstico? Mañana y mañana y mañana.

Always tomorrow.
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (43) May 19, 2013
Writing in the journal Nature Geoscience, an international team of climate scientists said a slower rate of warming increase observed from 2000 to 2009 suggested a "lower range of values" to be taken into account by policy makers.

"Lower range", yeah right! It's much more difficult to convince all of the fools for increased taxes unless they're "saving something".

Scientists have alternatively explained the flatter curve by oceanic heat capture, a decline in solar activity or an increase in volcanic aerosols that reflect the Sun's rays.

LOL. All kinds of excuses, but never a falsification of the theory though, couldn't possibly be that! Rubes, one and all.

ubavontuba
2.1 / 5 (39) May 19, 2013
the rate of increase showed a stabilisation despite ever-rising levels of Earth-warming greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
First they admit they've been wrong...

Scientists have alternatively explained the flatter curve by oceanic heat capture, a decline in solar activity or an increase in volcanic aerosols that reflect the Sun's rays.
Then they admit they've been trying to prove their preconceived bias anyway they can think of.

Go figure.

jackjump
1.5 / 5 (31) May 19, 2013
http://www.climat...20BP.gif

It's going to get colder, not warmer.
cantdrive85
2.2 / 5 (37) May 19, 2013
Colder, warmer... Any prediction is foolhardy, somehow this incomplete model is better than that incomplete model. You will not know the future until it arrives. Even then it's left to interpretation of the " facts".
Shootist
2.3 / 5 (31) May 19, 2013
Colder, warmer... Any prediction is foolhardy, somehow this incomplete model is better than that incomplete model. You will not know the future until it arrives. Even then it's left to interpretation of the " facts".


FACT: The climate will change.
cantdrive85
2.2 / 5 (31) May 19, 2013
Colder, warmer... Any prediction is foolhardy, somehow this incomplete model is better than that incomplete model. You will not know the future until it arrives. Even then it's left to interpretation of the " facts".


FACT: The climate will change.

I stand corrected, one of the few predictions that is likely to pan out.
210
3.3 / 5 (19) May 19, 2013
OK, I truly have NO opinion in this argument because it is like a 'DOMESTIC DISPUTE/DISTURBANCE' there is SO much hate flying around that no reasoned discussion appears to ever take place around this topic. There is hate/accusation against Al Gore, on up, Al Gore on Down, one simply cannot get either side or argument to present its facts and a neutral party parse the data, just cannot be done!!! But, I do have a question. If there is NO global climate change, WHAT IS HAPPENING to all the pollutants and carbon and 'stuff' we have been emitting in excess of natures/natural emissions common to a living world (forest fires, volcanos, etc, etc, etc.) AND, if there IS global climate change and we WAIT for tomorrow to get here, as suggested by -cantdrive85- is that too late to solve whatever will be wrong once what is wrong gets here? Will we look like Venus or Mars? And can it be fixed and at what price? I was in Beijing and Shanghai 4 two months 2012, OMG!! U never see the SUN!
word-
MikPetter
4.3 / 5 (16) May 19, 2013
Study co-author Reto Knutti of ETH Zurich said data ruling out the most extreme scenarios for near-term warming was clearly welcome news.
"But even if the response is at the low end of the current range of uncertainty, we are still looking at warming well over the two-degree goal that countries have agreed upon."
dogbert
2.2 / 5 (34) May 19, 2013
210,
But, I do have a question. If there is NO global climate change ...


Everyone knows that climate changes. Climate does change.

The questions are 'How is it changing?', 'Are the changes unusual -- good or bad?' and 'Should we try to modulate the climate?'

The climate has been doing fine for millions of years without our interference.

