As we approach the next Conference On The Parties in Paris, where lots of Warmists will take lots of fossil fueled trips from all over the world, many of them sucking at the teet of the government via taxpayer funded hotel rooms, etc and so on, members of the Cult of Climastrology are trotting out a new Imperative. Brad Plumer at Vox is the latest
The math on staying below 2°C of global warming looks increasingly brutal
Here’s a capsule summary of the big UN climate talks this year:
1) The good news: Every country is submitting a detailed pledge to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
2) The bad: Those pledges, added together, aren’t nearly enough to keep us below 2°C of global warming. Short of drastic changes, we’re in for some serious shit.
Point 2 can be tricky to conceptualize, since it involves so many moving parts. For more detail, I’d recommend this new paper in Environmental Research Letters by Glen Peters, Robbie Andrew, Susan Solomon, and Pierre Friedlingstein. It’s the clearest presentation I’ve seen of how far off course the world is from its stated 2°C climate goal. And it illustrates why the United States, Europe, China, and even India would have to drastically rethink their climate policies to stay below that target.
Now, for years and years we’ve been told that the CO2 cutting pledges and such just aren’t good enough to keep the world below 2C (3.6F) warming by 2100 (despite there only haven been a meager .8C (1.4F) increase since 1850, and, at best, statistically insignificant warming since 1997), but, now, the Cult of Climastrology is demanding that more be done than what they call meager “carbon pollution” cuts, as espoused in the rest of the Vox screed, along with many, many others. There’s been a growing movement to push for more and more and more. Yet, interestingly, most Warmists aren’t willing to make changes in their own lives. Weird, eh?
Teach yes the temps have gone up by “only” 1.8F since 1880
But
In the first 100 years. How much did they go up? About .3F
Since 1970 they have gone up 1.5F
As even an idiot can see the rate of increase has not been linear as carbon pollution has oncreSed dramatically so have our temps
So John, do you have all the other 135 year time-span temperature records for, let’s say, the past 4 billion years? If not, how could you possibly know that the temperature didn’t increase as fast, or faster, in the past? And even if you did, that in no way proves why it’s allegedly warming. Speaking of idiots, what cult believes that the earth’s temperature records began around 1880? “Since 1970 have gone up 1.5F” So you’re sure that the temperature recording system in place that can miraculously tell us that the earth’s temperature has gone up .1C or whatever is 100% accurate? And what about satellite records that show no warming for 19 years? One could obviously ask the same question about satellite accuracy, but the fact is that almost 60% of the world’s land-based temp records are infilled, or to put another way, guessed at.
jl,
Any measurements from land based NOAA thermometers should be referred to as tamperatures.
File this under:
-It’s okay to pollute, if it’s in the name of Green Energy.
http://m.pe.com/articles/plant-783703-gas-energy.html?utm_campaign=Breaking+News+Emails&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=22956945&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_AdYRvW9YLsqcUS3ihllYfDgdZIMppGTvakMp4i_BDT6Igq9zA8xDPddUWFfhAWEfEPLxkCj5mOBM2bHm1DofNkmJ6Qw&_hsmi=22956945
Mr Puppies wrote:
Well, I don’t know about everywhere, but I can’t be the only person who has wondered why International Falls, MN, is so often the coldest place in the contiguous 48 states. Why, it’s almost like they have some sort of bias to read the thermometer a tiny bit cooler!