Global warming is real


#3124

The tree ring data wasn’t given. Neither was any of the other proxy temperature data from any other source. All they gave was the approximate replication of temperature over time that they calculated by reducing and manipulating that data. Results are NOT data.

By the way, estimating temperature from tree ring data is voodoo science. There are simply too many variables in the growth rate of trees.


#3125

What do you mean it wasn’t given? Did you expect all the data to be listed out?

Almost all data requires some “manipulation” to be useable.


#3126

Pointing out that it was warmer or colder in the past is not saying anything beyond it was warmer or colder in the past. Saying climate changes is only saying that climate changes. No one disputes that and that alone does not refute anthropogenic climate change. The temperature record we have covers the period for which humanity activity has by definition been at a peak. The properties of CO2 are well understood and humankind contribution to altering the mix of the atmosphere is well recorded.


#3127

And what factors affect the growth of tree rings?


#3128

And that’s pure BS. You cannot demonstrate experimentally that raising CO2 levels is causing any of the current warming.

You cannot demonstrate that the current warming is in any way different from previous cycles using any data that isn’t completely cooked.


#3129

No it’s simply a fact. The proxies are not accurate enough to even begin to show we’re any warmer today than during previous cycles at similar periods during the same cycles.


#3130

The important demonstration would be how the current warming is like that of the past.


#3131

It is… .


#3132

That’s what data is … the numbers you use to reach your conclusion. Your source only gives the conclusion, not the data.

And I know what manipulation is, and saying that data is manipulated is not a bad thing, it’s a normal function of number crunching, particularly when using different proxies to approximate a completely different set of numbers.


#3133

In terms of cause.


#3134

It’s not just the accuracy of the proxies, it is also a matter of data density. The bulk of ancient proxy temperature data comes from Antarctica, Greenland and a handful of thick sediment locations on continental shelves, at a frequency of one or two values per year at best, and the density (and accuracy) goes down dramatically the farther back in time they go.

Today we have precision data from hundreds (tens of thousands, if you count satellite data) of locations all over the globe, taken hourly (or more) each day, 365 days a year. There is no real comparison. That’s why any graph depicting temperature going back hundreds of thousands of years has degraded resolution prior to about 1850 and the error bars grow as you go back in time.


#3135

You can’t show cause since we’re repeating the same cycle just as we have four previous times on roughly the same timescale.

In order to show cause you have to demonstrate this cycle is in any way substantially different than previous cycles.


#3136

No argument from me. This goes right to the same point I made about recorded temps.

We’ve only had accurate thermometers since 1650, only a handful of those in circulation in the then “known world” prior to 1700, and none for about 90% of the surface of the planet prior to 1940.

There isn’t enough accurate data to draw any conclusions from and certainly not to determine that we’ve exceeded the norms of previous cycles nor that CO2 is the driver.


#3137

Ok, it’s a cycle. Then what was the cause of that cycle the previous four times?


#3138

Well, it certainly wasn’t industrialization.

The climate is far too complex to narrow it down to a single or even several factors.


#3139

Well the climate does not warm up because the clock says so. If one cannot say why it warmed in the past and demonstrate that’s the reason it is warming now then the “it is a natural cycle theory” looks very weak.


#3140

There is a difference between “because of the clock” and “like clockwork.” Look at any graph by a reputable source of the estimated temperature for the last 600,000 to 2 million years and you will see a pattern of approximately 100,000 year long cold periods interspaced by approximately 10,000 year long inter-glacial periods … repeating “like clockwork.” We are currently in the 12th millennium of the most recent inter-glacial warm period (aka the Holocene)


#3141

Has a cause for previous warming cycles been identified and does that Sam cause apply today’s?


#3142

Not only is Global Warming real it is a National Emergency!


#3143

Thats like the Mayan and Aztec Calendar. Why is the world still here?