Quote:
Originally Posted by This_person  Interestingly, I note several subtle changes in wording. Climate change replaces warming when it's noted that temperatures leveled off, cooled, and warmed all due to man-made influences. Aerosols are seen to level temperatures off, yet are touted as causing warming. The rise in temperatures noted earliest in the 20th century are, by any reasonable estimation, long preceding the man-made global warming gas emissions. Temperature variations THEN are due entirely to natural effects (assumed as solar activity in the explaination above), but later in the 20th century, models can't say the same thing? And, the global rise in temperatures noted above starts in the 70's. 30 years of global warming makes a trend?
Nothing from the IPCC makes sense, when looked at with a skeptical, logical lens. |
It has never been called the IPGW; it is the International Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC's conclusion is that man-made effects are now overcoming the natural climate-influencing factors.
It makes sense if you study it. There has always been variation in the planet's climate because it is a dynamic system. The many phenomena that influnce global temps have various interactions, not easy to understand in just a few sentences. One example: clouds reflect solar energy from space (albedo) creating a net cooling; they also reflect back heat from the earth's surface, which is why overcast nights are warmer than clear nights. This seemingly simple occurrence does not act alone; other things will affect the net gain or loss of heat -- GHG concentrations, aerosols, relative temp, etc.
For a good primer, see NOAA's Q&A (
Global Warming Frequently Asked Questions) or see other links in earlier posts.