Considering the nearly continuous "this month/year is the hottest on record" reports we hear almost every month, I'd sure hate to see what happens if we start warming.
and many studies... some more recent... show that water vapor and clouds may lead to cooling. in fact the nasa site also says they are not sure what impact clouds have. you can find studies saying that lower clouds reflect the suns warming rays back up vs... high clouds trapping some heat. here is a review of a study which show that clouds provide a negative feedback... not a positive one. http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Clouds_Climate.pdf in short we don't yet really know if co2 warms or cools because we don't know enough about clouds and temps. . --- in short science has no idea if co2 is causing more warming or more cooling because the models have no idea what clouds are actually doing... at the moment.
http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/upload/climate-review-framing.pdf Bold mine. "10% confidence" blahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/upload/climate-review-framing.pdf Bold mine. "medium confidence"
http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/upload/climate-review-framing.pdf Blahahahahahaha!!!!!! 1896!!!! Blahahahahahahaha!!!!! ...."despite the significant intellectual effort that has been devoted to climate science."
yeah... who knows maybe we would have more food for the hungry. right now long term we have been warming out of an ice... if we had to choose warming or cooling back to and ice age... we should pick warming. would you pick cooling?
Yes, it's funny, that you don't even know what you are reading. It's hysterical. In a sad kind of way. 95% confidence.... The scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is extremely likely(at least 95% probability) that humans are causing most of it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels. In addition, it is likely that some potential further greenhouse gas warming has been offset by increased aerosols.[1][2][3][4] This scientific consensus is expressed in synthesis reports, by scientific bodies of national or international standing, and by surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their peer-reviewed publications, and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys. National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed current scientific opinion on global warming. These assessments are generally consistent with the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report summarized: Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as evidenced by increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, the widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.[5] Most of the global warming since the mid-20th century is very likely due to human activities.[6] Benefits and costs of climate change for [human] society will vary widely by location and scale.[7] Some of the effects intemperate and polar regions will be positive and others elsewhere will be negative.[7] Overall, net effects are more likely to be strongly negative with larger or more rapid warming.[7] The range of published evidence indicates that the net damage costs of climate change are likely to be significant and to increase over time.[8] The resilience of many ecosystems is likely to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate change, associated disturbances (e.g. flooding,drought, wildfire, insects, ocean acidification) and other global change drivers (e.g. land-use change, pollution, fragmentation of natural systems, over-exploitation of resources).[9] No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these main points. The last national or international scientific body to drop dissent was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists,[10] which in 2007[11] updated its statement to its current non-committal position.[12] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions.
"A factor-of-three uncertainty in the global surface temperature response to increased atmospheric CO2 as expressed by ECS has persisted through the last three decades of research despite the significant intellectual effort that has been devoted to climate science."
Really, don't worry about it. I am sure that Dr. Christy and Dr. Curry sufficiently answered all of the American Physical Society's questions.