Thats exactly how science works. Lets say for instance, someone comes up with an experiment that gives a different result than is predicted by the general theory of relativity, guess what, it proves Einstein was wrong and its back to the drawing board. When your model is spewing out bogus predictions, you dump the model. Its the same with trading. If your model is giving you shitty entries and exits, you dump the model and try something new. At least thats what the winners do. The losers come up with up with all kinds of excuses. There are countless really intelligent people who have wasted their careers by chasing a bad idea. Everytime reality smacked them in the face, they did not abandon their idea, they pressed forward instead. People like that get to retire from their lifes work with no real accomplishments when they had the ability to do something great if they just let go. The global warming people need to do that. They just need to accept that they were scammed and get on with their lives. Imagine how bad they are going to feel in 50 years when they let the government sic some bureacrat on them, counting how many times they flushed the toilet and they find out it was all for not. This GW stuff is really about government control and people who think the government should be allowed to dictate how much energy a person can use are really leading us down a dangerous path.
Because ice traps air bubbles, and air correlates with air. Average temperatures are the highest since recording of temperatures began.
Predictions? "in 1988, James Hansen of NASA GISS fame predicted that the temperature would climb over the next 12 years, with a possible brief episode of cooling in the event of a large volcanic eruption. ... "12 years later, he was proven remarkably correct, requiring an adjustment only for the timing difference between the simulated future volcanic eruption and the actual eruption of Mount Pinatubo."
It is. You can see the trend here: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ Don't believe NASA? Okeee, how about the Climate Research Unit of the UK government here: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/ Okay, don't like NASA or the CRU? How about satellite measures: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_Temperatures.png I haven't seen the movie, but there was no "cooling period" from 1940 to 1980. It is not the main driver of global warming because the planet is being subjected to a solar minimum.
1- yes, but how do you know that it's an accurate comparison? I've seen air flask measurements from the 1800's that show CO2 at 550ppm. Which means that the method of collecting the data set and constructing the graph to be wrong and invalid. 2- temp recording began when? Just as we were coming out of the Little Ice Age, right? So why use THAT when there are other graphs from 100's of thousands of years that indicate that there have indeed been hotter periods?
US weather service used to report Atlantic ocean temperatures but stopped doing that 2 years ago. Reason is that temperature of Atlantic oceaniwas down two years in the row. If anyone has a link to Atlanic 's temperatures, please, post it.
Please cite the 550 ppm measurement so that I can address it. Secondly, please understand that ice cores correlate with other measures of atmospheric CO2 measures, such as walking outside and measuring it and is not the sole methodology used. There are a multitude of ways that we know that the Earth is warming: * Satellite Data * Radiosondes * Borehole analysis * Glacial melt observations * Sea ice melt * Sea level rise * Proxy Reconstructions * Permafrost melt
Two years is not a sufficient sample size. Additionally, here's a link showing the Atlantic temperature measurements: http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/dsdt/cwtg/catl.html