The cause of the recorded warming trend is predominately natural and is due to the variations in solar radiation, ocean currents, convection, and oscillations, cloud cover, volcanic eruptions, earth albedo, atmospheric CO2 GHGs, etc.. All of the aforementioned are fully natural variables except for about 4% of the atmospheric CO2 which is due to human emissions.
Dr Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Emeritus at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. has done the calculations and states that the human contribution only causes about a 2% perturbation of this single natural CO2 variable. In his own words, he states "In this complex multifactor system, what is the likelihood of the climate (which, itself, consists in many variables and not just globally averaged temperature anomaly) is controlled by this 2% perturbation in a single variable? Believing this is pretty close to believing in magic. Instead, you are told that it is believing in ‘science.’ Such a claim should be a tip-off that something is amiss. After all, science is a mode of inquiry rather than a belief structure."
So rather than going around and around in the same circles we did before, let's try a different approach.
It seems we both agree that the current warming trend is real. We both also agree that CO2, methane, N2O, and ozone are greenhouse gases.
Where I live, we're already seeing some effects from this warming in the form of larger, more frequent wildfires; increasing spread of bark beetles; changes in migration patterns in birds and insects; more persistent droughts in the summer, and warmer, wetter winters (with more rain instead of snow). In other parts of the world we're seeing the effects of rising sea levels, increasing acidity of the oceans, melting of the permafrost, loss of certain types of habitats, and other documented effects.
Given all that, would you agree that, regardless of what either of us thinks caused the warming trend over the past 60 years or so, we should do what we can to not add to it? IOW, even if the current trend is mostly natural, we shouldn't be piling on, right? It's like if you have a fire caused by lightning, you don't then go out and throw gas on it just because it was a natural event at the start, right?
As for your graph, there are many way to present data for effect, cherry picking, filters, axis representations, etc.. The fact is, from 1880, the start date on your anomaly graph to now in 2017, the temperature has only increased about 1 degree C, and your Y axis is just a little over 1 C.
So I give you below, a perfectly accurate graph of the same period using with the Y axis showing the actual average annual global temperature in degrees Celsius,
I've never seen anyone try and represent changes within a range of 0-10 units on a graph that has a Y-axis with a range of 90 units, in
any situation, temperature or otherwise.
I never said the correlation should be year to year, but a 17 years plus pause is a such a significant duration, it is evidence that the climate sensitivity to CO2 is overestimated in the IPCC models. And fyi, the IPCC global temperature projections show a linear trend upwards correlating with linear CO2 increase. So as to clear up the suggestion of cherry picking the data to show the pause, here are some Climategate leaked emails from leading agw priesthood figures who acknowledged the pause in the upward trend in temperature.
Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 5th July, 2005 “The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn’t statistically significant….”
Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 7th May, 2009 ‘Bottom line: the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’
From: Kevin Trenberth (US National Center for Atmospheric Research). To: Michael Mann. Oct 12, 2009
"The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't... Our observing system is inadequate"
Dr. Mojib Latif – Spiegel – 19th November 2009 “At present, however, the warming is taking a break,”…….”There can be no argument about that.”
Dr. Jochem Marotzke – Spiegel – 19th November 2009 “It cannot be denied that this is one of the hottest issues in the scientific community.... We don’t really know why this stagnation is taking place at this point.”
Dr. Virginie Guemas – Nature Climate Change – 7 April 2013 “…Despite a sustained production of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, the Earth’s mean near-surface temperature paused its rise during the 2000–2010 period…”
I'm not sure what you think those tiny snippets do to support your assertion of a long-running global conspiracy among climatologists. At the worst, those just show climatologists discussing what seemed like a pause in the warming trend, at that time. But as we've now since realized, the trend not only continues, but has significantly accelerated.
But if you think those highly edited quotes demonstrate anything, then please provide their full context. Dishonestly mining quotes is a common creationist tactic, so let's make sure you're not doing the same.
