Recent comments by: Matti
A matter of opinion
Nico - as for "the rate of climate change". There is no statistically significant difference between the warming rates of the late 1800's, early 1900's and between 1978 and 1998 (Professor Phil Jones, CRU East Anglia). There is no "signature" for CO2 "forcing" in the temperature record. 1/4 of anthropogenic CO2 emissions since The Industrial Revolution have occurred since 1998, yet the temperature trend since then has remained flat, or even falling slightly. AGW/CO2 theory is falsified by empirical evidence. All the climate models have been woefully wrong.
Nico - "But human history, a short 10,000 years, has happened in a relatively stable climatic era, the Holocene. The changes which we are now causing are not unique in global history - but they are unique in human history, and happening very quickly." This is typical alarmist nonsense. The Holocene has seen a number of warm periods: The Holocene Maximum, The Minoan Warm Period, The Roman Warm Period and The Medieval Warm Period - these were all warmer than today and the World did not end. Would you like us to get back to The Little Ice Age, which would kill millions?
nico - Yes, poor Richard Feynman, the greatest scientific mind since Einstein. Climate alarmists hate him because he demolishes their beliefs and shows them to be religion, not science.
Nico - all predictions have been wildly wrong using climate models. Let me just explain all the "Hottest evah!!!" temperatures we constantly hear about, apart from all the "adjustments" and "homogenisation". Modern electronic thermometers will instantly record brief fluctuations in temperature (eg. a momentary hot breeze, common with UHI) whereas the old style bulb thermometers would not register this. All modern temperature readings need to be adjusted down due to this, not up as they have been.
This is AGW/CO2 theory:
"Another thing I must point out is that you cannot prove a vague theory wrong. If the guess that you make is poorly expressed and rather vague, and the method that you use for figuring out the consequences is a little vague – you are not sure, and you say, ‘I think everything’s right because it’s all due to so and so, and such and such, do this and that more or less, and I can sort of explain how this works’, then you see that this theory is good, because it cannot be proved wrong!" - Richard Feynman
As for "a rapid increase of surface temperatures", the planet warmed by a whopping 0.3 degrees over 20 years. Hardly rapid!
There is no statistically significant difference in the warming rates between the late 1800's, early 1900's and between 1978 and 1998. There is no "signature" for CO2 "forcing" in the temperature record. This fact is acknowledged by Professor Phil Jones of CRU East Anglia. The recent warming was not "rapid" nor "accelerating" as climate alarmists would have us believe.
"The last positive phase of the PDO, also known as the Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation, ran from about 1978 to 1998, a period of a rapid increase of surface temperatures."
There we have it. We have identified the cause of recent global warming, ocean cycles, not CO2. Thank you.
The planet cooled between 1940 and 1978, then warmed from 1978 to 1998, just as the article states, with the empirical evidence being that this was caused by ocean cycles.