Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Temperatures can be 4 °C (7 °F) higher in the city than in the surrounding areas.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Summer days are usually warm and pleasant with average temperatures between 15 and 25 °C (59 and 77 °F), and a fair amount of sunshine.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

The annual average temperature is 25.4 °C (78 °F) during the day and 13 °C (55 °F) at night.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Winters are mild: January is the coolest month, with average maximum temperatures of 16.0 °C (61 °F) and minimum of 5.7 °C (42 °F).


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

March is transitional, the temperature often exceeds 20 °C (68 °F), with an average temperature of 19.3 °C (66.7 °F) during the day and 10.0 °C (50.0 °F) at night.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

The European heat wave of 2006 was the second massive heat wave to hit the continent in four years, with temperatures rising to 40 °C (104 °F) in Paris; in Ireland, which has a moderate maritime climate, temperatures of over 32 °C (90 °F) were reported.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Local average temperatures vary between 6 and 30 degrees Celsius.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Temperature varies from 39C in summer to 5C in winter.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Temperatures range from 22 to with an average of 27 C.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Mean maximum temperatures range from 19 ° C (66 ° F) in July, to 38 ° C (100 ° F) in January.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

The definition of this climate regarding temperature is as follows : the mean temperature of the coldest month must be below − 3 ° C and there must be at least four months whose mean temperatures are at or above 10 ° C.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

The temperature ranges from sub-zero in winters to more than 50 ° C in summers.


Question: temperatures were 6-10C above normal over most of France, Germany and northern Spain during the final days of the month, according to C3S.

Annual average temperatures : maximum 33.3 ° C, minimum 12.1 ° C ; annual rainfall 2506 mm.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

The largest contribution to total radiative forcing is caused by the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 since 1750."


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

One argument is that of global warming occurring due to human-caused emission of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide produced by the burning of fossil fuels.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

Decades ago, they correctly predicted how much Earth's temperature would rise due to increasing atmospheric CO2.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

Global warming is the result of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations which is caused primarily by the combustion of fossil energy sources such as petroleum, coal, and natural gas, and to an unknown extent by destruction of forests, increased methane, volcanic activity and cement production.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

As stated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the largest contributor to global warming is the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO) since 1750, particularly from fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and land use changes such as deforestation.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

"How do we know more CO2 is causing warming?".


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

Global warming refers to the warming caused by human technology since the 19th century or earlier.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

Increases in atmospheric concentrations of CO 2 and other long-lived greenhouse gases such as methane, nitrous oxide and ozone have correspondingly strengthened their absorption and emission of infrared radiation, causing the rise in average global temperature since the mid-20th century.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

Not only do increasing carbon dioxide concentrations lead to increases in global surface temperature, but increasing global temperatures also cause increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

GHG emissions due to anthropogenic (human) activity are the dominant cause of observed global warming (climate change) since the mid-20th century.


Question: Early 20th century warming is due to several causes, including rising CO2.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that increased quantities of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide within the atmosphere will "very likely" lead to higher average temperatures on a global scale (global warming).


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The last continental glaciation ended 10,000 years ago.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The last cold episode of the last glacial period ended about 10,000 years ago.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

During the most recent North American glaciation, during the latter part of the Last Glacial Maximum (26,000 to 13,300 years ago), ice sheets extended to about 45th parallel north.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

Accordingly, at glacial times the humid climatic belt that today is situated several latitude degrees further to the S, was shifted much further to the N. Although the last glacial period ended more than 8,000 years ago, its effects can still be felt today.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The earth is currently in an interglacial, and the last glacial period ended about 10,000 years ago.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The last glacial period, commonly referred to as the 'Ice Age', spanned 125,000 to 14,500 years ago and was the most recent glacial period within the current ice age which occurred during the last years of the Pleistocene epoch.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The last glacial period, commonly referred to as the "Ice Age", spanned 125,000–14,500 YBP and was the most recent glacial period within the current ice age, which occurred during the last years of the Pleistocene era.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The last cold period began about 115,000 years ago and ended 11,700 years ago.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

Estimates vary for when the last time the Arctic was ice-free: 65 million years ago when fossils indicate that plants existed there to as recently as 5,500 years ago; ice and ocean cores going back 8,000 years to the last warm period or 125,000 during the last intraglacial period.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

At the end of the last ice age, between 10,000 and 11,500 years ago, the sea level was about 175 meters higher than it is today.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The maximum ice extent occurred approximately 25,000 -- 21,000 years ago during the last glacial maximum, also known as the Late Wisconsin in North America.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

The Last Glacial Period (LGP) occurred from the end of the Eemian to the end of the Younger Dryas, encompassing the period c. 115,000 – c. 11,700 years ago.


