The definitions of global warming are varied and can cause confusion, but clarity is vital for legal and policy reasons. A new standard has recently been proposed.
First it assumes that an average measurement of a wide natural weather fluctuation can be trended. Statistics tells us that the error sigma rate may be far too high and erroneous to use in this manner.
Then, even if we accept the erroneous trend, we see that it’s not the average high temperature that is changing but the low temperatures .. so, we are not getting hotter.. we are just getting milder… this just increases growing seasons and it questions how much impact on many of the ecological issues mentioned by the climate alarmists… maybe… just a little bit of adaptation is all that is needed.
Then we need to review that even though CO2 may have some small effect the bulk of the warming is an ongoing natural warming trend as we emerge from the little ice age that has been trending upward at a same rate long before humans added any significant CO2 to the atmosphere.
Further the correlation between ground and satellite data needs further validation due to the Heat Island Effect that has distorted the long-term trends.
Then we realize that these warming cycles are far from unprecedented and have happened at least 4 times before in the last 10,000 years with temperatures far higher that today or higher than the targets mentioned, and with significant historical data available to support this fact.
Unusual and Unprecedented Warming - Presentation to the AAPG ACE 2020
Bottom line… it raises questions that climate mitigation action may be unnecessary or ineffective and that we should set policy to just consider some focused adaption action. Many scientists are concluding this as the best policy.
The error bars for the main temperature trends are way smaller than the trend rise, so, yes warming is real. Even the FF companies admit this.
The high temperature tail is extending so yes the hot temperatures are going up as well as the average.
The little ice age was a local regional cooling in Europe, it wasn't global, and the warming of the last 40 years is not associated with it at all.
Reanalysis products such as ERA5 take all the heat island effects into account. There has been a recent myth that temperatures are going up because thermometers are in cities, this is just not true.
The most global temperature has fluctuated in the last 10,000 years is 0.5º. The 1.45º that we are at now is unprecedented. The rate of rise is also unprecedented in the last 300 million years. (with the exception of the 66Ma asteroid strike)
Try telling the 10 million Bangladeshi who have been forced from their land in the last 20 years through sea level rise induced saline intrusion that mitigation won't be necessary. I hope you don't live in Florida.
I am sorry but I have hard scientific data that does not support most of your statements… I don’t mind a scientific review but its not OK to just disagree without scientific support.
Probably the most urgent point to understand and review is the past historical warm periods that are global based on many studies…see the links I attached to the prior comment.
Also sea level rise is steady at 1 foot per century and I cannot help it if people build on flood plains.
I'm sorry, but you haven't got hard scientific data, you have YouTube videos from known climate deniers who have been widely and conclusively debunked. They have not published any peer reviewed studies or even applied for scientific grants. Their arguments simply don't align with the evidence.
By the way sea level rise is accelerating, just like all the other indicators.
Such UN targets raise many questions…
First it assumes that an average measurement of a wide natural weather fluctuation can be trended. Statistics tells us that the error sigma rate may be far too high and erroneous to use in this manner.
Then, even if we accept the erroneous trend, we see that it’s not the average high temperature that is changing but the low temperatures .. so, we are not getting hotter.. we are just getting milder… this just increases growing seasons and it questions how much impact on many of the ecological issues mentioned by the climate alarmists… maybe… just a little bit of adaptation is all that is needed.
Then we need to review that even though CO2 may have some small effect the bulk of the warming is an ongoing natural warming trend as we emerge from the little ice age that has been trending upward at a same rate long before humans added any significant CO2 to the atmosphere.
Further the correlation between ground and satellite data needs further validation due to the Heat Island Effect that has distorted the long-term trends.
Then we realize that these warming cycles are far from unprecedented and have happened at least 4 times before in the last 10,000 years with temperatures far higher that today or higher than the targets mentioned, and with significant historical data available to support this fact.
Unusual and Unprecedented Warming - Presentation to the AAPG ACE 2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ciY5GGUOAg&t=8s
Bottom line… it raises questions that climate mitigation action may be unnecessary or ineffective and that we should set policy to just consider some focused adaption action. Many scientists are concluding this as the best policy.
Here is more justification for this statement..
A Hot Time In The Old Holocene Climatic Optimum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP8nz0cVbzQ&t=2s
Lots to unpack.
The error bars for the main temperature trends are way smaller than the trend rise, so, yes warming is real. Even the FF companies admit this.
The high temperature tail is extending so yes the hot temperatures are going up as well as the average.
The little ice age was a local regional cooling in Europe, it wasn't global, and the warming of the last 40 years is not associated with it at all.
Reanalysis products such as ERA5 take all the heat island effects into account. There has been a recent myth that temperatures are going up because thermometers are in cities, this is just not true.
The most global temperature has fluctuated in the last 10,000 years is 0.5º. The 1.45º that we are at now is unprecedented. The rate of rise is also unprecedented in the last 300 million years. (with the exception of the 66Ma asteroid strike)
Try telling the 10 million Bangladeshi who have been forced from their land in the last 20 years through sea level rise induced saline intrusion that mitigation won't be necessary. I hope you don't live in Florida.
Always a pleasure.
I am sorry but I have hard scientific data that does not support most of your statements… I don’t mind a scientific review but its not OK to just disagree without scientific support.
Probably the most urgent point to understand and review is the past historical warm periods that are global based on many studies…see the links I attached to the prior comment.
Also sea level rise is steady at 1 foot per century and I cannot help it if people build on flood plains.
I'm sorry, but you haven't got hard scientific data, you have YouTube videos from known climate deniers who have been widely and conclusively debunked. They have not published any peer reviewed studies or even applied for scientific grants. Their arguments simply don't align with the evidence.
By the way sea level rise is accelerating, just like all the other indicators.
Let's end it here before we fall out.
Well done.
Caution…. Climate Uncovered is not a scientific site.. its an activist site and will cancel comments that don’t fit the climate emergency narrative.