Last time there was a long pause there were at least 66 Excuses to try and explain the Pause. Is this a new attempt, or just a reason to say that warming should be way worse?
Extra Dust in the Atmosphere Could Be Hiding the True Effects of Climate Change
A dust storm covers the Persian Gulf and Middle East in 2014.
It’s no secret that humans have made big changes to Earth and its atmosphere. But as greenhouse gases have built up in the air and our planet’s average surface temperature has risen, a lesser-known phenomenon has been happening.
Earth’s atmosphere has gotten dustier since the pre-industrial age. And all those additional particles have likely been subtly counteracting some of the effects of climate change—cooling the planet a little bit, according to a review study published Tuesday in the journal Nature Reviews Earth & Environment.
The effects of atmospheric dust are absent from nearly all climate studies and projections, according to the new analysis. Meaning that these models could be underestimating the warming associated with human-caused climate change. And, if the atmosphere becomes less dusty, we could be in for even more rapid temperature spikes.
“We want climate projections to be as accurate as possible, and this dust increase could have masked up to 8% of the greenhouse warming,” Jasper Kok, lead study researcher and an atmospheric physicist at the University of California, Los Angeles, said in a press statement. By adding the impacts of dust into future climate models, scientists could improve them, he continued. “This is of tremendous importance because better predictions can inform better decisions of how to mitigate or adapt to climate change.”
The New Pause is over 7 years, and most of the warming can be explained by regional effects, rather than global. Considering that we’ve only seen a 1.5F increase in global temperatures since 1850, how big is 8%, even if caused by Mankind? The cult has to cult, though.
First, they had to figure out how atmospheric dust has changed over time. Using computer modeling and existing data from ice cores and sediment records, they found that the amount of large dust particles in the atmosphere has gone up by about 55% in the present, compared with the pre-industrial age. The reasons behind our increasingly dusty Earth are multitude, but it comes down to land use changes like increased agriculture and development, along with climate shifts like drought, according to the researchers.
Land use? Hmm, that’s not actually global warming. Are they admitting that anthropogenic global warming is BS? If the dust is blocking sunlight and reducing what the warming should be, doesn’t that rather mean that the sun is the primary driver?
Teach the last 8 years have been the hottest 8 years in record.
There has been no pause.
Sorry, Johnny-wrong again. The major data sets (rss, uah, gistemp, hadcrut)all show cooling for the last 6-7 years. And “hottest on record” only counts the last 150 years or so. Out 4.5 billion
And yet after the previous so-called 20 year “pause”, what happened? The Earth continued to warm. Whenever there is a peak year (usually from a strong El Nino) global warming deniers start a new countdown until the trough just before the next even higher peak year calling the interim a “pause”.
The mean global surface temperature is affected by more than just greenhouse gases. El Ninos and La Ninas temporarily increase or decrease the global temperature. Atmospheric aerosols and particulates, for example from volcanoes, temporarily decrease it. Atmospheric greenhouses reduce the loss of heat from Earth.
Mr Teach imagines that a global climate conspiracy group/team/organization meets and generates a new excuse when their “fake theory” is threatened. Ominously (for the “warmists”), the mean global surface temperature has DECREASED since 2016’s El Nino massive peak!!! A new “pause”!
Global warming deniers use the variability to attack the data supporting global warming.
It’s likely that global warming deniers (GWD) have never seen a temperature record from the 20th and 21st century. Here’s a temperature trend calculator that has the data from the global datasets including Roy Spencer’s UAH satellite calculations.
You can choose the database you wish (HadCrut, UAHv6. etc), input the years (e.g., 1950 to 2023) and hit “Calculate”.
You’ll immediately notice the year-to-year variability in the measurements.
We know, we know, GWDs imagine that all the databases are fraudulent, “doctored” and “adjusted” to support global warming.
Dear Elwood:
Trend = “GIGO”
James,
That’s not much of an argument.
As I said, GWDs simply deny the evidence.
Do you believe the Earth is warming?
Dear Elwood:
As you said:
“As you said, GWDs simply deny the evidence.”
As I said: “Trend = “GIGO””
I believe the earth’s climate has been changing since Day 1.
Man is not the driver.
Haven’t seen anyone “deny” the warming. What is still very questionable is the amount and the cause. And even more importantly, the alleged effects. As said before, most alarmists stop at “it’s warming!”
Normally, when a theory is not demonstrated with reliable, repeatable, and documented experimental results, followed by those same, or at least very similar, results in the real world outside the laboratory, the theory is considered to have been disproved.