The real driving force of the AGW proponents is social redistribution of wealth. That is the bottom line. It is not science, it is politics.
brianweymes
3.5 / 5 (19) May 19, 2013
250, It's far cheaper to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases and mitigate the worst effects of warming now than to wait until cities flood and lakes dry and mass extinction happen and only then act. The real moderate, impartial people here are the scientists, the vast majority of whom believe climate change is man-made and a threat to civilization. If you want a truly "balanced" view, to one side you have people who deny much warming is happening at all, or it's natural and a good thing. On the other end, you have people saying equally unsupported incredible things like the sea level will rise 100 meters next year after west antarctica slides into the ocean or whatever. The neutral view, as much as there is one, is the one voiced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which says man-made warming is near certainly happening (95% chance but soon to be 99%) and sea level will rise 1 meter by 2100 (probably closer to 2 meters), among other things.
gregor1
2.3 / 5 (31) May 20, 2013
No way is it cheaper to mitigate for a non existent problem. If you believe the IPCC you really haven't been paying attention. AGW is the new goldrush and when there's such huge amounts of cash on the table corruption follows. Al Gore makes a propaganda movie and scams $200,000,000. Insurance companies raise premiums and scam 80 billion. Green groups become rapacious multinations exploiting an unpaid work force and are now willing to sacrifice the environment in exchange for mega bucks. Bankers (Goldman Sacks) bribe the US President to create a new 'derivative' that never goes down in value (Isn't this a ponzi scheme?). And... re the above... climate scientists employ pr people to provide spin in the form of press releases to put out the fires they've created when the real world evidence refuses to comply.
brainweymes This is VERY expensive
antigoracle
2.2 / 5 (31) May 20, 2013
AGW was always the cult's dogma disguised as science and designed to prey on our concerns and fears. It was inevitable that reality would reveal the truth. So, as the AGW foundation of lies crumbles and they can no longer veil their scam behind science, they must revert to just dogma and prophesies of doom and gloom, to keep the cult together.
vjman
2.1 / 5 (19) May 20, 2013
So Global Warming is dead? No need to spend trillions to combat it?
Hail Global Warming!!!

As comrade Stalin once said:
"The facts are against us?
The worse for the facts..."

Egleton
2.6 / 5 (17) May 20, 2013
You clutch at straws.
Go tell your Ubermeister, King Coal, he is going down. Cigar smoking capitalist pig.
And you, poor fools, grovel at his feet hoping for crumbs from his fat stomach. Have you no shame? No pride?
If there is money to be made from photocells, what of it? Be a man. Stand up for yourself. Grab some of the action.
But no. Poor lapdogs.
When the fat old man goes down, where will you turn then for your crumbs?
MaiioBihzon
2.8 / 5 (24) May 20, 2013
CO2 has exceeded 400 parts per million in our atmosphere. The "developing world" is increasingly developed and therefore hungry for power and fossil fuels. Oil is cooking on the front-burner (sorry for the pun) than ever.

We've been altering our local and regional environments for thousands of years, and now it has obviously matured into a planetary phenomenon.

"Anthropocene" is a valid term. While it can have negative connotations, our species has achieved something no other species has managed in the history of Earth. We have altered the planet. We are the latest mass extinction, but we are also the most transformative force in the world in recent times. And we are the only transformative force operating on a planetary scale that can be guided by intelligence and choice.

There is grim stuff here, sure. But there is something hopeful here, too. We ARE capable of terraforming worlds ~ we know that because we have already done it. And we may make better choices tomorrow.
triplehelix
2.1 / 5 (21) May 20, 2013
"While the last decade was the hottest since records began in 1880, the rate of increase showed a stabilisation despite ever-rising levels of Earth-warming greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Scientists have alternatively explained the flatter curve by oceanic heat capture, a decline in solar activity or an increase in volcanic aerosols that reflect the Sun's rays.

"

This is exactly what I have been saying for literally 13-14 years now, it's actually 1999-2013 that this has stabilised, not 2000-2009.

The theory of global warming is that as CO2 rises, so does temperature. We see data here showing this to not be true. Ergo, the theory should be revised.

What has caused it to stop/slow down? Oh, that's right, a mass load of naturally occurring phenomena that we have no control of. If lowered sun activity stops the warming, then a heightened sun activity will start the warming, and that, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly what is happening. You cant tax people based on sunspots though.
drhoo
3.5 / 5 (16) May 20, 2013
Who says there has been a pause at all??

Since climate estimates have many factors, not all known, why should this relatively flat period indicate a flattening of the effect?

