No, that's the last time NASA/NOAA published a combined graph. Here's the CO2 data 2016-2022 from the Mauna Loa Observatory, followed by the NASA GISS temperature anomaly for the same period. If CO2 is the temperature "control knob", why is the data getting cooler? Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Lol, I'm not getting involved in this soap opera I've got enough spot fires I think you just shot yourself in the foot.[/QUOTE] I think you're thinking of someone else
Here’s the answer! https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/if-carbon-dioxide-hits-new-high-every-year-why-isn%E2%80%99t-every-year-hotter-last
Thanks Kim, how do you define "climate scientist"? The term didn't exist 20 years ago and no atmospheric physicist for example would call themselves that. If you read the IPCC papers, you'll find a wide range of professions represented, not all related to weather or climate. That's where the 90% comes from, e.g. biologists researching changes to coral in warmer water, on the assumption the climate models are correct. I'm a semi-armchair expert. I started my career in offshore oil & gas, as a programmer. I was part of the team in 1978 that built the atmospheric model to predict storms on the North West Shelf of WA. I believe this was the first such model in Australia, we were certainly a long way ahead of the BoM. We then did the same thing for the North Sea as contractors to the German Govt. It was a relatively small part of my life, but I've maintained the interest. Our emissions are part of the carbon cycle, of which total human activity is 4%. Most CO2 is absorbed by the oceans, where it goes through other cycles and eventually ends up as limestone. The rest is plant food and becomes wood. All the carbon we're emitting today, existed in the past. "The first half of your comment is pure opinion". If you mean my comment regarding purged scientists, here's a sample of 3: Judith Curry, Roy Spencer and our own Peter Ridd. They've all been fired, or demonitised by Google or both.
With respect to all the climate change convo here,can y'all stop doing an Adrian and move it to it's Not Funny etc. I and others come here to check out the weird stuff Adrian,meself and Gazz (when he's not gone for a Tosca) put up to bore the shoit out of all the rest of youse! TA!
That's been the NOAA narrative for some time, but nobody has been able to find the ocean hotspots, despite much searching. Did you know that there are thousands of active sea floor volcanoes, all pumping heat into the oceans? It's why the western shelf of Antartica is melting for example.
That's weird. Link didn't work on my iPhone, but it does on my Samsung. WTF! Sig www.pless.com.au/mechanics.htm
Except you miss the bit about ‘balance’ - millions of years worth of stored carbon (fossil fuels) released within the space of 150 years - that’s where the problem is. Too many people, not enough trees is the basic equation.
https://8d81bae502d61d709f04-302a0122e08c7bba566fc0a6e13dab31.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/video/1920/bigsur/PCK-BLACK-LOWER_PNT-M5-01_WAT-FORGED-ULW-V-SPOKE-DC_CAL-BLACK.mp4 Well, given that CO2 is plant food, how does reducing it help the trees? A warmer planet with more CO2 will make for a greener planet, will it not?
Actually I recall reading somewhere there's more trees on the planet now than there were 100 years ago (more than even 40 years ago).. It's not trees alone that's the issue. In my mind it's a relative non issue. Our planet has been through far worse than the burning of fossil fuels, and will shrug us off like a bad cold once we wipe ourselves out through whatever means are at our disposal, melting the ice caps through burning oil included.
The equation is simple: People: O2 in CO2 out Trees: CO2 in O2 out. Plants can’t pop up out of nowhere to mop up the excess CO2. That’s the problem, we’re INCREASING CO2 but REDUCING trees - out of balance; particularly in the cities.
