A picture is worth a thousand words. IPCC 1990 and 2007 on the same image, at the same scale.
We have consensus. In fact we have two diametrically opposed consensus – from the same organisation.
A picture is worth a thousand words. IPCC 1990 and 2007 on the same image, at the same scale.
We have consensus. In fact we have two diametrically opposed consensus – from the same organisation.
IPCC 1990 graph was from western Europe only and when updated with the most recent temperatures for that region shows a significantly warmer current period of warmth. You know better than this, its been shown time and time again. Why don’t you show a graph of the IPCC 1990 Graph updated with the temperatures for the region?
I’m also curious about how you superimposed the two? What is the common base period that you used? how did you align them up? I hope you didn’t do the lazy man’s way and just through them on top of each other and ignore they’re using different base periods…. You wouldn’t do that would you goddard?
You can see the axis markings on both graphs. Look closer.
we have two diametrically opposed consensus – from the same organisation.
Consensus’s can’t do that. And all consensus’s are equal. But some consensus’s are more equal than others.
Okay it’s simple, they were wrong then they were right, it worked out so well for cholesterol, ozone and ddt… oh wait….
how about eggs, butter, and salt
Steven
I wonder if you could tell us how you got them to the same scale, given that the 1990 graph has no values on the y axis.
Fred
‘Temperature Change (°C)”
Steven
But in the 1990 graph there are no values given for temperature change.
Fred