Tons of media outlets think they Have Something, in that Team Trump would allow this Hotcoldwetdry report to be release. Here’s the Washington Post
And the NY Times
U.S. Report Says Humans Cause Climate Change, Contradicting Top Trump Officials
You can go round and round and find similar headlines all over the Leftist media. Here’s what the report supposedly finds
(1) Global annually averaged surface air temperature has increased by about 1.8°F (1.0°C) over the last 115 years (1901–2016). (which is about .3 to .4F above every other measurement, which is more like 1.4 to 1.5F since 1850, the end of the Little Ice Age)
(2) Based on extensive evidence…it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century [emphasis in report]. For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence. (there’s never any other explanation in Warmist World, except when they blame Nature for masking the effects, you know)
(3) Global average sea level has risen by about 7–8 inches since 1900, with almost half (about 3 inches) of that rise occurring since 1993. Human-caused climate change has made a substantial contribution to this rise since 1900, contributing to a rate of rise that is greater than during any preceding century in at least 2,800 years. (how many times have I noted that 7-8 inches is exactly average for the last 7,000-8000 years, since warm periods would have high sea rise and cool periods low to negative?)
(4) Relative to the year 2000, global mean sea level is very likely to rise by 0.3–0.6 feet (9–18 cm) by 2030, 0.5–1.2 feet (15–38 cm) by 2050, and 1.0–4.3 feet (30–130 cm) by 2100. (simply looking into a crystal ball)
(4) Annual average temperature over the contiguous United States has increased by 1.8°F (1.0°C) for the period 1901–2016; over the next few decades (2021–2050), annual average temperatures are expected to rise by about 2.5°F for the United States, relative to the recent past (average from 1976–2005)…. (more crystal ball gazing)
(5) The frequency of cold waves has decreased since the early 1900s, and the frequency of heat waves has increased since the mid-1960s (the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s remains the peak period for extreme heat in the United States). (doesn’t prove anthropogenic causation)
Realistically, this is all what one would expect from members of the Cult of Climastrology, putting out a doomy document right before the next UN IPCC occurs, because of course they’ll want to get their taxpayer funded fossil fueled trips to Bonn, Germany.
But, um, what of some other information in the Warmist screed?
(Daily Caller) The NCA is the work of scientists, but the report’s media messengers are embellishing some of the report’s key findings with respect to current U.S. weather trends.
The New York Times, for example, reported “that every part of the country has been touched by warming, from droughts in the Southeast to flooding in the Midwest to a worrying rise in air and ground temperatures in Alaska, and conditions will continue to worsen.â€
But that is not correct, according to University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, Jr., an expert on extreme weather trends and natural disaster costs.
Pielke, Jr, knocks it down, and notes many other things that are buried in the report but not showing in the media on extreme weather, like
https://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/926523050702520320
https://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/926523989454864384
The report was also unable to attribute drought, flooding, and precipitation trends, whether up or down, to anthropogenic causation.
They try and try, but, they cannot scientifically prove that mankind is mostly/solely responsible, hence weasel words like “likely”. It was better for Team Trump to allow the report to be released. Otherwise, they would have been accused of Censorship and stuff. This report does nothing to persuade Skeptics, and really doesn’t move the needle for the Warmists. Same old same old. It is cute how the media goes with “contradicting Trump” meme.
tRump will point out how ignorant and political our “deep state” scientists are.
Those ignorant of the methods and language of science, and reared on the false assurances of politicians, criticize the caution of scientists as being “weasels”.
Scientific theories are not “proven” in a strict sense, but as supportive evidence accumulate (and without evidence to falsify the theory or a reasonable alternative explanation), it becomes increasingly unreasonable to not accept the theory. That is not to say that the theory cannot be invalidated, only that it has not, and becomes increasingly un”likely” to be invalidated.
It is not “proven” that the current period of rapid global warming is the result of man’s burning fossil fuels but it is highly “likely”.
In the highly un”likely” event that all the world’s scientists, business leaders, religious leaders and government officials are wrong, and the American conservatives are right, we end up with a cleaner environment and less reliance on a diminishing natural and finite resource. In the highly “likely” event that American conservatives are wrong the Earth will continue to warm rapidly with the attendant sequelae. This simple risk/benefit analysis is why American conservatives concoct stories that a carbon tax will result in Americans living in caves.
The way science works is that multiple hypotheses are generated and evaluated. You are not very familiar with the area so are probably unaware that there were competing hypotheses including natural causes, changes in insolation, vulcanism, cosmic rays, it’s artifactual, ozone, rain forests… but none survived the test of time, observation and challenge.
What is your hypothesis? And what evidence do you have to support it? And magic is not acceptable.
Really, little guy?
Prove it.
Jeff, please look up the scientific method.
Finally, a global warming alarmist advocates personal responsibility among the other global warming alarmists.
“The way science works is multiple hypothesis are generated and evaluated….†And then, when someone disagrees with your “assertionsâ€, you try to sue them into oblivion. It’s then scientific way, right? Nice try though, J. In this case the IPCC was tasked to look only at man’s CO2 as causing climate change.†Funny-“multiple hypothesisâ€? No, just one. And then they torture the data to make it fit their hypothesis
j,
How many lawsuits for defamation have been filed by climate scientists? Two? That’s two too many in our opinion, but still not many compared to the thousands of climate science journal articles published each year.
We realize that you dispute the facts, but the Earth is warming as predicted. The only reasonable explanation at this time is that increased atmospheric CO2 is causing the retention of heat.
We realize that you dispute the fact that the Earth is warming, so debating the cause with you is pointless. Debating what evidence would persuade you of the reality of global warming is pointless, since you dispute the simplest facts.
Which doesn’t refute a thing I said, but thanks. As far as lawsuits, it’s 3 or maybe more. Mann has filed 2, and this other clown 1. Further more, the earth is not warming as predicted. In fact, nothing is happening as predicted. But here’s another look at that report. https://realclimatescience.com/2017/11/very-high-confidence-of-fraud-in-the-national-climate-assessment/
j,
You rarely spout anything worth refuting, but what little is, is refuted. All of your cited sources are right-wing denier sites. But thanks for trying.
As we’ve stated repeatedly, it’s difficult to debate someone who denies basic facts.
Jl: Further more, the earth is not warming as predicted.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg
Uuuh, scary graphs…
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lPGChYUUeuc/VLhzJqwRhtI/AAAAAAAAAS4/ehDtihKNKIw/s1600/GISTemp%2BKelvin%2B01.png