The reconstructed temp histories have decade long deviations from norm even prior to industrialization. Note that the deviations very rarely go on for more than 20 years indicating that MMGW might be isolated from the other effects based on this duration of excursion or even more sophisticated statistical techniques.
Que a simple cheesy quote about statistics, cmon ya know you want to post it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (10) May 20, 2013
"Otto and his team used up-to-date data..."

Indeed, I always do which makes me somewhat unique here.

In related news, the independent third-party report on rossis ecat has been published on arxiv;

"Computed volumetric and gravimetric energy densities were found to be far above those of any known chemical source. Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources..."

-As found on the ecat world site. Production and delivery continues. So if these things don't start blowing up, perhaps the only thing we will need to worry about by the end of the century is waste heat?
Noumenon
1.9 / 5 (43) May 20, 2013
These facts defeat the 'Cataclysmic AGW' predictions of the far left, and their true agenda of instituting socialist policies, wrt controlling human behavior to "save the planet", and is proof that their models that claim accuracy of tenths if a degree per decade is deeply fraudulent. Not flawed, but fraudulent.

Humans dump an extra 4% of co2 over and above natural causes. Of course human activity is a natural cause itself so why would nature not choose to take it into account in its natural balance,... but in any case, we can do things about it, so I have no problem with reasonable environmental policies as long as they are not engineered counter to freedom and counter to free market.

---------------------------

http://www.bbc.co...22567023
Noumenon
2 / 5 (43) May 20, 2013
A global warming "pause" over the past decade may invalidate the harshest climate change predictions for the next 50 to 100 years


Which is plenty of time to transition off of carbon based energy sources as is expected to occur in any case, purely on account of Natural free market forces.
Feldagast
3.1 / 5 (15) May 20, 2013
Fact is, they have been cutting down rainforests to make room for farming and expansion like there is no tomorrow. What better method for sequestering all that co2 than plants? The forests are the lungs of the planet and they have a serious case of emphysema. For those of you claiming a sea level rise of unimaginable proportions read this.
http://www.thereg...thought/
antigoracle
2.4 / 5 (26) May 20, 2013
A global warming "pause" over the past decade.....
Scientists (AGW ALARMIST) have alternatively explained the flatter curve by oceanic heat capture, a decline in solar activity or an increase in volcanic aerosols that reflect the Sun's rays.

oceanic heat capture - where are the scientific studies that prove this?
decline in solar activity - prior to this the AGW Alarmists screamed, it's not the sun.
volcanic aerosols - again, where are the scientific studies that prove this?

This is not science, but pure conjecture, on which the entire AGW dogma is built.
This is the reaction of a desperate cult that's witnessing the collapse of their dogma.
Expect more baseless propaganda from them.
Neinsense99
3.3 / 5 (16) May 20, 2013
http://www.climate4you.com/images/VostokTemp0-420000%20BP.gif

It's going to get colder, not warmer.


Is 'climate4you' by any chance connected with ToysRUs?
freethinking
2 / 5 (25) May 20, 2013
Careful everyone. If you go against AGW you go against what Obama stands for. If you are against what Obama stands for, then,
The IRS will investigate you, ask you all sorts of questions.
The DOJ will start reading your emails, tracking your movements, listen to your phone calls
http://www.dailym...ces.html

Just wait till Obama care, you will be denied medical treatment if you oppose or support anything you shouldn't.

BTW, who is Obama's favorite character on Hogan's Hero's? Answer: Schultz! Why? Because even when he see's things he keeps saying "I know nothing","I hear nothing" or "I see nothing"

gregor1
2 / 5 (20) May 20, 2013
Fact is, they have been cutting down rainforests to make room for farming and expansion like there is no tomorrow. What better method for sequestering all that co2 than plants? The forests are the lungs of the planet and they have a serious case of emphysema. For those of you claiming a sea level rise of unimaginable proportions read this.
http://www.thereg...thought/


