No. Here's a handy graphic for you to enjoy and share, courtesy of Climate Nexus.
Also, you might want to ask the question: What has global warming done since 1998?
That question is addressed HERE, where this handy graphic is available showing the importance of ocean warming:
So, has global warming stopped? No, I'm afraid not.
Other posts of interest:
- How to get rid of spiders in your house
- Why is your poop green?
- How many cells are there in the human body?
- Is there really a plot hole in Harry Potter Goblet of Fire?
- How long is a human generation?
- Is blog ever really blue?
- How to not get caught plagiarizing
- The origin of the domestic chicken
- What are the three necessary and sufficient conditions of Natural Selection?
- How do I get rid of foot fungus?
- Which is better, Tap Water or Bottled Water?
- Has Global Warming stopped?
Also of interest: In Search of Sungudogo: A novel of adventure and mystery, which is also an alternative history of the Skeptics Movement.
- Log in to post comments
Joules??? Just fear crap made up by elitist left wingers to scare us. The theocratic right wing nutter republicans have told us you all are lying!!! and they would never lie to us average joes! I wish I could make that sound as awful as it really is.
Because the 1% and the right wing dimwits living at this time will all be dead in another 50+ years, they will not feel the full impact and don't give a schite about anything but themselves. So global warming will decrease about 300 yrs AFTER the collapse of the civilization that supports this present technology. Hopefully there will be enough of us around to start over and hopefully get it right. But judging from past and present history, it will be the4 same thing round and round again.
trick question. so called "global warming" is real. The cause is natural, NOT man made. A natural earth cycle that nothing will help undo. Certainly Bill Gates spraying sulfur and aluminum nano particles into the atmosphere is not going to stop it. If it is man made, then he probably helped make it doing this crap. HAARP doesn't seem to help much in the matter either.
The 97% consensus paper gets criticized by AGW "skeptics" because it is based on just the papers that expressed an "AGW is real" type statement in the abstract and 67% of the papers surveyed did not express a position either way in the abstract. Similarly, no papers have been published recently stating that the earth is round in the abstract either, because science has moved on. To the "skeptics" though, this makes the consensus paper "junk science". Apparently authors are going to have to spell things out more obviously in their abstracts in the future.
Nobody shows the intersection of denialism and crank conspiracies theories as clearly as Kevin.
The discussion of why the papers classified as supporting or not supporting climate change was not badly done is an illuminating read. It seems that the deniers aren't even trying to make reasoned arguments any more. They are following the tea baggers and simply tossing out untruths at such a high rate it is difficult to deal with all of them.
thanks. glad to know I am doing my part to combat global warming myths. All aI am doing is trying to people to realize that little fairies are not flying through the air sprinking carbon dust on everything. and Bill gates is funding mass spraying. look it up.
Kevin, does that last graph look like a "natural earth cycle" to you? If so, what is the cycle length, and when was the last peak?
Kevin, the websites that agree with your claim at as batshit crazy as you - and likely as dishonest. Do you have any rational sources?
Here is another interesting graph.
Wait, wut? Bill Gates is funding little fairies to fly through the air spraying something? Or is Bill Gates the one flying through the air spraying carbon dust on everything? I'm confused!!!11!!!
I think he must be talking about contrails.
When I did as Kevin suggested and looked up "Bill Gates" "mass spraying", chemtrails was referenced among the hits. Wouldn't suprise me, as Kevin has abundantly displayed his crank magnetism here, and elsewhere on scienceblogs. In the interest of fairness, however, I'm hoping he'll clarify just which crankery he's refering to.
Greg, I'd be grateful if you'd fix the link in my last comment.
If you think your so called global warming is bad wait until the angels of heaven start the bowls judgement and if you survive it, wait till you see what is next.
It is interesting how many of those bowls are full of climate change.
yes, greg. Climate change. But NOT manmade climate change. Agian, God is in control of your weather.
"All your weather are belong to God" is not a hypothesis amenable to scientific investigation, so all we can do in this case is agree to disagree.
Confusing climate and weather is boring, and at this stage of the discussion it's just plain ridiculous.
Invoking Goddidit is only satisfying when you are unable to understand the cause and effect of something. For example, if your car breaks down and you don't understand engines; Goddidit! Oh, it couldn't possibly be that you failed to maintain it properly...
We can pretty well see the human fingerprints all over climate change:
Stop blaming your screw-ups on God.
I am glad Kevin is around to tell us what God is up to.
I have been wondering whether Global Warming stopped, because at one point last year so many volcanoes were erupting, and therefore sending dust into the upper atmosphere that it should have had a cooling effect. Does anyone know?
Global warming didn't stop. Over the last decade or so the rate of warming of the atmosphere has slowed but it is still warming. Over the last few years the sea surfaces have been warming at an alarming rate. Over this entire time the total surface warming of the Earth including the top 2000 meters or so of the ocean has been pretty much apace, but with lots of heat going into the ocean on average, and not much coming out. It will come out.
But over the last decade or so there has also been a regular supply of small(ish) volcanoes adding to the cooling effects, and that is considered to be part of the equation. I wrote about this (very briefly) at the following two links, where you will find other links to address your question:
the 97% was taken for 75 people who sent in a 3 question survey.and 3 people didn't return their survey. Did you know that? And with Climate EMAIL-Gate and the only people doling out money being the United Nations .. to mimic what their computers say, or demand the "Scientist" to write... Doesn't give me much faith.. in the 97% number. I believe the Earth is just doing what it has done in the past. Earth climate goes in cycles. PERIOD.
Dina, "97% was taken for 75 people who sent in a 3 question survey" is not accurate at all. There were, that I know of, at least seven different studies completed by the middle of last year when I last checked. The studies are much more intense than you are suggesting here. Your statement about that is is absurd.
I love your bolding of "EMAIL" in "Climate-Gate" ... why not throw in BENGHAZI!!!!!!! as well. Regarding that issue, this is where you will find out all you need to know..
Your assertion that this is all natural PERIOD is either a pernicious lie or a senseless comment based on ignorance. Or both. But if you want to find out more, read this.
"Did you know that?"
Did you know that your source for that was lying?
"Earth climate goes in cycles. PERIOD."
No it does not.
(and since this was in bold type, it outclasses your merely normal case "PERIOD" proof)