Global Warming Pause Challenged by NOAA Research

a reply to: newWorldSamurai

Excuse me?
We aren't supposed to question man made Global Warming/Global Climate change! Who are you to question the data? Questioning the data implies you're a denier. They want to make that a crime in the UK. I'm actually kinda surprised they hadn't pulled this thread.

Shame on you!

a reply to: newWorldSamurai

Peer review happens after the information is published, not before.

it's the Sun Its the Sun Its the Sun.
it's not political it's not biased & we still
need to clean our act up, but it's also time
to include that 1 million wide ball in sky
in our best guesses as to what climate may
or may not do.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Do you even have a background in college science? That response is so candid, yet still lacks any substance. In fact since you took an informal jab by trying to associate what I wrote with alarmism.

CO2 and CH4 are not the only problems that human activity event. We are causing mass extinction events all over the globe. We continue to pollute our waters, we continue to over fish, we continue to deforest and contribute to desertification, yet many of you want to say we are insignificant and our destructive activities do not need to be kept in check. However the reality is, this planet will become a wasteland NOT a tropical paradise if we continue to destroy the planet for profit.

There is no debate in science community about what is going on. What we have are think tanks who get paid to come up with bogus studies and knee-jerk emotional responses that cast doubt on what is really going on.

According to an email obtained by Media Matters, Bill Sammon imposed an order on Fox News journalists to cast doubt on climate change.

How The Merchants Of Doubt Push Climate Denial On Your Television

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What we have is a lack of understanding of science by those who get hoodwinked by the denialist arguments.

This is not much different than the tactics the tobacco industry used. They also ended up getting hit with RICO charges. Hopefully my generation can force the same action on the industries who are funding the campaign against good science.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Perhaps a poor choice of words. I stand corrected. It's not uncommon to have a data analysis review by a third party, independent or not. My point is, perhaps they could have done a better job to ensure accuracy.

Other climate scientists are calling BS on the NOAA's new analyses.
Fox News article

“While I’m sure this latest analysis from NOAA will be regarded as politically useful for the Obama administration, I don’t regard it as a particularly useful contribution to our scientific understanding of what is going on,” Judith Curry, a climate science professor at Georgia Tech, wrote in a response to the study.

“The new NOAA dataset disagrees with a UK dataset, which is generally regarded as the gold standard for global sea surface temperature datasets,” she said. “The new dataset also disagrees with ARGO buoys and satellite analyses.”

It's interesting to me, that a legit climate scientist would admit that satellite data suggests the Earth has been cooling for the past 17 years. The complete opposite has been shoved down our throats for that same amount of time, from the media, from politicians, from the liberal left, from other climate scientists.

I've also heard claims like "97% of all climate scientists agree that global warming is occurring" apparently this isn't true either and is just another false statistic someone came up with. Or perhaps Judith Curry is just part of the 3%?

Here is another article about the origins of the bogus 97% claim:
Fox News article

Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: Climate change is real, man-made and dangerous. President Obama tweeted that, and it has been repeated by countless others. It is tempting for a politician to claim that 97 percent of experts agree with you. But do they? The 97 percent claim was taken from a study paper by Australian John Cook, Climate Communications Fellow for the Global change Institute at the University of Queensland, and his colleagues, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters in May, 2013. The paper says nothing about the would-be dangers of climate change and it counts the number of publications, rather than the number of scientists, in support of human-made climate change. Never let facts get in the way of a good story.

I'm not at all surprised Obama would tweet such a pack of lies. They go on to say that of about 12,000 papers they went through on the subject, only about 40 of them explicitly stated that humans are the cause of global warming.