Good source of climate change data

[popeyespappy]

The US Global Change Research Program maintains a website with a lot of information pertaining to climate change. While much of the information is US specific there is a lot of stuff there that pertains to everyone.

http://www.globalchange.gov/

[Welsh cake]

What about the USGCRP would you like to discuss?

The federal research only becomes of concern to me when it doesn't start off with the presumption that global warming is human-induced, because that's not scientific.

Any program's report that has any involvement with the IPCC is not worth the paper its printed on to determining what is actually happening to our climate as we should know from past experience (if we're actually paying attention that is).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environ...ciers.html

Where's our 10 million pounds Syed Iqbal Hasnain? You cretin.

[ib.me.ub]

Don't worry about Welsh Cake, he's just one of those "deniers".

Climate Change itself isn't caused by humans, but the rate of change is.

[Anomalocaris]

Don't worry about Welsh Cake, he's just one of those "deniers".

Climate Change itself isn't caused by humans, but the rate of change is.

Were there no human induced warming, climate change at this time should be going in the opposite direction from what is observed based on what we know of the long tern natural factors impacting on global climate. More accurate to say causes of climate change consist of many components, some of which are related to the impact of GHG emitted by humans. At the current time, the aggregate strength of components other than human induced GHG is being overwhelmed by human induced GHG. This does not mean in the future, certain other elements can not gain in strength until the aggregate non-man made effects surpass those of man-made effect. But for now, Human GHG emission is controlling the direction og global climate change.

[ib.me.ub]

Climate Change itself isn't caused by humans, but the rate of change is.

Were there no human induced warming, "climate change at this time should be going in the opposite direction" from what is observed based on what we know of the long tern natural factors impacting on global climate.

Links please.

[Zen Badger]

A major factor in global warming.

The Sun.

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source...spIyTDw80w

Can't do much about that kiddies.

[popeyespappy]

What about the USGCRP would you like to discuss?

The federal research only becomes of concern to me when it doesn't start off with the presumption that global warming is human-induced, because that's not scientific.

Any program's report that has any involvement with the IPCC is not worth the paper its printed on to determining what is actually happening to our climate as we should know from past experience (if we're actually paying attention that is).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environ...ciers.html

Where's our 10 million pounds Syed Iqbal Hasnain? You cretin.

Well Cup Cake, I posted the link not so much as something to discuss but as a data source for others. I would however be happy to address any specific evidence backed claims you care to make about anthropic global warming. I don’t know what good that would do though because everything you’ve ever had to say on the subject has already been thoroughly refuted in recent threads on this forum.

A major factor in global warming.

The Sun.

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source...spIyTDw80w

Can't do much about that kiddies.

Unlike Earth, Martian climate is driven primarily by dust and albedo. The claims of global warming on Mars are based on this 2007 paper by NASA scientist Lori Fenton. In the paper, Fenton compared a composite photograph of Mars taken in 1977 with another composite photograph taken in 1999 by the Mars Global Surveyor. The 1999 photograph showed a lower albedo with darker regions in the high and mid latitudes than the 1977 image. Fenton used a general circulation model containing the albedo changes to calculate a temperature difference of 0.65 degrees C between the two photographs. From this data she inferred a 0.65 C 22 year warming trend.

The problem with this conclusion is that Fenton started with two end points and came to the conclusion they represented a long term trend. If Fenton had included a broader sample of the available data the evidence would not have supported her conclusion.


Comparison of data sampled by Fenton and full spectrum of available data.[/quote]

[theVOID]

A major factor in global warming.

The Sun.

Solar activity is inversely correlated with rising temperatures...

[Anomalocaris]

Climate Change itself isn't caused by humans, but the rate of change is.

Were there no human induced warming, "climate change at this time should be going in the opposite direction" from what is observed based on what we know of the long tern natural factors impacting on global climate.

Links please.

Roe G (2006). "In defense of Milankovitch". Geophysical Research Letters

---

...... claims you care to make about anthropic global warming......

anthropogenic?

Any warming while humans exist can be called anthropic warming.

[Welsh cake]

Well Cup Cake, I posted the link not so much as something to discuss but as a data source for others.

With all due respect this isn't the proper place to make shameless plugs, you started a thread, I'm expecting you to follow-through now and start the debate about any given topic matter relating to general science. You picked climate change data. The ball's in your court.

I would however be happy to address any specific evidence backed claims you care to make about anthropic global warming. I don’t know what good that would do though because everything you’ve ever had to say on the subject has already been thoroughly refuted in recent threads on this forum.

Then you obviously haven't even bothered to read my posts. I haven't presented anything that could be refuted or supported.

I'm not the majority who are lobbying with the rest of the scientific consensus that global warming is occurring and human activities are chiefly responsible. That's a big fucking claim and all I've ever been presented with when I ask for proof why we must have carbon taxes is some statistical crap that would make my managers proud as opposed to a direct correlation that greenhouse gases are in fact forcing these climate feedbacks.

I also haven't been given a single peer reviewed paper on this, I don't know yet if this has gone through the process to determine if it's creditable or not. I looked and can't find them. Even if peer reviews were presented, you still must know this is a necessary but still not sufficient condition to presenting a scientific case for AGW. If neither of us can find these papers it demonstrates IPCC are not fundamentally serious about their position.

All I am is simply skeptical of anthropogenic climate change. :>

Unlike Earth, Martian climate is driven primarily by dust and albedo.

We're not talking about climate change on other planets.

And if we are, Zen Badger is the link broken?