Dnarever wrote on Dec 23
rd, 2017 at 8:03pm:
You just squeezed a 17 year pause into 12 years – well done.
However, if you look at the average level immediately before the spike and the previous high level they are approx. -0.05 (after the spike it returned to that level). and +0.08.
Across the claimed 17 years it finishes at +.3 at your 12 year mark an averaged line would finish around 0.15
It is not possible to draw a flat line between any of those start and finish points without it clearly showing an increase.
You really can not recognise that the first half of the graph is primarily below the zero line and that the last half is primarily above zero?
Any you really do not recognise an overall consistent positive trend?
Keep in mind that this graph is the climate sceptics ACE card.
What they have done is to rely on the anomaly of two spikes and a dip to manufacture a false result.
I’m not denying that the Earth has warmed, it has been warming since the little ice age, that is fact that anyone can research and find, except the IPCC who once did show the little ice age but then for some unexplained reason took it out of their report and replaced it with the hockey stick.
With regards to reading the graph depending on where you start and finish after 1998 you can come to all sorts of conclusions. Yes I can see that before 1998 the graph is below 0.0 and after 1998 its above BUT can you please show me how CO2 is responsible for this increase in temperature….??
The crux of the matter with the alarmists and the warmists is that global mean temperature on Earth responds to the amount of atmospheric CO2 that is present, CO2 is the most prominent driver of warming the Earth according to the IPCC and its associates which most people that have done any research on this subject will end up telling that is a furphy if they’ve ever heard.
Now please show me how any rise in temperature is because of man’s emissions of CO2 which are so small they are lost in the natural emissions of CO2 from natural sinks as the Earth warms up.