Not so with
global warmingclimate change! If the real world results have not matched the stated theory, instead of questioning the theory, the warmunists look for excuses why their predictions were not met.That’s because it is a religion.
That’s because it is a religion.
James,
Are you “arguing” that global warming is built on magic rules, imaginary beings and make-believe places just like religions?
The temperatures have been adjusted. Take, for instance, director of NOAA at the time Tom Karl saying in 1989 that “since 1881, most of the warming occurred before 1919-before the most recent increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. The global climate actually cooled from 1921 to 1979.” You won’t find single graph today that shows the 1921 to 1979 cooling
But of course the data do support the theory that increasing atmospheric greenhouse gases (eg, CO2) will cause warming. Not even the most ardent global warming denier still denies warming. As previously explained CO2 isn’t the only factor affecting the mean global temperature, but IS the primary driver of the current long term but of warming.
If the data supports the warming then there’d obviously be no need for “adjustments”. But yet, there are many instances of this happening.
“CO2 is the primary driver…” That is still a theory, with no verifiable cause- effect evidence to support it.
To believe any numbers on any subject put forward by lying leftists is akin to believing in fairy tales and witch doctors.
They are all liars.
It simplifies matters for rightists to simply ignore/deny all data, whether around global warming, Covid, vaccines, evolution, abortion et cetera, et cetera and so forth.
The warmest year recorded was 2016, “coincidently” the beginning of Mr Teach’s current “pause”, LOL.
This “pause” will end at the next warmest year recorded, LOL.
If all the data are “faked or adjusted”, what data does Mr Teach use to make his claim that there is a “pause”?
Is Mr Teach ready to declare global warming over once again?
Dear Elwood:
The manmade global warming theory fails to meet the guidelines to be a scientific theory.
Among the failures is its well-known inability to predict, plus it’s impossible to test the theory. It is not falsifiable.
Instead, it relies on anecdotal events that may or may not be related and/or true. That numerous people have financial relationships based on claims further reduces its viability.
That means you must take it based on faith.
James,
The thermometer concept has been around for centuries. The Earth is warming as predicted.
What warming prediction do you claim has failed?
Measurements have been taken on land and sea. These are not anecdotal. Ice extent and mass is measured. Atmospheric CO2 is measured.
Numerous warming deniers have financial relationships with oil companies, FOX News or Heartland Institute.
Gee, all J really said is that the earth is warming, when the real issue is how much and why
“Warmest year recorded was 2016”. So when is the warmest year supposed to be recorded? Again, it would be why it was allegedly the warmest. That hasn’t been determined, which is the whole issue. But the best is “numerous warming deniers have financial relationships with oil companies…”. You mean as opposed to numerous bed-wetters that have financial relationships to governments, with governments having infinitely bigger pockets than any oil company? Really didn’t think that one out too well, did you?
But nonetheless it’s humerus when alarmists bring up the “funding” aspect of this issue, as every interest group is funded somehow.
If the alarmist group could actually prove that the skeptical side is wrong in their viewpoints, then obviously there’d be no need to bring up “funding”. That they bring up funding in an attempt to discredit is simply showcasing the fact that’s all they have
Jill,
The Earth IS warming. And 2016 HAS been the warmest year recorded. So far. So what’s your point.
True, the theory cannot predict the temperature of Bumfukt, Mississippi for 3PM May 22, 2047, but allowing for no asteroid strikes, no thermonuclear war and no supervolcano eruptions, it can be predicted that the 2050s will be warmer than the 2020s.
The funding issue was brought up by a global warming denier, Mr Lewis.
No one must prove that you are wrong in your viewpoints. The Earth IS warming, with no science-based reasoning to expect it to stop soon. Is the rate of warming increasing??
Do you “believe in” the data from the MWP (about 1000 years ago) more than you believe in the current data?
Until just a few years ago global warming deniers were insisting it wasn’t warming, blaming the melting sea ice and ice sheets on poorly sited thermometers and data “adjustments”. News flash, Jill. Ice sheets don’t read WUWT! Anyway, the deniers have been won over by data and now, finally, admit that it’s warming.
Jill – If the data are all faked, adjusted and manipulated why do you now admit that it’s warming? And since warming has no detectable effects, it can’t be your senses advising you. Are you just following the commands of your handlers like Watts, Teach and Gosselin? Were they persuaded by Watts’ own data on siting or by Berkeley’s analyses of temperature data, that is, science?
How much? Since 1970 the mean global surface temperature has increased 1°C (1.8°F).
Mechanism? 40% increase in atmospheric CO2.