Very true Tropical rainforests and people of the developing world are the
collateral damage of green groups that have morphed into rapacious multinational corporations who trade in pedaling fear. Just look at the death of up to 4 million children in South East Asia due to the 10 yr irrational fear campaign orchestrated by Green Peace against Golden rice. They should be tried for crimes against humanity.
JohnGee
2.8 / 5 (20) May 20, 2013
Just wait till Obama care, you will be denied medical treatment if you oppose or support anything you shouldn't.
If you honestly believed that, you wouldn't have made that post. You're just bloviating.
gregor1
2 / 5 (24) May 20, 2013
Mass Forced sterilization In India
"a working paper published by the UK's Department for International Development in 2010 cited the need to fight climate change as one of the key reasons for pressing ahead with such programmes. The document argued that reducing population numbers would cut greenhouse gases, although it warned that there were "complex human rights and ethical issues" involved in forced population control."
http://www.guardi...on-india
More than 20,000 people tossed off their land to grow trees for carbon credits
http://www.guardi...erything
Destruction of the Amazon to grow soyabeans for Biofuel. (Funny we need biofuel when oil and gas are so plentiful)
http://news.monga...els.html
Need I go on. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Create a phony climate scam and these things happen
deepsand
3.3 / 5 (23) May 20, 2013
A global warming "pause" over the past decade.....
Scientists (AGW ALARMIST) have alternatively explained the flatter curve by oceanic heat capture, a decline in solar activity or an increase in volcanic aerosols that reflect the Sun's rays.

oceanic heat capture - where are the scientific studies that prove this?
decline in solar activity - prior to this the AGW Alarmists screamed, it's not the sun.
volcanic aerosols - again, where are the scientific studies that prove this?

The problem with prolonged prevarication and obfuscation, compounded by a pronounced ignorance of the subject matter, is that, with time, you forget the details of your earlier pronouncements, such that you inevitably contradict yourself, as is here the case.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (11) May 21, 2013
Massed forced sterilization
But wait! Salvation is on the horizon:

"...An independent test [of the miraculous ecat] by third parties who were credible...much to my, and I suspect many other people's surprise... is exactly what we got... unless this is one of the most elaborate hoaxes in scientific history it looks like the world may well be about to change."

-Alas forced pop control is still necessary until the obsolete cultures Designed to conquer their enemies by outgrowing and overrunning them, are DESTROYED. Otherwise rossis gadgets will only make things far worse.
freethinking
2.1 / 5 (21) May 21, 2013
JohnGee, If you thing Obama and Progressives will NOT do things to destroy those that appose their agenda, you need to learn history of progressives.

It has come out that Obama and his cronies have done there best to destroy whistle blowers, investigated reporters, used the IRS to silence opposition, used the DOJ Read emails, tapped into phone conversations, tracked locations, etc. etc.

I nor would any Conservative support any president (republican or democrat) who will use the force of government to silence or destroy the opposition. Progressives have no such issue. Progressives, the ends justify the means.
freethinking
2.1 / 5 (22) May 21, 2013
Just for fun, here is a 1975 article on the tornadoes we experienced today. The science was settled then. We had to act then. But hey, Progressives can't let an emergency go unused, even it is a manufactured emergency.

http://stevengodd...cooling/

freethinking
2.1 / 5 (22) May 21, 2013
It appears even CBS reporters are being investigated by the Government: http://www.thebla...eporter/

I use to work in telecom industry and the joke was if you mentioned plutonium or terrorism on the phone you would trigger a recording device.

Now it appears, you can mention those words safely, as Muslim terrorists have found out. What triggers recording devices, email sniffers, IM captures, today are the words: Patriot, fast and furious, Benghazi, Tea Party, conservative, church, loyal, constitution, IRS.

We need to make mandatory the reading of "Animal Farm" and "1984" for all High School and University Students. That way no one can claim ignorance.

Progressives favorite TV show of all time: Hogans Hero's: Their favorite Character. Schultz. Why? Because like Schultz "They know nothing" "They see nothing" "They hear nothing"
Neinsense99
3.3 / 5 (21) May 21, 2013
Careful everyone. If you go against AGW you go against what Obama stands for. If you are against what Obama stands for, then,
The IRS will investigate you, ask you all sorts of questions.
The DOJ will start reading your emails, tracking your movements, listen to your phone calls
http://www.dailym...ces.html

Just wait till Obama care, you will be denied medical treatment if you oppose or support anything you shouldn't.

