|Quoting Superfly (Reply 39):|
Quoting Klaus (Reply 31):
And as the saying goes: Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts!
I can say the same thing to you as well.
That's the whole point – it applies to absolutely everybody.
The whole point behind science is that its only measure is observable reality and that scientific research is designed to converge towards ever more precise explanations of reality.
And if you want to know what the actual state of scientific research in climatology is, do you really think that asking psychologists, economists or biologists polled by oil industry lobby groups will be the smarter choice rather than asking actual climatologists who get paid regardless of the direction of their conclusions?
This choice of yours seems rather peculiar, to put it this way.
|Quoting windy95 (Reply 41):|
Contrary to the IPCC and others the science is not settled.
Among actual climatologists, the main questions – namely whether climate change is under way and whether human activities are the probable main driver – actually are
"The" science as in every last imaginable question
absolutely settled in any
field of natural science.
It is of course still possible that climatologists might one day find their current consensus to have been incorrect and in need of a 180 degree reversal, but there is simply no significant support for this position at this time, and the evidence keeps stacking up against it day by day.
|Quoting windy95 (Reply 41):|
But as long as scientific funding by governments stays focused on model simulation supporting preconceived views rather than the development of scientific theory sopported by testing we will continue to see junk science. Follow the alarmist money and it goes right to the teet of big government,
There is no actual evidence that such an immense conspiracy was actually going on. And too many climatologists would have to gain a lot more by disproving climate change than by confirming it and yet it stays the consensus of actual climate researchers.
Even just in the very short window this graph displays the warming trend is unmistakeable. It is clearly visible that there are the usual short-term deviations, but also that there is a larger-scale upwards trend which is further underscored the larger the time scale chosen.
File:Instrumental Temperature Record.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The upwards slope is also obvious here, even though it's just six years which is next to meaningless for a major trend.
This gives a better view of the larger trend:
File:Recent Sea Level Rise.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What your whole posts effectively amounts to is claiming that the past year with its particularly cold winter on the northern hemisphere somehow nullified a much larger trend already running through more than one hundred years.
That Hypothesis is already statistically unsound which forces its rejection. And increased weather variations have indeed been predicted during the ongoing climate change. Your own graphs are quite in line with that, too.
Unfortunately the prediction is that even further extremes on the upside are to be expected as well. It would be great if this would turn out not to be the case, but recent observations give little hope of the consensus theory being incorrect after all.