Uh, no. But if it makes you feel better to believe that, you go boy.

A real study was just released that disproves Whell's fantasy:

How much Earth will warm in response to future greenhouse gas emissions may be one of the most fundamental questions in climate science — but it’s also one of the most difficult to answer. And it’s growing more controversial: In recent years, some scientists have suggested that our climate models may actually be predicting too much future warming, and that climate change will be less severe than the projections suggest.

But new research is helping lay these suspicions to rest. A study, out Wednesday in the journal Science Advances, joins a growing body of literature that suggests the models are on track after all. And while that may be worrisome for the planet, it’s good news for the scientists working to understand its future.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...imate-science/

That's hilarious. One of the authors of this study is Peter Huybers. He's not an anthropomorphic climate change guy.

"He has advanced the hypothesis that a 41,000 year period of change connected to the Earth's tilt on its axis is dominant during the past 800,000 years, and that every second or third of these cycles produce a major deglaciation event. This deglaciation also appears to trigger changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide, perhaps in part coming from radically increased volcanic activity during deglaciation."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Huybers

So, it matters not at all that you're driving your SUV or burning your coal fired furnace during the winter. Its all about the Earth's tilt on it's axis, and unless cow farts can correct the tilt, we're in for more scenes of polar bears drifting along the ocean on ice chunks.

Most balanced article I've read in a while. Thanks finn. The key thing for me is that these models are complicated and as we learn more, actual data combined with improved/new theories, their predictive ability will hopefully improve.

However for the last century or so there haven't been coal fired furnaces or SUV's. So your conclusion has nothing to do with your Wiki quote.

My "conclusion" was tongue in cheek.

By the way, as recently as 1945 - which I believe was within the last 100 years - 55% of US households were heated with coal. Also, the SUV has been around for a long time, like the GM Suburban, Jeep Wagoneer, Ford Bronco, etc. Gradually being supplanted by crossovers, but still part of the last century's auto production. So your comment above is puzzling. But I digress....

Don't for the life of me know how that however got there.:o

Should read "For the last ..."

A real world look at global warming.

A flood of problems
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/wor...ot-going-well/

Hey Folks,
I have been absent awhile. I hope I don't offend by joining the party so late.

A couple of facts. For every gallon of liquid gasoline burned, 3 gallons of liquid co2 is produced. It does not matter what car or what mode it is burned. This is simple chemistry.

Fact two, population is as big of a problem as global warming. Even if GW was a complete and total hoax, absolutely no validity to it, population is going to kill us. Current estimates put the earths population at 32 billion in 100 years. Obviously it can never reach this. Orr systems(food water heating etc) and everything we know will crash before this occurs.

So what is going to get us first, GW or overpopulation?

"So what is going to get us first, GW or overpopulation?"

I'm betting on zombies. That's why I'm thinking about getting a .45-70 Henry rifle and/or a 40mm grenade launcher.