BTW, who is Obama's favorite character on Hogan's Hero's? Answer: Schultz! Why? Because even when he see's things he keeps saying "I know nothing","I hear nothing" or "I see nothing"


Why do I feel like I'm in a high school cafeteria after reading that?
JohnGee
3.6 / 5 (23) May 21, 2013
You aren't the only one Neinsense99. It must be stressful seeing communists around every corner...
deepsand
3.7 / 5 (24) May 21, 2013
This forum has devolved into a magnet for kooks of all stripes.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (11) May 21, 2013
We need to make mandatory the reading of "Animal Farm" and "1984" for all High School and University Students. That way no one can claim ignorance
I think in many schools they are. But I also think, like dan dennett and others, that religious instruction should also be compulsary.

Thai is, kids should be taught about all religions together, comparatively, and on an equal footing so that the public can begin to understand how much they have in common. And also to clear up the confusion and disinformation they all spread about each other.

And in this context the latest scientific conclusions about the veracity of the biblical myths and the extent of errors to be found in all the books should be taught as well.

Frankly I dont think any religion could survive this sort of clarity and honesty.
freethinking
1.9 / 5 (22) May 21, 2013
The difference between a communist and Progressives like Obama. The communists are honest about their intent.
deepsand
3.1 / 5 (21) May 21, 2013
When free_from_thinking doesn't understand the Science, he evades by changing the subject to political ideology.
triplehelix
2.1 / 5 (21) May 22, 2013
So what happens when this pause, or a decline even, is seen for 20 years? 30 years? 50 years?

With every passing year comes more evidence of alarmism. 2100 we will still all be here (barring war or disease) and the climate will be fine, we won't all be cooked alive, we won't be frozen, and if we are, it will be due to natural factors, which are the major driving forces of climate.

Do humans have an effect? Yes, then again, a butterflies wings has an effect on wind speed. The problem is our effect is laughable compared to natural forcings. It's like saving money by going through your spending history and blaming your lack of liquid cash on a mars bar for 69p while ignoring the bugatti veyron £2.5million in the list. That is the level of absurdity being used in climate sciences. Humans effects on climate are occurring, but are an extremely minor player
freethinking
2.1 / 5 (21) May 22, 2013
Problem is with science as it is practiced in the America is that if you support whatever Obama stands for, you get the money.

Hey, if you donate enough, you get to investigate those who oppose your king

http://www.breitb...ma-Donor

#1 Progressives saying these days "I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing!"
second only to.... "It's Bush's fault."
no fate
3.5 / 5 (13) May 22, 2013
So what happens when this pause, or a decline even, is seen for 20 years? 30 years? 50 years?


We would be lucky.

With every passing year comes more evidence of alarmism.


It coincides with more alarming observations.

Do humans have an effect? Yes



Thank you.

The problem is our effect is laughable compared to natural forcing
.


150 years of population explosion and industrialization have provided enough evidence to prove the above statement patently wrong.

We made a continent sized hole in the ozone layer at one pole and an ocean sized one above the other. It took 50 years.

If you believe our activities aren't having a major effect on the earths systems you need to research alot more.
antonima
1.9 / 5 (14) May 22, 2013
DIRE OUTLOOK. Standing on the shore, water is now up to knees... humanity has been faced with climate change before, it can adapt to it nowadays better than at any time in the past. It IS alarming, but I wouldn't call it 'dire'. It looks like the worst predictions of 'runaway warming' were overstated, so whats the worst that could happen?
islatas
4.1 / 5 (14) May 22, 2013
I've reread the beginning of the article 3 times to be sure I read it correctly prior to posting. I get the impression most commenters have read it incorrectly. Nowhere does it say the global temperature has stopped rising. Its says the rate of temperature increase has stabilized for this period. There's a huge difference in meaning between the two. Last decade was the hottest of the last 13 decades. This decade is trending to be even hotter. I don't think any politician on Earth can bias thermometers.

I really can't believe this argument exists. Some of you are so self obsessed you think climate research exists only for and because of the USA. Why are you on this site? If you really think altering the chemical composition of a system will result in no change to that system's properties you need to go back to elementary school.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (23) May 23, 2013
So what happens when this pause, or a decline even, is seen for 20 years? 30 years? 50 years?

