Nothing yet? Well, from the
http://www.ucar.edu/research/climate/future.shtml site, I found this quote:
"A vast majority of climate scientists agree with the IPCC consensus that Earth will warm along with increasing greenhouse gases."
I just don't know where you get the 95% from nor the human induced part of your quote. Science is where you take a hypothesis and try to prove it. If you are successful, then others try to confirm your work. Once an experiment proves your hypothesis wrong then the whole thing falls apart.
Climate is very complex. Check out this page:
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/382_myths.htm Almost half way down, while they are trying to dispell the "human activities contribute only a small fraction of carbon dioxide emissions" myth, they talk about a balance that has existed for 10,000 years. That is indeed interesting.
That 10,000 years is an anomoly. The earth's temperature has been within 2 degrees Celcius for 203 of the 239 data samples. That is it has been within 2 degrees 85% of the time and within 4 degrees in all samples except 1 where it hit 2.06 C. Why has the earth's temperature been mostly within 2 degrees for the past 10,000 years?
Check the graph from GRID and UNEP in the Myth 7 section of the
http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs/atmosphere-energy/climate-change/ten-myths.html website. The past 10,000 has been quite warm. I have plotted the data myself and found that the average temperature for the past 400,000 years up to 1950 is -4.52 degrees Celcius. The average is much cooler than what it was in 1900. I got the data from
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/temp/vostok/vostok.1999.temp.dat and calculated the average using a spreadsheet. If you exclude the anomolous past 10,000 years of data, the average drops to -4.85 C.
To contrast this, the highest temperatures found by this data were more than 3 degrees Celcius warmer than it was in 1900. Since the ice cores only took samples at 1 meter intervals, the hottest and coldest years were probably missed. So, the question remains. Why has the past 10,000 years had an average of -0.36 C while the average for the past 400,000 has been -4.5 degrees Celius cooler?
Why would scientists ignore the anomolies? Why do they quote greenland data from 1992 when that year was an anomoly? Why do they choose to ignore salps that are an indicator of a natural mechanism that deals with excess carbon in the atmosphere? Why are they cherry picking data? Why have the Inuit only recently been able to feel the heat of the sun in December? And why won't anyone answer my questions?
John M Reynolds