Question: And  since the last ice age ended almost exactly 11,500 years ago…" (Ice Age Now)

In the North Atlantic, sediments accumulated since the end of the last ice age, nearly 12,000 years ago, show regular increases in the amount of coarse sediment grains deposited from icebergs melting in the now open ocean, indicating a series of 1–2 °C (2–4 °F) cooling events recurring every 1,500 years or so.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

The Clean Power Plan was an Obama administration policy aimed at combating anthropogenic climate change (global warming) that was first proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 2014.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

Janet McCabe, an Obama Administration EPA department head, stated that the decision completely disregards the impacts of climate and the cost and benefits associated with the started programs.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

"The EPA Could Soon Formally Propose Repealing Obama's Key Climate Change Regulation".


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

According to the League of Conservation Voters in 2015, the Clean Power Plan "established the first national limits on carbon pollution from existing power plants—our nation's single largest source of the pollution fueling climate change" and was "the biggest step" the United States had "ever taken to address climate change."


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

According to the EPA fact sheet on the Clean Power Plan, climate change is responsible for everything from stronger storms to longer droughts and increased insurance premiums, food prices and allergy seasons.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

In 2014, President Barack Obama proposed a series of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations, known as the Clean Power Plan that would reduce carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines climate change as "any significant change in the measures of climate lasting for an extended period of time.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

The US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA, 2009) responded to public comments on climate change attribution.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

United States Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, in a 19 June 2017 interview with CNBC, acknowledged the existence of climate change and impact from humans, but said that he did not agree with the idea that carbon dioxide was the primary driver of global warming pointing instead to "the ocean waters and this environment that we live in".


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

On June 1, 2017, Donald Trump announced United States withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, but a number of U.S. states formed the United States Climate Alliance to maintain within state borders the objectives of the Clean Power Plan separately from the federal government.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

The Clean Power Plan was an Obama administration policy aimed at combating global warming that was first proposed in 2014.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

In June 2015, the Obama administration released the President's 21st Century Clean Transportation Plan with the goal of reducing carbon pollution by converting the nation's century old infrastructure into one based on clean energy.This plan intended to battle climate change by reducing emissions through a switch to more sustainable forms of transportation, resulting from a potential increase of innovation in both public transit and electric vehicle production in the United States.The President stated that the revitalization of the infrastructure would not only create jobs, but also allow for quicker deliveries of goods, and allow for a greater variety of transportation options that would facilitate travel for Americans.The President's multibillion dollar proposal provided incentives to reduce reliance on international oil and fossil fuels.


Question: The Obama administration's "own Environmental Protection Agency" has said its Clean Power Plan "will have a marginal impact on climate change."

In 2015, Obama also announced the Clean Power Plan, which is the final version of regulations originally proposed by the EPA the previous year, and which pertains to carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

During the Mesozoic, the world, including India, was considerably warmer than today.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

Consequently, summers are 2.3 °C (4 °F) warmer in the Northern Hemisphere than in the Southern Hemisphere under similar conditions.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

The result is a picture of relatively cool conditions in the seventeenth and early nineteenth centuries and warmth in the eleventh and early fifteenth centuries, but the warmest conditions are apparent in the twentieth century.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

The current scientific consensus is that: Earth's climate has warmed significantly since the late 1800s.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

However, the geological record demonstrates that Earth has remained at a fairly constant temperature throughout its history, and that the young Earth was somewhat warmer than it is today.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

In at least some areas, the recent period appears to be warmer than has been the case for a thousand or more years".


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

There is considerable evidence that over the very recent period of the last 100–1000 years, the sharp increases in human activity, especially the burning of fossil fuels, has caused the parallel sharp and accelerating increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases which trap the sun's heat.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

within the past 10 ~ 10 years) captured by the Solar System.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

An examination of the average global temperature changes by decades reveals continuing climate change, and AR5 reports "Each of the last three decades has been successively warmer at the Earth's surface than any preceding decade since 1850 (see Figure SPM.1).


