Pennsylvania State University professor and climate scientist Michael E. Mann has been selected to receive the 2018 AAAS Public Engagement with Science Award. The honor recognizes Mann’s “tireless efforts to communicate the science of climate change to the media, public and policymakers.”
View the short video the American Association for the Advancement of Science put together for this occasion.
I am sure that the 97% agree “ In this field all things have been discovered what remains is just to fill a couple holes”. 
See
David Dilley
Adapt 2030
Suspicious Observers
http://www.suspicious0bservers.org
Piers Corbyn
Such fine scientific resources!
I could say the same about Mann. 
I suggest that people watch the videos and educate themselves. The Sun and its magnetic field fluctuations are the elephant in the room. The climate science is way to complex multivariable science for simple single factor CO2 forcing. The IPCC models fail. We are very likely going into a Dalton like Solar Minimum that will influence the jet stream, ocean currents and weather patterns. Also the earths magnetic field has decreased by about 10-15% in last 150 years with an increasing rate of decrease of the field. The Grand solar minimum are associated with increased severe earthquakes, volcanic activity and extreme weather events and climate changes leading to local food shortages. Also, it is possible to have Carrington like solar events that could be devastating to the power grid.
And Remember CO2 forcing model doesn’t effect earthquakes and volcanoes.
The proof is upon us. These solar lunar models vs the failed Ipcc predictions.
Just watch the videos and decide for yourselves.
Not sure how to parse this reply, especially this.
I encourage people to look at the links. Watch the videos and you will understand the significance of changes in earth magnetic field strength. Please parse away.
I took a look at your WeatherAction link, and I’m sorry, but it looks seriously crazy! Did you even read it? And he wants us to buy forecasts? What does that even mean?
The science is actually really straightforward. The more greenhouse gas you put in the atmosphere the more heat you will trap. It is simply a physical fact. There is also mountains of data demonstrating that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are well above natural levels (+30% or so), and that the increase over natural levels is heavy in carbon-12 which is consistent with the same isotope ratios found in fossil fuels. If you are going to claim that the Sun is also increasing its output, then we are doubly in trouble since we will trap even more heat as solar output increases.
So very true, and we’ve known about this for YEARS.
To be precise, we have known about the greenhouse affect and carbon dioxides role in the greenhouse effect since Svante Arrhenius’ work in 1896.
Svante Arrhenius (1896). “On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Earth”. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. 9: 14.
The consequences of climate change were even discussed in the 1959 Bell Telephone children’s film about weather called “The Unchained Goddess.”
To play devil’s advocate, there are also other feedback mechanisms at work. Increased heat can lead to increased cloud coverage which then reflects incoming heat. Also the atmosphere / ocean interface is poorly modeled and it is a big contributor to climate. And then add the people who claim there is no such thing as climate only weather.
Why do you consider it poorly modeled?
Who cares what people claim? Weather is short-term. Climate is long-term. Do you deny the existence of climate? Climate is a thing.
The bottom line is that the earth really Is warming.
This is offset by increased water vapor in the atmosphere which is a strong greenhouse gas. Venus is a great example of this in action. It is completely covered in clouds yet it has extreme temperatures due to the greenhouse effect.
That would only matter for modeling small changes over short time periods in future temperatures. When you trap more heat in the atmosphere the climate only has one way to go. Exactly how that plays out over short time periods is up for debate, but the long term trend is pretty unavoidable.
I don’t. The people that do climate models do.
Weather is what you get today. Climate is a long term statistical measure and people that know more than I do say the statistical measures are wrong.
Venus has no water vapor. Water vapor is considered a short term greenhouse gas as it tends to condense into clouds which reflect heat and also fall as rain.
Weather is short-term. Climate is long-term.
It does, it just happens be lower than that found on Earth.
Or more precisely, water vapor is a follower and not a forcer. In order to get more clouds you first have to heat the oceans, and if you have warmer oceans then climate change is already ongoing. Cloud cover may mitigate some of that temperature increase, but it won’t counteract all of it.
Since carbon dioxide can stay in the atmosphere for decades it can force long term climate changes. In the past, carbon dioxide has been in sync with temperature since it is tied to ocean temps, but with humans burning fossil fuels this is no longer the case.
In this 25-second video clip atmospheric scientist Katharine Hayhoe explains the difference between weather and climate. Hayhoe is a professor in the Department of Political Science and director of the Climate Science Center at Texas Tech University, part of the Department of Interior’s South-Central Climate Science Center.
I encourage you to understand the science and its consequences . Climate is so so much more complex than just CO2. You are right C02 has been known for a long time. CO2 forcing is only one factor of many in climate. Simply said CO2 lags temperature changes (due to the oceans storage related to temperature) and C02 models can not explain the warming and cooling events of the last 120,000 years let alone the midieval optimum and the little ice age. Please just watch these two videos. Trust me when you watch these videos they address what you are discussing. There are a lot of papers coming out and this is an active area of research. The science is not settled but developing. Take a couple minutes and watch.
That is what you should be doing.
Do you mean real peer-reviewed papers published by climate scientists? What papers are coming out, and how do you know about them?
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.