Guess you missed the fact that the cherry-licked HADCRUT data that your kind are so fond of claiming shows a cooling trend actually shows a WARMING trend from 2008 through 2012.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (23) May 23, 2013
Problem is with science as it is practiced in the America is that if you support whatever Obama stands for, you get the money.

Hey, if you donate enough, you get to investigate those who oppose your king

http://www.breitb...ma-Donor

#1 Progressives saying these days "I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing!"
second only to.... "It's Bush's fault."

When free_from_thinking doesn't understand the Science, he evades by changing the subject to political ideology.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (23) May 23, 2013
DIRE OUTLOOK. Standing on the shore, water is now up to knees... humanity has been faced with climate change before, it can adapt to it nowadays better than at any time in the past.

Neither man nor the ecosystem upon which he is so intimately dependent have ever before been forced to attempt to adapt to such rapid changes.

Have you a cure for species extinction?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (9) May 23, 2013
DIRE OUTLOOK. Standing on the shore, water is now up to knees... humanity has been faced with climate change before, it can adapt to it nowadays better than at any time in the past.

Neither man nor the ecosystem upon which he is so intimately dependent have ever before been forced to attempt to adapt to such rapid changes.

Have you a cure for species extinction?
Yah it's called technology. The cause of our troubles is also the only chance we have of a cure. A one-way path.

Tech is what forced our brains to grow and made us human to begin with. Tech alone enables us to survive in inhospitable climes. It is evolution externalized. We didn't need to grow fur when we could make clothes and build fires.

Tech tells us that we are only a transition species, an intermediate form. Our successors will probably enjoy the increased energy available from AGW.
antigoracle
2.3 / 5 (25) May 23, 2013

Have you a cure for species extinction?

We don't need a cure for extinction as much as we need one for AGW Alarmist stupidity.
deepsand
2.8 / 5 (24) May 24, 2013

Have you a cure for species extinction?

We don't need a cure for extinction as much as we need one for AGW Alarmist stupidity.

Spoken like a true doofus.
freethinking
2 / 5 (24) May 24, 2013
deepsand. You and Obama have been watching too much Hogan's Hero. Both of you say "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing."

BTW, got your talking points today from the White House?
runrig
3.7 / 5 (12) May 24, 2013
deepsand. You and Obama have been watching too much Hogan's Hero. Both of you say "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing."

BTW, got your talking points today from the White House?


Must have come to the wrong site.
Could have sworn it was to do with science.
antigoracle
2.2 / 5 (24) May 24, 2013
deepsand. You and Obama have been watching too much Hogan's Hero. Both of you say "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing."

BTW, got your talking points today from the White House?


Must have come to the wrong site.
Could have sworn it was to do with science.

Nope, move along. With headlines like the one above, it is all about AGW Cultist scripture, prophesying doom and gloom, not science.
freethinking
2 / 5 (23) May 24, 2013
Progressives and Science??? When do progressives and science go hand in hand.
According to Progressives, facts are not science, evidence isn't science, however consensuses is science. Just like the consensuses that Al Gore invented the internet (I just received a magazine that has nothing to do with science where the writer claimed in seriousness that Al Gore invented the internet. The writer is obviously a Progressive) .

Yup, Progressives "I see Nothing, I hear Nothing, I know Nothing." (Other than talking points from the White House)
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (21) May 25, 2013
deepsand. You and Obama have been watching too much Hogan's Hero. Both of you say "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing."

BTW, got your talking points today from the White House?

Spoken like a true doofus.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (21) May 25, 2013
deepsand. You and Obama have been watching too much Hogan's Hero. Both of you say "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing."

BTW, got your talking points today from the White House?


Must have come to the wrong site.
Could have sworn it was to do with science.

Nope, move along. With headlines like the one above, it is all about AGW Cultist scripture, prophesying doom and gloom, not science.

Spoken like a true doofus.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (21) May 25, 2013
Progressives and Science??? When do progressives and science go hand in hand.
According to Progressives, facts are not science, evidence isn't science, however consensuses is science. Just like the consensuses that Al Gore invented the internet (I just received a magazine that has nothing to do with science where the writer claimed in seriousness that Al Gore invented the internet. The writer is obviously a Progressive) .