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

Recent global warming is one of many natural cycles of warming and cooling in geologic history.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

He told CBC: "It was warmer a thousand years ago than it is today.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

Such warming over the past 15,000 years is widely accepted.


Question: Also, it is increasingly clear that the planet was significantly warmer than today several times during the past 10,000 years.

"The Earth's Centre is 1000 Degrees Hotter than Previously Thought".


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

"Mike's Nature trick" referred to Michael E. Mann's paper on temperature trends published by Michael Mann in Nature in 1998, which combined various proxy records and related them to actual temperature records: it included a figure later dubbed the ""hockey stick" graph, which clearly distinguished between the proxy and instrumental data.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

Many commentators quoted one email in which Phil Jones said that he had used "Mike's Nature trick" in a 1999 graph for the World Meteorological Organization "to hide the decline" in proxy temperatures derived from tree-ring analyses when measured temperatures were actually rising.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

The email was widely misquoted as a "trick" to "hide the decline" as though it referred to a decline in measured global temperatures, but this was obviously untrue as when the email was written temperatures were far from declining: 1998 had been the warmest year recorded.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

Several scientific sources state that the decline being referred to is a decline in tree ring climate proxy metrics, not temperature.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

Despite this and the fact that 1999 had just seen record breaking global temperatures, the email was widely misquoted as a "trick" to "hide the decline" as though it referred to a decline in measured global temperatures, an accusation made publicly by the politicians Sarah Palin and Jim Inhofe.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

"A controversy over leaked e-mails exchanged among global warming scientists is part of a 'smear campaign' to derail next month's United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen, one of the scientists, meteorologist Michael Mann, said Tuesday...Climate change sceptics 'don't have the science on their side any more, so they've resorted to a smear campaign to distract the public from the reality of the problem and the need to confront it head-on in Copenhagen' said Mann"; Feldman, Stacy (25 November 2009).


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

This "decline" referred to the well-discussed tree-ring divergence problem, but these two phrases were taken out of context by global warming sceptics, including US Senator Jim Inhofe and former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin, as though they referred to some decline in measured global temperatures, even though they were written when temperatures were at a record high.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

He is quoted as being skeptical of global warming, and is described by Michael E. Mann as a "prominent climate change contrarian.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

Paleoclimatology (in British spelling, palaeoclimatology) is the study of climates for which direct measurements were not taken.


Question: "Mike's Nature trick" has nothing to do with "hide the decline", instead refering to a technique by Michael Mann to plot instrumental temperature along with past reconstructions.

Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Center, said that sceptics were "taking these words totally out of context to make something trivial appear nefarious" and called the entire incident a careful, "high-level, orchestrated smear campaign to distract the public about the nature of the climate change problem".


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

At the same time, the solar power industry grew by almost a quarter to 374,000 jobs.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

The American solar energy industry is highly reliant on foreign parts (80% of parts are made abroad); as a result, the tariffs could raise the costs of solar energy, reduce innovation and reduce jobs in the industry—which in 2017 employed nearly four times as many American workers as the coal industry.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

The solar industry is projected to employ over 420,000 individuals by 2020- nearly double of the 260,000 solar workers in 2016- and contribute $30 billion to the United States economy annually.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

[clarification needed] Solar jobs have more than doubled in the United States over the last decade growing 153% since 2010 to 242,343 workers directly employed by the industry.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

The solar industry is currently one of the fastest growing in the United States, employing more than 250,000 people as of 2018.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

When coal is compared to solar photovoltaic generation, the latter could save 51,999 American lives per year if solar were to replace coal generation in the U.S. Due to the decline of jobs related to coal mining a study found that approximately one American suffers a premature death from coal pollution for every job remaining in coal mining.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

The United States is one of the world's largest producers of solar power.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

There are a many different solar industry jobs.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

As of 2016, more than 260,000 people worked in the solar industry and 43 states deployed net metering, where energy utilities bought back excess power generated by solar arrays.


Question: More than 260,000 Americans are employed by the domestic solar industry â three times as many workers as employed by the entire coal mining industry.

