Global Warming is a Scam

In my non-expert opinion I'm going to say a bit of both, leaning more towards the fluke. Global temperatures are said to be about a degree warmer than they 'should' be. This might mean some areas are unseasonably warmer by several degrees, but I doubt that it is going to be that noticeable to most people in their everyday weather experience.That said, I think it would mean that flukes will tend towards the warm side rather than the cold side. We're pretty warm this winter here in the UK too (though we're having some hellish winds this week).Edited by Modulous, : changed the subtitle to make more sense, but weaken the already bad pun

And they're right to remain silent (for the most part). We're talking about a dangerous global temperature raise of just 2 degrees (K). We might be looking at higher but by 2 degrees the shit will have hit the fan. A 4K rise will probably be accompanied by a major extinction event.Without detailed record keeping, I am unlikely to notice that the weather is on average 2-4 degrees warmer around the planet. I probably wouldn't notice if it was 2 degrees warmer on average in my present location.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

Wouldn't it be terrifying if warmer temperatures reduced the amount of low level cloud cover? It could be possible to create a positive feedback. I'd like to see the evidence you have found that supports this claim. Here is what I managed to find The possible connection between ionization in the atmosphere by cosmic rays and low level clouds E. Palle, C.J. Butler, K. O’Brien

quote:

---

We show that, under the most favorable conditions, a reduction in low cloud cover since the late 19th century, combined with the direct forcing by solar irradiance can explain a significant part of the global warming over the past century, but not all. However, this computation assumes that there is no feedback or changes in cloud at other levels.

---