Yup, Progressives "I see Nothing, I hear Nothing, I know Nothing." (Other than talking points from the White House)

Spoken like a true doofus.
freethinking
2 / 5 (24) May 25, 2013
Deepsand, Progressives, hate the truth and they will not question Progressive dogma.

http://www.thebla...n-obama/

Conservatives in general love science and search for the truth, which is why conservatives are the majority in real science and engineering.

deepsand
3.1 / 5 (23) May 25, 2013
As is his usual want, free_from_thinking avoids issues of Science and evades by telling lies about how "Conservatives in general love science and search for the truth." Guess he's missed the studies that find the contrary.
Neinsense99
2.9 / 5 (15) May 26, 2013
deepsand. You and Obama have been watching too much Hogan's Hero. Both of you say "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing."

BTW, got your talking points today from the White House?

Spoken like a true doofus.


My, how we do fuss about a doofus.
Howhot
3.8 / 5 (10) May 27, 2013
I heard some dingaling bean head say; Progressives, hate the truth and they will not question great leader; Howard Dean. The only people I saw running were the toad stools like you who don't respect a women's reproductive rights and would force old people into the streets to beg homelessly denying them health care, or good forbid, food stamps.

http://www.bartco...care.jpg
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (20) May 28, 2013
Facts:

http://www.thebla...-to-see/

Progressives: "I see nothing, I know nothing, I hear nothing..."
Still getting your check from Obama? How is your free Obamaphone?

Interesting facts about progressives: More dead people vote for Progressives than for Republicans. More Criminals vote for Progressives than for Republicans. More illegal aliens vote for Progressives than Republicans. Vast majority of reporters vote progressive than republican.
deepsand
3.3 / 5 (21) May 28, 2013
free_from_thinking is still having a very hard time figuring out the differences between Science and Politics.

And, given his penchant for parroting neo-conservative lies, he also has trouble with telling fact from fiction, truth from falsehood.
Howhot
4.3 / 5 (11) May 28, 2013
Good old @freesex says
Facts:
and then one is directed to a Republican funded trash the president site, so clickers beware. It tags you with cookies. Nice move freesex. POS.
I've love you lousy claim
More Criminals vote for Progressives than for Republicans.
How low can you go? Really, and I claim to be a progressive, liberal, socialist , environmentalist, green etc ... etc. I love all your junk labels; ya lousy dip.

If I was the common man, I certainly would vote Democrat simply because your tent is shrinking and shrinking. Love your posts. Keep them going fringe case.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (20) May 29, 2013
deepsand. You and Obama have been watching too much Hogan's Hero. Both of you say "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing."

BTW, got your talking points today from the White House?

Spoken like a true doofus.


My, how we do fuss about a doofus.

Well, when you are stupid and incapable of an appropriate response.
deepsand
3.3 / 5 (16) May 31, 2013
Well, when you are stupid and incapable of an appropriate response.

Which explains Potty Mouth's frequent inability to even form a complete sentence, let alone engage in substantive rational and civil discourse on matters of Science.
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (18) May 31, 2013
Howhot, why does everything with progressives revolve around sex. Most likely because the more progressive you are the more perverted you become.

For Progressives, truth and honor doesn't matter. However the funny thing about truth is that, no matter how much is is shouted down, no matter how much it is hated or legislated against, no matter how few people speak it, it is still truth. Conservatives love the truth.

Progressives Hezbollah's use the force of government to suppress the truth. Which is why Obama has used the DOJ, IRS, EPA, DOE, against his opponents.
deepsand
3.1 / 5 (17) Jun 01, 2013
Howhot, why does everything with progressives revolve around sex.

How has it escaped your attention that it is the neo-conservatives who are hell-bent on regulating sexual behavior.

You are a ****ing hypocrite.
freethinking
1.2 / 5 (17) Jun 01, 2013
deepsand, have you noticed, Progressives are trying to force sexual perversion down everyone's throats?
You Must ACCEPT Homosexual behavior as normal, or you will be destroyed.
http://www.thebla...se-down/

But violence is ok for Hezbollah progressives to use and threaten to further their cause. Hezbollah Progressives don't believe in diversity of opinion, just diversity of perversion.

