Gee, I wonder what NASA says? Is up really down like jerm says? Has CO2 stopped being a GHG? http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,1and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources. AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES Statement on climate change from 18 scientific associations "Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009)2 AAAS emblem American Association for the Advancement of Science "The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)3 ACS emblem American Chemical Society "Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)4 AGU emblem American Geophysical Union "Humanâinduced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5 AMA emblem American Medical Association "Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changeâs fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)6 AMS emblem American Meteorological Society "It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7 APS emblem American Physical Society "The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earthâs physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)8 GSA emblem The Geological Society of America "The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouseâgas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)9 SCIENCE ACADEMIES International academies: Joint statement "Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the worldâs climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10 USNAS emblem U.S. National Academy of Sciences "The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)11 U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES USGCRP emblem U.S. Global Change Research Program "The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12 INTERGOVERNMENTAL BODIES IPCC emblem Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change âWarming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.â13 âMost of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely* due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.â14 *IPCC defines âvery likelyâ as greater than 90 percent probability of occurrence.
further support for the concept that co2 lags... http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/...made-co2-is-not-the-driver-of-global-warming/ An important new paper published today in Global and Planetary Change finds that changes in CO2 follow rather than lead global air surface temperature and that âCO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2â The paper finds the âoverall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere,â in other words, the opposite of claims by global warming alarmists that CO2 in the atmosphere drives land and ocean temperatures. Instead, just as in the ice cores, CO2 levels are found to be a lagging effect ocean warming, not significantly related to man-made emissions, and not the driver of warming. Prior research has shown infrared radiation from greenhouse gases is incapable of warming the oceans, only shortwave radiation from the Sun is capable of penetrating and heating the oceans and thereby driving global surface temperatures. The highlights of the paper are: ⺠The overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere. ⺠Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 11â12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature. ⺠Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5-10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature. ⺠Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature. ⺠Changes in ocean temperatures appear to explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980. ⺠CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2, and changes in atmospheric CO2 are not tracking changes in human emissions. The paper: The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature
and here is a link to the peer reviewed paper itself... Highlights ⺠Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 11â12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature. ⺠Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5â10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature. ⺠Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature. ⺠Changes in ocean temperatures explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980. ⺠Changes in atmospheric CO2 are not tracking changes in human emissions. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658
No science org of national or international standing rejects the consensus on AGW. None. Virtually all of them concur. Yet jerm is so insane that he thinks it is only 0.3%. Which coincidentally is how much of head has brain matter in it. His argument is breathtakingly moronic. jem, do you have kids?
No it doesn't. You have zero science showing CO2 lags temperature. Everyone knows CO2 only leads temps because CO2 is a GHG. Have you figured out what a GHG is yet?
Bro, he's stated on here that he lives with his mommy. A bachelor. A real shame that that bloodline will be lost.
NO brainproof the quantities themselves will not change nor did I at anytime say imply or infer they would. I don't like the intentional misuse of charts to create unnecessary alarm. And yes I know which axis is X and which is Y. WTF is wrong with YOU? Because I'm not trying to change the data dumb ass, only it's presentation. Your chart makes the data look more dramatic than the change in data really is. It's that simple. I don't have a God, stupid. I'm probably going to Hell.
Oh not to scary to me personally. Scary to those who don't understand charts and how they can be manipulated. You know, AGW alarmist sheeple for instance.
You keep repeating that the chart is manipulated. How so? You don't know the X from the Y and you're now going to school us on how to read a chart. Start Y at zero (strange, as I doubt the Earth had zero CO2 in the atmos.) You sitting in your hovel, missing teeth and suffering from strabismus, doesn't make it so. Both axis are linear. We're now 33% above the pre-modern era. The majority of gains (off previous scale-high of 300ppm) in the last 60 YEARS. Yeah, the f*cking data is scary. You'd be scared sh*tless if you could read above a 2nd grade level.