Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.

I read that meteorologists have taken to calling these neutral oceanic phase years, those without either an El Nino or a La Nina, "La Nada". : )

 

How igonorant can you be... fc.
I will show you through science that GHCs can and do cool the planet.
.

Nasa says Carbon dioxide cools.

"For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO, the two most efficient coolants in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95% of that total back into space."

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/


aerosols...
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/...ation-via-solar-magnetic-activity-modulation/


With the new results just published in the recognised journal Geophysical Research Letters, scientists have succeeded for the first time in directly observing that the electrically charged particles coming from space and hitting the atmosphere at high speed contribute to creating the aerosols that are the prerequisites for cloud formation.



Clouds, which are drops of water, occur more easily when water vapour in the atmosphere can condense around particles – dust or large clusters of molecules. Researchers have now shown that electrons caused by cosmic radiation can create small particles that can grow in the atmosphere into such cloud condensation nuclei. This is interesting in the light of the controversial theory proposed by Henrik Svensmark, DTU Space, who postulates a correlation between solar activity and the Earth’s temperature: when the Sun’s activity increases – and thereby magnetic fields (seen as more sunspots) – more of the cosmic particles deflect and fewer therefore reach the Earth’s atmosphere, whereupon there is less cloud formation and the temperature rises on the Earth’s surface. And conversely: when the magnetic field is weakened, the temperature drops. (Graphics: DTU Space)

The more cloud cover occurring around the world, the lower the global temperature – and vice versa when there are fewer clouds. The number of particles from space vary from year to year – partly controlled by solar activity. An understanding of the impact of cosmic particles – consisting of electrons, protons and other charged particles – on cloud formation and thereby the number of clouds, is therefore very important as regards climate models.
With the researchers’ new knowledge, it is now clear that here is a correlation between the Sun’s varying activity and the formation of aerosols in the Earth’s atmosphere. Initially, the researchers have demonstrated that there is a correlation, and they will therefore now carry out systematic measurements and modellings to determine how important it is to the climate

 

Yeah, blah blah blah.....so what? Increasing levels of CO2 are raising the world temp. There is no question about it. Only an idiot does not know that. Or Republican. Same thing.

 

Blah Blah Blah... I'm not going to read the scientific facts... (hands over ears)... Not going to listen.... blah blah blah. Sadly, even your recitation is wrong - Increasing world temperature leads CO2 levels. Only an idiot states otherwise.

 

Yes, and CO2 leads temperature higher. Only an idiot or a Republican (you have both covered) doesn't understand this.

And his "facts" are irrelevant. If any of them really mattered we would not be seeing temps rapidly rise like they are. The proof is in the current record you fool.

 

your comments have become so ignorant you are now comedy.

there has been no warming for 17 years.
and there has been no statistically discernable warming outside natural variation since the industrial revolution.

 

New paper --- Oceans can and have been net source for co2.

A paper published today in Biogeosciences finds the South China Sea is a net annual source of CO2 to the atmosphere. The findings oppose the commonly held assumption that oceans serve as a net sink for CO2, and add to several other recent peer-reviewed papers finding the oceans can act as net annual sources of CO2, and which demonstrate many prior assumptions of the global carbon cycle may be highly erroneous.

Based upon 14 field surveys conducted between 2003-2008, the authors find "The estimate of annual sea–air CO2 fluxes showed that most areas of the South China Sea proper served as weak to moderate sources of the atmospheric CO2." " Overall the four [regions of the South China Sea] contributed (18 ± 10) × 1012 g C yr−1 to the atmospheric CO2."

Seasonal variations of sea–air CO2 fluxes in the largest tropical marginal sea (South China Sea) based on multiple-year underway measurements

Biogeosciences, 10, 7775-7791, 2013

Author(s): W.-D. Zhai, M.-H. Dai, B.-S. Chen, X.-H. Guo, Q. Li, S.-L. Shang, C.-Y. Zhang, W.-J. Cai, and D.-X. Wang

Based upon 14 field surveys conducted between 2003 and 2008, we showed that the seasonal pattern of sea surface partial pressure of CO2 (pCO2) and sea–air CO2 fluxes differed among four different physical–biogeochemical domains in the South China Sea (SCS) proper. The four domains were located between 7 and 23° N and 110 and 121° E, covering a surface area of 1344 × 103 km2 and accounting for ~ 54% of the SCS proper. In the area off the Pearl River estuary, relatively low pCO2 values of 320 to 390 μatm were observed in all four seasons and both the biological productivity and CO2 uptake were enhanced in summer in the Pearl River plume waters. In the northern SCS slope/basin area, a typical seasonal cycle of relatively high pCO2 in the warm seasons and relatively low pCO2 in the cold seasons was revealed. In the central/southern SCS area, moderately high sea surface pCO2 values of 360 to 425 μatm were observed throughout the year. In the area west of the Luzon Strait, a major exchange pathway between the SCS and the Pacific Ocean, pCO2 was particularly dynamic in winter, when northeast monsoon induced upwelling events and strong outgassing of CO2. These episodic events might have dominated the annual sea–air CO2 flux in this particular area. The estimate of annual sea–air CO2 fluxes showed that most areas of the SCS proper served as weak to moderate sources of the atmospheric CO2, with sea–air CO2 flux values of 0.46 ± 0.43 mol m−2 yr−1 in the northern SCS slope/basin, 1.37 ± 0.55 mol m−2 yr−1 in the central/southern SCS, and 1.21 ± 1.48 mol m−2 yr−1 in the area west of the Luzon Strait. However, the annual sea–air CO2exchange was nearly in equilibrium (−0.44 ± 0.65 mol m−2 yr−1) in the area off the Pearl River estuary. Overall the four domains contributed (18 ± 10) × 1012 g C yr−1 to the atmospheric CO2.

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/11/new-paper-finds-south-china-sea-is-net.html

 

Your continued saying that there has been no warming has gone from being merely ignorant to totally ludicrous. You're like some retarded broken record.

There has been no pause at all in the warming of the earth. Dipshit.

And there certainly has been unnatural warming since the IR. Dipshit. Your saying otherwise just shows your ignorance. You are such a fool.

American Geophysical Union
"The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system — including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons — are now changing at rates and in patterns

that are not natural

and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century." (

 

The 40% rise in CO2 has been from man. Dipshit.

 

The 40% rise in CO2 has been from mann... as in Professor Mann from Penn State - the totally discredited hockey stick guy.