Journalism Professor calling for killing of NRA members by firing squads (sounds like a Hezbollah Progressive). Progressives using the IRS to persecute conservatives. Can any one assure me a Progressive will not use Obamacare to persecute someone? Hey, you don't actively support Homosexual perversion so no hospital care for you or your family. Hey you, you have more than 2 children, no maternity care for you. (Unless you are Muslim, a homosexual couple, or elite Progressive
freethinking
1.2 / 5 (17) Jun 01, 2013
Deepsand, isn't it the homosexual Hezbollah progressives lobby trying their hardest to ALLOW and decriminalize sex between boys and men. Mohamed would be proud of the gains Hezbollah progressives are making in the USA.

http://americansf...re-14134

Isn't it the Hezbollah Progressives trying to limit free speech, freedom of religion, 2'nd amendment, freedom of the press, by using the IRS, EPA, DOJ, and the DOE?
deepsand
3.4 / 5 (15) Jun 01, 2013
deepsand, have you noticed, Progressives are trying to force sexual perversion down everyone's throats?

That is a blatant lie. Progressives are simply saying that you've no right to force your beliefs in such matters on others, and that you've no right to discriminate against those who do not share your beliefs.

Homosexuality and bisexuality predates man's recorded history.

Nor are such confined to man. Many other species of fauna are neither exclusively heterosexual not monogamous.

The Catholic Church itself has ancient rites for the marrying of same sex couples.

It is you who seek to circumvent the intent of the US Constitution so as to impose your own religious beliefs on those who do not share such.
Neinsense99
3.2 / 5 (13) Jun 02, 2013
Howhot, why does everything with progressives revolve around sex. Most likely because the more progressive you are the more perverted you become.

For Progressives, truth and honor doesn't matter. However the funny thing about truth is that, no matter how much is is shouted down, no matter how much it is hated or legislated against, no matter how few people speak it, it is still truth. Conservatives love the truth.

Progressives Hezbollah's use the force of government to suppress the truth. Which is why Obama has used the DOJ, IRS, EPA, DOE, against his opponents.

Truth, as predetermined by your desired outcome. Otherwise known as the sound of your own voice.
freethinking
1 / 5 (14) Jun 02, 2013
Child rape has been around almost since time has began.
Murder has been around almost since time has began.
Rape has been around almost since time has began.
Stealing has been around almost since time has began.

So according to Hezbollah Progressive logic, Child rape, Perverted sexuality , Murder, Rape, theft, all needs to be protected. Perverted sexuality trumps Religious rights.

I also find it hilarious that Hezbollah progressives claim conservatives are against the constitution and against individual rights. Who has used the IRS, DOJ, EPA, DOE to go against it's enemies? It is the Hezbollah Progressives that are forcing people to comply with their belief system or be punished. No matter how hard truth is suppressed, truth is still the truth.

Neinsense99
2.8 / 5 (11) Jun 03, 2013
Child rape has been around almost since time has began.
Murder has been around almost since time has began.
Rape has been around almost since time has began.
Stealing has been around almost since time has began.

So according to Hezbollah Progressive logic, Child rape, Perverted sexuality , Murder, Rape, theft, all needs to be protected. Perverted sexuality trumps Religious rights.

I also find it hilarious that Hezbollah progressives claim conservatives are against the constitution and against individual rights. Who has used the IRS, DOJ, EPA, DOE to go against it's enemies? It is the Hezbollah Progressives that are forcing people to comply with their belief system or be punished. No matter how hard truth is suppressed, truth is still the truth.


Pssst! He thinks that if he repeats "Hezbollah Progressives" often enough, it will be more than a ridiculous smear.
freethinking
1 / 5 (11) Jun 04, 2013
If the word fits, wear it with Pride. Hezbollah Progressive.

Neinsense99
2.8 / 5 (9) Jun 08, 2013
If the word fits, wear it with Pride. Hezbollah Progressive.


Is your shoe box talking back?