The warming effects of carbon emissions on the atmosphere was scientifically known and measured back in the 1800s.
Seems reasonable that as the climate warmed by fractions, we cooled by fractions.
Seems reasonable that as the climate warmed by fractions, we cooled by fractions.
The general thing about the person he was responding to being totally wrong was obviously correct.
[1]: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
As far as anamolies go, which area is experiencing "cooler than average" (which, as mentioned above, is difficult to do) depends on the year, but here's a map from NOAA showing 2013 temps and clearly shows the Western U.S. experiencing below average temps (from a 1980-2010 baseline): https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-blended-mn...
And to underscore the situation in the 1970s I'm going to link to a documentary that starred Leonard Nemoy as narrator in 1978. Quotes below and link below to clips from:
“In Search of…The Coming Ice Age”, narrated by Leonard Nimoy (Spock from Star Trek):
“…sea coasts long free of summer ice, are now blocked year round…” “…the data shows temperatures in the arctic have fallen dramatically over the last 30 years…” “…in most locations the drop has been about 2 degrees Centigrade…”
GISS also claims to have global temperature data from 1884 that doesn't exist. They interpolate and make up numbers when they go back that far, as we don't have records from much of Asia, Africa, eastern Europe and south America during that time, even huge swaths of Australia were not covered by temperature gauges. We didn't really start getting quality global temperature data until the satellite era.
You goober, I was comparing the measurements from 2000 onward. You specifically said the past couple decades. The reference point does not matter at all.
> As far as anamolies go, which area is experiencing "cooler than average" (which, as mentioned above, is difficult to do) depends on the year, but here's a map from NOAA showing 2013 temps and clearly shows the Western U.S. experiencing below average temps (from a 1980-2010 baseline)
You just complained about cherry picking and now you're looking at a single year that was slightly colder. On average, the US is warmer everywhere.
> GISS also claims to have global temperature data from 1884 that doesn't exist. They interpolate and make up numbers when they go back that far, as we don't have records from much of Asia, Africa, eastern Europe and south America during that time, even huge swaths of Australia were not covered by temperature gauges.
Still irrelevant to the last couple decades. Sue me for trusting NASA though, I guess?
UAH is a good resource (University of Alabama-Huntsville in conjunction with NASA, albeit a different department than GISS) and they show a 0.13C per decade trend since the 80s. That being said, because global temps are not evenly distributed, some areas are experiencing cooler temps and some areas are experiencing warmer temps. Averages hide a lot of nuance. See below for latest chart from UAH:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2020/01/uah-global-temperature-u...
https://skepticalscience.com/skeptic_Roy_Spencer.htm https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer
His own satellite work has been retracted and refuted: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/have-satel...
He's a bad scientist who cares far more about his own politics than accurate research.
Also, here's more research for you to chew on:
The Key Role of Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation in Minimum Temperature Over North America During Global Warming Slowdown
Shows minimum temps dropping during the last couple decades in North America:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/201...
Also:
The dynamics of the warming hiatus over the northern hemisphere
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00382-016-3085-...
Higher CO2 levels can reduce cognitive function [1]. Reduced cognitive function could mean reduced energy expenditure (a common figure is the brain is responsible for 20% of your energy demands), it may not though. I can see this as being a valid mental leap worth investigating.
I suspect however in this case it's a combination of the things the article suggests as well as the thermic effect of food. A reduction in the amounts of nuts/seeds/spices/whole plant foods consumed, combined with highly processed foods that require less work to digest (a piece of fruit vs a bunch of table sugar), likely means diets with a lower thermic effect from the foods. Lower thermic effect means less caloric expenditure, less caloric expenditure should mean a lower body temperature.