Thousands of people are employed in the energy industry.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

It is by far the biggest cause of land use, as it accounts for nearly 40% of the global land surface.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

Alaska is the largest state in the United States in terms of land area at 570,380 sqmi, over twice (roughly 2.47 times) as large as Texas, the next largest state.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

The global consumption of meat is projected to rise by as much as 76% by 2050 as the global population surges to more than 9 billion, resulting in further biodiversity loss and increased GHG emissions.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

Global meat consumption is projected to more than double by 2050, perhaps as much as 76%, as the global population rises to more than 9 billion, which will be a significant driver of further biodiversity loss and increased GHG emissions.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

Some scientists and academics assert that industrial agriculture and the growing demand for meat is contributing to significant global biodiversity loss as this is a significant driver of deforestation and habitat destruction; species-rich habitats, such as significant portions of the Amazon region, are being converted to agriculture for meat production.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

Habitat destruction by humans, including oceanic devastation, such as through overfishing and contamination; and the modification and destruction of vast tracts of land and river systems around the world to meet solely human-centered ends (with 13 percent of Earth's ice-free land surface now used as row-crop agricultural sites, 26 percent used as pastures, and 4 percent urban-industrial areas), thus replacing the original local ecosystems.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

Climate change is attributed to land use for two main reasons.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

A 2005 report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimated that although the Earth's total forest area continued to decrease at about 13 million hectares per year, the global rate of deforestation has recently been slowing.


Question: The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska

The Holocene extinction includes the disappearance of large land animals known as megafauna, starting at the end of the last Ice Age.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

Climate sensitivity is the globally averaged temperature change in response to changes in radiative forcing, which can occur, for instance, due to increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO 2).


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

A related concept is the transient climate response to cumulative carbon emissions, which is the globally averaged surface temperature change per unit of CO 2 emitted.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

The sensitivity of temperature to atmospheric gasses, most notably CO 2, is often expressed in terms of the change in temperature per doubling of the concentration of the gas.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

The transient climate response (TCR) is the amount of temperature increase that might occur at the time when CO2 doubles, having increased gradually by 1% each year.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

There is also a close correlation between CO2 and temperature, where CO2 has a strong control over global temperatures in Earth history.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

The changes in temperature have been associated with increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO 2) and other GHGs in the atmosphere."


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

"Coherence established between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature".


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

The ice core data shows that temperature change causes the level of atmospheric CO2 to change - not the other way round.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas that is contributing to recent climate change.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

During the glacial cycles, there was a high correlation between CO 2 concentrations and temperatures.


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

Although the term climate sensitivity is usually used in the context of radiative forcing by CO, it is thought of as a general property of the climate system: the change in surface air temperature following a unit change in radiative forcing, and the climate sensitivity parameter is therefore expressed in units of °C/(W/m).


Question: CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that increases radiative forcing and contributes to global warming along with ocean acidification.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

The Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO) is a research unit of Columbia University located on a 157-acre (64 ha) campus in Palisades, N.Y., 18 miles (29 km) north of Manhattan on the Hudson River.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

The Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University is one of the world's leading research centers developing fundamental knowledge about the origin, evolution and future of the natural world.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

Sean Carl Solomon (born October 24,1945) is the director of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, where he is also the William B. Ransford Professor of Earth and Planetary Science.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

He was the Newberry Professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University, a scientist at Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and a sustainability fellow at Arizona State University.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

Global Change Research Program.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

Global Change Research Program.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

The warming has not been globally uniform.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

This article is about climate change scenarios.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

Unanimous agreement was found among the models that future climate change will reduce the efficiency of the land and ocean carbon cycle to absorb human-induced CO. As a result, a larger fraction of human-induced CO will stay airborne if climate change controls the carbon cycle.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

The Keeling Curve is a graph of the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere based on continuous measurements taken at the Mauna Loa Observatory on the island of Hawaii from 1958 to the present day.


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

United States Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, in a 19 June 2017 interview with CNBC, acknowledged the existence of climate change and impact from humans, but said that he did not agree with the idea that carbon dioxide was the primary driver of global warming pointing instead to "the ocean waters and this environment that we live in".


Question: “The arc of global warming will be variously steep and less steep,’ said Richard Seager, a climate scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University.

The Woods Hole Research Center (WHRC) is a scientific research organization that studies climate change impacts and solutions.


