Global Temperature Set To Reach 1 Degree C Over Pre-Industrial Levels (metoffice.gov.uk)

Layzej writes: Based on data from January to September, the HadCRUT dataset shows 2015 global mean temperature at 1.02 degrees C (±0.11 degrees C) above pre-industrial levels for the first time. The Copenhagen Accord recognizes "the scientific view that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius (PDF)." Physicist Ken Rice points out that the next degree Celsius may be closer than we think. "It's taken us about 160 years to warm by about 1 degree C. This is associated with emissions of about 550GtC (550 billion tonnes of carbon, or ~2000 billion tonnes of CO2). Current emissions are around 10GtC/year. If we continue emitting as we are, we will double our cumulative emissions in about 50 years. If we continue to increase our emissions, it will be even sooner.

Comments

Gassholes

[Anonymous Coward]

This is because of all you gas-guzzler driving pukes out there with your fucking lifted trucks and humvees and generators powering your cabins in the woods.
You know who climate changes hurts most? The marginalized, women and minorities.
*YOU DON'T NEED A CAR!* Get that through your thick skulls.

Why should we care about faked data?

[SuperKendall]

HadCRUT? You mean the data set that is full of glaring errors and manipulated data?

Climate alarmists, if you want to continue to frighten children and the mentally slow with your tales of woe, please at least to to source data people not so obviously desperate to craft a scary fairy-tale.

Re:Why should we care about faked data?

[tmosley]

"And people who believe that CO2 causes temperatures to rise are the alarmists. Right." They are ignoramuses who believe what they are told, and have never done a physical chemistry calculation before. CO2 is NOT a greenhouse gas relative to Earth's current atmosphere. It has slightly lower heat capacity than the average atmospheric component.

"In other words, that it is actually more expensive to keep using fossil fuels."

No, that means it is more profitable for big banks and other moochers to take government handouts based off of terrible theory and fake data than it is to provide goods and services that are actually desired by the people.

"And, how about this: if solar power becomes a cheap reality, what is that going to do for the quality of life of those 50 million Africans?"

You mean 100% of the Africans who survived the famine caused by the loss of fossil fuel enabled fertilizers? Because that is a few hundred million fewer Africans than exist today. Also quite a few fewer asians, and even a lot fewer white people, including your grandparents who starved to death when AGW "remediation" efforts bankrupted all western countries to the point they could no longer pay pensions and thus allowed all the elderly to die. Something we are disturbingly close to already without idiotic liberals destroying our economy by forbidding the use of carbon based fuels.

"Here's another question for you: can we continue to use fossil fuels indefinitely?"

When was the right time to stop using charcoal to smelt steel? Or to use whale oil to light lamps? When the market dictates we change. Don't pull peak oil out of your ass on me boy. I know economics and peak theory about 1000x better than you do, and will crush you if you try.

"new data shows it's not going to hit us"

This is why you are not a scientist, but a cult follower. Your leaders continuously proclaim impending doom, and when the dates come and go, you continue to believe. Fucking stupid.

Re:And what if we were just colder 160 years ago

[_Sharp'r_]

Well, it's a good thing that Antarctic Sea Ice just reached the highest level ever seen, according to NASA.:

“There hasn’t been one explanation yet that I’d say has become a consensus, where people say, ‘We’ve nailed it, this is why it’s happening,’” Parkinson said. “Our models are improving, but they’re far from perfect. One by one, scientists are figuring out that particular variables are more important than we thought years ago, and one by one those variables are getting incorporated into the models.”

Don't try telling me about the Arctic, either. We wouldn't want to be skeptical of the scientists, right?

And don't get me started on Solar cycles...

Re:Who measured in pre-industrial times?

[Anonymous Coward]

Scientists? Which Scientists? What equipment did they use. Where is their raw data collected from pre-industrial times?

Answer: there isn't any. You are lying. The claim isn't being made through measurements from the pre-industrial age. It is arrived at by MODELING. More misleading crap.

Re:Who measured in pre-industrial times?

[ScentCone]

Scientists.

The same ones who, in pre-industrial society, were also quite sure that they could measure someone's criminality by feeling the lumps on their skulls? Those sorts of pre-industrial scientists?

Thus proving warming alarmism is a lie

[SuperKendall]

how much CO2 and other 'greenhouse gasses' humans are actually responsible for.

Don't forget China, between lying about car emissions and China lying about coal emissions, a HUGE volume of CO2 has been put into the atmosphere.

Which proves that CO2 does not cause warming, because warming has been DECREASING over the decades CO2 has been pouring into the atmosphere.

This proves simply that CO2 is not a direct driver of warming as is required for any of the warming models to be accurate in a rise of even 2C. What we are left with then is natural climactic warming, unrelated to atmospheric CO2 - which is what we'd have supposed all along if the global record of CO2 and temperature had been paid attention to to start with.

You want to get rid of pollution? So do I. But CO2 is NOT POLLUTION and by focusing on that and ignoring actual pollution you are fucking over the environment on a scale unimaginable. For that environmental crime I will never forgive nor forget the harm you warming alarmists have caused to the Earth, never again will you and your doom cult be trusted.

Re:And what if we were just colder 160 years ago

[danbert8]

No, the end goal is climate constant regardless of the cost. YOU ARE A DENIER!

Here we go again!

[p51d007]

More BS "man made" global warming crap. The problem is, a majority of "youth" have been brainwashed into believing that man can alter the climate on this planet, which makes them great pawns, in this controlling the world through the U.N. crap. One good belch out of a volcano, will screw up the globe more than humans can. Just a couple weeks ago, some hot shot researchers explained why they were wrong, about melting ice in Greenland or some crap. They said years back that due to burning of fossil fuels, soot & dirt were covering ice, causing more light to be absorbed, than reflected, heating the ice and melting it. Once researchers discovered the ice was INCREASING not decreasing, they admitted that the satellite sensors were degrading and had not been calibrated to make up for the decrease in sensitivity. The science does not support the facts on man made global warming/climate change. We are more likely to enter a new mini ice age in the next 15 years, if you use the solar cycle and lack of sunspots this year.