Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="dmac1" data-source="post: 4377736" data-attributes="member: 60252">The medieval warming was localized almost entirely to the northern atlantic region and central southwestern north America, and the south pacific was actually cooler during the same period. Kind of an exaggerated el nino/la nina effect, with warmer temps across the US Gulf of Mexico driving a warmer gulf stream. That is hugely different from the average GLOBAL temp rise we have now. There are charts and graphs intelligent people can look at to see the difference. It only takes some slightly elevated or decrease in cloud cover for a period of time to drive el nino and change ocean currents that can affect weather thousands of miles away. Plus, the GLOBAL average temp rise today is higher than the localized rise, and has been going on for several decades now- at least the last half century. If you can&#039;t understand the difference between LOCALIZED and GLOBAL warming, you really risk appearing stupid if you post at all about &#039;medieval warming&#039;&nbsp; when talking about global warming. Some deniers may not even understand what AVERAGE means. Some think a snowfall in March means global cooling.&nbsp; A simple 5 year running average&nbsp; over the last several thouseand years proves to any who understand that global warming is real, and greater than ANY period in human history, and that science points to the slow&nbsp; steady increase in CO2 emissions as directly correlating to the rise.Just a simple test in tow greenhouses would help you. Two side by side greenhouses, one with 300ppm of CO2 and the other with 450ppm will show you that one gets warmer. Guess which one??????? And science, which you may not understand, proves that CO2 has been rising steadily since the 1800s, and is now higher than any time since mammals spread across the globe.Most of the planet sees climate change deniers, and those who may admit it but don&#039;t admit the human cause as idiots, who are unable to process more than one idea at a time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="dmac1, post: 4377736, member: 60252"] The medieval warming was localized almost entirely to the northern atlantic region and central southwestern north America, and the south pacific was actually cooler during the same period. Kind of an exaggerated el nino/la nina effect, with warmer temps across the US Gulf of Mexico driving a warmer gulf stream. That is hugely different from the average GLOBAL temp rise we have now. There are charts and graphs intelligent people can look at to see the difference. It only takes some slightly elevated or decrease in cloud cover for a period of time to drive el nino and change ocean currents that can affect weather thousands of miles away. Plus, the GLOBAL average temp rise today is higher than the localized rise, and has been going on for several decades now- at least the last half century. If you can't understand the difference between LOCALIZED and GLOBAL warming, you really risk appearing stupid if you post at all about 'medieval warming' when talking about global warming. Some deniers may not even understand what AVERAGE means. Some think a snowfall in March means global cooling. A simple 5 year running average over the last several thouseand years proves to any who understand that global warming is real, and greater than ANY period in human history, and that science points to the slow steady increase in CO2 emissions as directly correlating to the rise. Just a simple test in tow greenhouses would help you. Two side by side greenhouses, one with 300ppm of CO2 and the other with 450ppm will show you that one gets warmer. Guess which one??????? And science, which you may not understand, proves that CO2 has been rising steadily since the 1800s, and is now higher than any time since mammals spread across the globe. Most of the planet sees climate change deniers, and those who may admit it but don't admit the human cause as idiots, who are unable to process more than one idea at a time. [/QUOTE]

Verification