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

It is a major aspect of climate change, and has been demonstrated by the instrumental temperature record which shows global warming of around 1 °C since the pre-industrial period, although the bulk of this (0.9°C) has occurred since 1970.


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

Since the 1950s, droughts and heat waves have appeared simultaneously with increasing frequency.


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

"Sun's Shifts May Cause Global Warming".


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

There has been no upward trend in the amount of the Sun's energy reaching the Earth, so it cannot be responsible for the current warming.


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

These measurements indicate that the Sun's total solar irradiance has not increased since 1978, so the warming during the past 30 years cannot be directly attributed to an increase in total solar energy reaching the Earth (see graph above, left).


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

Our results show that the observed rapid rise in global mean temperatures seen after 1985 cannot be ascribed to solar variability, whichever of the mechanisms is invoked and no matter how much the solar variation is amplified.


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

If solar variations were responsible for the observed warming, warming of both the troposphere and the stratosphere would be expected, but that has not been the case.


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

Retrieved 2010-08-28. the leading international network of climate scientists has concluded for the first time that global warming is 'unequivocal' and that human activity is the main driver, 'very likely' causing most of the rise in temperatures since 1950 Stevens, William K. (2007-02-06).


Question: The sun has not warmed since 1970 and so cannot be driving global warming.

Here is the quote: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

The system aims at achieving the environmental outcome of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the idea being that capping emissions creates a price for carbon and the ability to trade ensures that emissions are reduced at the lowest possible price (Department of Climate Change, 2008, 12).


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

There will be a price cap on emissions, that will start at AUD 40 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

The Australian government's Emissions Reduction Fund provides for purchasing carbon offsets from Australian carbon emissions reduction projects.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

The tax that was to be implemented would be 2,400 yen ($20.85 in 2005 dollars) per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted from fuels.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

The proposal would have set an emissions price of NZ$15 per tonne of CO2-equivalent.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

On 1 July 2012, the Australian Federal government introduced a carbon price of AUD$23 per tonne of emitted CO2-e on selected fossil fuels consumed by major industrial emitters and government bodies such as councils.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

A carbon price — the method widely agreed to be the most efficient way for nations to reduce global warming emissions — is a cost applied to carbon pollution to encourage polluters to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases they emit into the atmosphere: it usually takes the form either of a carbon tax or a requirement to purchase permits to emit, generally known as carbon emissions trading, but also called "allowances".


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

1.0% lower and nine months after the introduction of the pricing scheme, Australia's carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation had fallen to a 10-year low, with coal generation down 11% from 2008 to 2009.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

Suppose a $30 carbon price is imposed on the (roughly) 5 billion tonnes of the U.S. emits each year, and suppose that causes emissions to drop 20% (in the long run) to 4 billion tonnes.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

The Australian Government said in July 2013 that the carbon tax was a factor in reducing the emissions intensity in the National Electricity Market from 0.92 t of CO2 per MWh to 0.87 in the 11 months following its introduction.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

A carbon pricing scheme in Australia, commonly dubbed by its critics as a "carbon tax", was introduced by the Gillard Labor Government in 2011 as the "Clean Energy Act 2011" which came into effect on 1 July 2012.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

The carbon price was set at AUD$23 per tonne of emitted CO-e on selected fossil fuels consumed by major industrial emitters and government bodies such as councils.


Question: Environment Minister Greg Hunt the Coalition's emissions reduction fund, at $13.95 per tonne of carbon, is around 1 per cent of the cost of reducing carbon under the former Labor government's carbon pricing scheme, which he cost $1,300 a tonne.

The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (or CPRS) was a cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme for anthropogenic greenhouse gases proposed by the Rudd government, as part of its climate change policy, which had been due to commence in Australia in 2010.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

The effects of global warming in the Arctic include rising temperatures, loss of sea ice, and melting of the Greenland ice sheet.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

The effects of global warming in the Arctic, or climate change in the Arctic include rising air and water temperatures, loss of sea ice, and melting of the Greenland ice sheet with a related cold temperature anomaly, observed since the 1970s.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

Around much of Earth, deglaciation during the last 100 years has been accelerating as a result of climate change, partly brought on by anthropogenic changes to greenhouse gases.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

This acceleration is due mostly to human-caused global warming, which is driving thermal expansion of seawater and the melting of land-based ice sheets and glaciers.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

The Arctic is affected by current global warming, leading to Arctic sea ice shrinkage, diminished ice in the Greenland ice sheet, and Arctic methane release as the permafrost thaws.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

Recent global warming has caused mountain glaciers and the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica to melt and global sea level to rise.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

The rate of the decline in entire Arctic ice coverage is accelerating.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

"Increasing rates of ice mass loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets revealed by GRACE".


