If there is global warming, why are the temperatures getting lower?

Question

http://spacescience.spaceref.com/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm

Answer 1

Why are you quoting something from 11 years ago?  The science has advanced significantly between the 2001 IPCC report and the 2007 report.  Something from 1997 is not at all helpful.

Answer 2

Why aren't global warming temperatures going up despite increases in CO2.  Why has the ice area of the Artic increased this year.  Why do scientists have to look really hard to find glaciers in retreat and why do they insist on claiming them as proof of continued warming when they find them.  

It's faith.

Answer 3

I have difficulty accepting the credibility of this site but, for the sake of argument, I will.

You say:

"the temperatures getting lower"

The source you provide says:

"global measurements of the temperature at the Earth's surface have indicated a warming trend of between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees C"

So. Your own source says that you are making things up.

Do I need to spend any more time on this question?

Answer 4

WOW!!! Are you for real. Eveyone knows you have to stop giving away plastic bags in San Fransico and start selling them for $.25 cents each if you want to eliminate Global Warming. Geeeezzzzzz!!!!!!!!!

Answer 5

Regarding the first link, which is now 11 years old, in 2005 an error in satellite orbital decay rates used by UAH was shown to be responsible for this apparent anomaly.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...

The second link is so riddled with errors it's hard to know where to begin. For example:

"By contrast [with Hadley data], NASA data shows worldwide temperatures increasing at a record pace - and nearly a full degree warmer than 1880."

But if you actually look at the graph of Hadley data, you will find that it too shows nearly a degree of warming since 1880. The two datasets are almost exactly in agreement, in spite of the fact that Goddard has chosen different scales for his graphs.

The only difference between NASA and Hadley data is that NASA data includes polar regions, which Hadley does not. NASA data is more complete than satellite data for the same reason.

Goddard has deliberately chosen to show you only a fraction of the satellite record in an attempt to deceive. There was a global spike in temperatures in 1998 caused by a massive El Niño, and Goddard begins his graph right at the height of this spike. (The same spike is visible in both the Hadley and NASA graphs too, if you take a look.)

If you were to take a longer view, back before 1998, you would find that the global temp is rising overall at about the same rate in the satellite record as it is in the historical record.

Answer 6

From what I understand about global warming is it takes a long time to change degrees of a drastic nature and as this happens it actually then causes a cooling trend like the ice age according to some recent studies i have seen they have some evidence of ice age activity in some parts of new york

depicting ice age activity almost every ten thousand year's and if these finds come to fruition then it would be some change in the way the earth revolves around the sun or some size-able asteroid or meteor that pulls the earth off just a little to cause this then we would know that humans play only a small part in global warming trends

Answer 7

The truth is - they really don't know.  Even the highly politicized IPCC admits to big uncertainties.

There have always been a lot of uncertainties in the theory of global warming, and it's record of failed predictions past & present does a lot to discredit it.

The question is: why are so many people convinced action is needed when the theory has so many holes and is unable to predict anything?

steam is correct - James Hansen has been playing politics since 1976 to better fund his pet projects & whatever else his personal agenda entails (not least of which is political "organizing.").

Answer 8

the alien's are pointing the death ray at mars instead of earth?

Answer 9

Its all p**p that the left has shoveled onto our plates. Be cautious of what you listen to in the media, most of the information is tainted with demo-c**p.

Answer 10

The temperatures are not getting lower ....AT ALL...

Although as the environment is changing, temperatures in different places are shifting. Like now you can extreme heat in summer and extreme cold winter.

Things from now on will be more extensive. Like too much rain, flood, earthquake.

Nature fights back to bring the balance. But we are dust destroying too fast.

Answer 11

temps are dropping but i think the site youve prob quoted is nt accurate. this is because CO2 is believed not to be the cause for GW and therefore if CO2 is said to be the cause of GW, we can conclude that GW is NOT OCCURING. however, the hype on GW is somewhat beneficial to our environment as ppl are caring abt it and therefore there's other problems such as pollution and deforestation being solved. Therefore even though i personally believe that GW is not occuring, im not ready to convince the world about it yet.

Answer 12

JS.  You need to refine your question.

Yes, global temperatures are getting higher since the ice age. Only 10,000 years ago New York was under 5000 ft of ice, thanks to global warming.

Greenland was warmer in the 3rd century when the Vikings went there to farm before it got too cold around the 10th century

Al Gores argument is that mans CO2 is causing global warming.

The questions are

Warming since when?

Is it CO2, or sun spots or geothermal activity or what?

Is man causing it and do we have the means to reverse it if we did?

I Think not!  The world has been warming and cooling for millions of years before man and will continue long after we are gone.

Take a look at the link  

Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

Answer 13

O U R O P I N I O N

An alarmist’s solution to criticism

    Unless you’re among those who follow the global warming controvery with considerably more intensity than the average citizen, the name James Hansen probably doesn’t ring any bells. But it should.

    Hansen is the original global warming alarmist. He is currently the head of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Twenty years ago, in an appearance before several Congressional committees, Hansen warned that increasing human-generated CO2 content in the earth’s atmosphere was pushing up global temperatures, and that if generation of CO2 wasn’t cut back, we would face a “tipping point” from which there could be no return, and that the result of warming would doom life on earth as we know it.

    He was called to testify in the early ’80s because in 1981 he and a team of scientists at Goddard had concluded that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would lead to global warming sooner than previously predicted. While other climatologists had already predicted that a trend would be apparent by 2020, Hansen predicted, in a paper published in Science, that the change was already occurring and that there would be record high temperatures as early as 1990.

    In June of this year Hansen again testified before a Congressional committee, on the anniversary of his first alarmist appearance. And what has happened to global temperatures in the intervening 20 years? According to the University of Alabama at Huntsville, global satellite temperature data show that earth’s temperature has indeed changed; it’s gone down by half a degree (Fahrenheit). So much for Hansen’s prediction about tipping points, and carbon dioxide dangers, etc., etc.

    But Hansen also did something else at in June. At an informal media event hosted by Worldwatch Institute, an environmental activist group, he called for criminal trials against scientists, corporate executives, and public policy advocates who disagree with him. He said skeptics are guilty of “crimes against humanity.” If you oppose his theories, in other words, you’re no better than Hitler, Stalin, Robert Mugabe, Papa Doc Duvalier, and the rest of history’s mass murderers, and ought to be sent to jail — or worse — for holding such views.

    Much of the above is from the August issue of Environment & Climate News, a Heartland Institue publication. The Heartland Institute, you may not know, is a non-profit environmental organization that challenges global warming theories. Two letters to the editor today take note of a story published in the Sunday Press Dispatch (albeit buried on D7) that some 31,072 American scientists have signed a petition rejecting Hansen’s — among others — assertions that global warming has reached a crisis stage that is caused by human activity. The story about the petition originated with the Heartland Institute.

    The petition puts the lie to claims such as the one by Al Gore (“The debate is over”) that there’s any sort of general agreement among the world’s scientific community about global warming, either as to what is causing it, that it’s in fact happening, or that there’s anything humanity can do about it.

    Hansen, you might also want to know, is indeed a scientist. He’s an astronomer. But stifling dissent of his theories by shouting, “Off with their heads” does not exactly comport with scientific method. So it’s no surprise to also learn he’s Al Gore’s adviser on science. Uh huh.

    Steve Williams

Answer 14

Perhaps you missed this on your first link.  It is right up top.

October 2, 1997