Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

flossie asked in EnvironmentGlobal Warming · 8 years ago

Anyone else "remember" scientists "predicting it was supposed to be much warmer by now"?

5 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Yes, it's right in the IPCC reports in plain English:

    "For the next two decades, a warming of about 0.2°C per decade is projected for a range of SRES emission scenarios. Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1°C per decade would be expected." http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/e...

    Alarmists are picking the most odd forms of battle lately (e.g. water vapor??). I wonder what's going on?

    They call others anti-science and then state that climate science doesn't make any warming predictions. The whole purpose of science is to make predictions and then check them against real world data. I just don't get it. Maybe they are becoming unraveled?

  • ?
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Again you shown an appalling knowledge of the English language. And instead of going to the Science itself, you entirely rely on "journalists' interpretations" of what a particular scientist has said. And you then extrapolate that to "scientists" so the opinion of one 'scientist' suddenly becomes the general opinion of the entire scientific community.

    Your first 2 links are related to the same scientist, Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, whose research indicated that the arctic COULD be ice free by 2013, an assertion which the journalists in question apparently found too unclear so the freely changed it into something more attractive. It is only when one read the articles that one realizes that that what was being said was actually far less conclusive.

    Your third link is a 2012 article in which another single scientist who "predicted the final collapse of Arctic sea ice in summer months within four years". Last time I checked, 2012 plus 4 = 2016 which means there's still 3 more years to go to find out whether this single scientist was right or not.

    Your last 2 links also describe an instance where a single scientist, Dr David Viner, predicted that "within a few years winter snowfall will become 'a very rare and exciting event'" and again you extrapolate that as being representative of the entire scientific community. It is not. Scientists in general do not use such conclusive language and prefer to express that there is always some level of uncertainty. That applies to every single scientific field.

    If the opinions of single scientists quoted in 'the media' were all of a sudden representative of the entire scientific community, then vaccines cause autism, evolution does not exist and alien life has (again and again) been found on meteorites (as your beloved Daily Mail has claimed over and over again).

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-241...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-226...

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/01/1...

  • 8 years ago

    In July my solution was implemented where the Alien organism is located. In November 2012 Our Satelites reported Ice accumulation on different parts of earth. My Global teams and i believe my solution deleted Global Warming November 2012. Mike/ Global command

    Source(s): Logical
  • ?
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    Yes I do too. I think, "The Earth has a fever," is just about as clear as you can get. Also we were given the infamous 'hockey stick' to prove their point.

    One only has to go and get Jimmy Hansen's speech in front of Congress back in the eighties. You remember, the one where they turned off air conditioners in the Capital to influence the Congressmen. Then they even laugh about it, now.

    Notice how 'appalling' your English is. Why your bringing up those 'crackpots' is not what is really true. Ha! Ha! Your question, although not of your own origination, refers to 'scientists' whether crackpot or not.

    As to the 'could' vs. 'would' interpretation, Professor Wieslaw Maslowski had ample opportunity to correct the matter, if he thought there was some misrepresentation. This fact leads one to believe that Professor Wieslaw Maslowski got the desired results.

    < Scientists in general do not use such conclusive language and prefer to express that there is always some level of uncertainty. That applies to every single scientific field.>

    Do you think we would have put a man on the moon with an uncertainty in the science of trajectory? Why are they now enacting legislation regarding AGW and ACC if, in their minds, there was an uncertainty? The tax in Australia is very certain. Obama giving $100,000,000,000 to the UN in the name of Global Warming is very certain.

    Just too many of these 'saviors of the earth' try to play with our minds and make it seem that it is the real people who are disillusion and that we don't see what we see. It is the same as the alcoholic not seeing himself as an alcoholic and thinking everyone else is wrong.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Sheldon Whitehouse pulled out a stairstep graph and claims it will heat up again . Only pricing Carbon will stop it.

    Prices are high enough .

    Source(s): C-Span 2 9-26-13
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.