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

Global climate change and fluctuation is causing an increasingly exponential melting of Earth's glaciers.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

The rate of ice loss from glaciers and ice sheets in the Antarctic is a key area of uncertainty since this source could account for 90% of the potential sea level rise: increased ocean warmth is undermining and threatening to unplug Antarctic glacier outlets, potentially resulting in more rapid sea level rise.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice.


Question: Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland ice loss is accelerating due to global warming.

As the Greenland ice sheet loses mass from calving of icebergs as well as by melting of ice, any such processes tend to accelerate the loss of the ice sheet.


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

Currently, surface temperatures are rising by about 0.2 °C per decade.


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74 °C (plus or minus 0.18 °C) since the late-19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13 °C (plus or minus 0.03 °C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years.


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

"Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature" (PDF).


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

The average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8° Celsius (1.4° Fahrenheit) since 1880; Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20 °C per decade.


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

Our results show that the observed rapid rise in global mean temperatures seen after 1985 cannot be ascribed to solar variability, whichever of the mechanisms is invoked and no matter how much the solar variation is amplified.


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

From 1961 to 2003, the global ocean temperature has risen by 0.10 °C from the surface to a depth of 700 m. There is variability both year-to-year and over longer time scales, with global ocean heat content observations showing high rates of warming for 1991 to 2003, but some cooling from 2003 to 2007.


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

"Estimating Changes in Global Temperature since the Preindustrial Period".


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

The warming has not been globally uniform.


Question: "...there has been no increase in the global average surface temperature for the past 16 years" (Judith Curry and David Rose)

Global warming is the long-term rise in the average temperature of the Earth's climate system.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

Despite the recession, it was still at 2.79% in 2012 and will slide only marginally to 2.73% in 2013, according to provisional data, and should remain at a similar level in 2014.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

It grew 3.0% per year on average in the 1960s, 2.1% in the 1970s, 2.4% in the 1980s, 2.2% in the 1990s, 0.7% in the 2000s, and 0.9% from 2010 to 2017.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

GDP per employed person increased at an average 1.5% rate during the Reagan administration, compared to an average 0.6% during the preceding eight years.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

Private sector productivity growth, measured as real output per hour of all persons, increased at an average rate of 1.9% during Reagan's eight years, compared to an average 1.3% during the preceding eight years.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

This forecast assumes real GDP growth would be 1.4% in 2013 and 2.5% in 2014.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

U.S. agriculture has doubled farm energy efficiency in the last 25 years.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

The overall increase in rice production throughout the 1980s was the result of higher productivity per hectare, rather than of an increase in the land area planted in rice ; in fact, the area planted in rice decreased during the 1980s, from 732,000 hectares in 1980 to 657,000 hectares in 1990.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.

By 2013, the median household income in the United States rose to $ 52,100.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.


Question: “In 2013 the level of U.S. farm output was about 2.7 times its 1948 level, and productivity was growing at an average annual rate of 1.52%.


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

It is partly covered by sea ice throughout the year and almost completely in winter.


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

"Nonetheless, the extreme loss of this summer’s sea ice cover and the slow onset of freeze-up portends lower than normal ice extent throughout autumn and winter, and the ice that grows back is likely to be fairly thin".


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

"Absurd January Warmth in Arctic Brings Record-Low Sea Ice Extent".


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

The previous record of the lowest area of the Arctic Ocean covered by ice in 2012 saw a low of 1.58 million square miles (4.09 million square kilometers).


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

The Arctic sea ice minimum is the day in a given year when Arctic sea ice reaches its smallest extent, occurring at the end of the summer melting season, normally during September.


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

"Arctic Sea Ice Hits Record Low—Extreme Weather to Come?".


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

"Arctic sea ice reaches lowest extent for the year and the satellite record" (Press release).


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

Arctic sea ice extent ice hit an all-time low in September 2012, when the ice was determined to cover only 24% of the Arctic Ocean, offsetting the previous low of 29% in 2007.


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

The Arctic sea ice covers less area in the summer than in the winter.


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

The Arctic sea ice September minimum extent (i.e., area with at least 15% sea ice coverage) reached new record lows in 2002, 2005, 2007, and 2012.


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

"Record Arctic sea ice minimum confirmed by NSIDC".


Question: Most people expect this year will see a record low in the Arctic’s summer sea-ice cover.

In the Arctic, the area of ocean covered by sea ice increases over winter from a minimum in September to a maximum in March or sometimes February, before melting over the summer.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

Although the parties to the UNFCCC have agreed that deep cuts in emissions are required and that global warming should be limited to well below 2 °C (3.6 °F) in the Paris Agreement of 2016, the Earth's average surface temperature has already increased by about half this threshold and current pledges by countries to cut emissions are inadequate to limit future warming.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

In 2015 all UN countries negotiated the Paris Agreement, which aims to keep climate change well below 2 °C.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

The Paris Agreement aims to combat global climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

The Paris Agreement's long-term temperature goal is to keep the increase in global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels; and to pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 °C, recognizing that this would substantially reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

An increase of global temperature by more than 2°C has come to be the majority definition of what would constitute intolerably dangerous climate change with efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels per the Paris Agreement.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

The Paris Agreement's long-term temperature goal is to keep the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels; and to pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5°C.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

In 2015, all (then) 196 parties to the convention came together for the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris 30 November - 12 December and adopted by consensus the Paris Agreement, aimed at limiting global warming to less than two degrees Celsius, and pursue efforts to limit the rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

The aim of the agreement is to decrease global warming described in its Article 2, "enhancing the implementation" of the UNFCCC through: (a) Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change; (b) Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production; (c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.

Stabilising greenhouse gas concentrations at 450 ppm would only result in a 50% likelihood of limiting global warming to 2 °C, and that it would be necessary to achieve stabilisation below 400 ppm to give a relatively high certainty of not exceeding 2 °C.


Question: This could mean the landmark Paris Climate Agreement – which seeks to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels – may not be enough to ward off catastrophe.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

In February 2020, the region recorded the highest temperature of 18.3 degree Celsius which was a degree higher than the previous record of 17.5 degrees in March 2015.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

The Earth's average surface temperature has increased by 1.5 °F (0.83 °C) since 1880.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

About a billion years from now, all surface water will have disappeared and the mean global temperature will reach 70 °C (158 °F).


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

In the last 100 years, Earth's average surface temperature increased by about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F) with about two thirds of the increase occurring over just the last three decades.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

The 10th Emissions Gap Report issued by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) predicts that if emissions continue to increase at the same rate as they have in 2010–2020, global temperatures would rise by as much as 4° by 2100.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

Models referenced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predict that global temperatures are likely to increase by 1.1 to 6.4 °C (2.0 to 11.5 °F) between 1990 and 2100.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

In 2018 the IPCC published a Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C which warned that, if the current rate of greenhouse gas emissions is not mitigated, global warming is likely to reach 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) between 2030 and 2052, risking major crises.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

Global warming will likely rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels between 2030 and 2052 if warming continues to increase at the current rate.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

Climate model projections summarized in the report indicated that during the 21st century the global surface temperature is likely to rise a further 0.3 to 1.7 °C (0.5 to 3.1 °F) in a moderate scenario, or as much as 2.6 to 4.8 °C (4.7 to 8.6 °F) in an extreme scenario, depending on the rate of future greenhouse gas emissions and on climate feedback effects.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

In a scenario where global emissions start to decrease by 2010 and then declined at a sustained rate of 3% per year, the likely global average temperature increase was predicted to be 1.7 °C above pre-industrial levels by 2050, rising to around 2 °C by 2100.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

In preparation for the 2021 6th IPCC report, a new generation of climate models are being developed: some show climate sensitivity around , meaning temperature can rise by 6.5 - 7 degree by 2100 in the worst socio-economic scenario ("SSP5 8.5 – rapid economic growth driven by fossil fuels without mitigation").


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

Over the last 100 years the Earth's temperature has increased 0.6 degrees Celsius and it is predicted to increase an additional 3.5 degrees over the next century.


Question: Climate scientists have predicted global temperatures would increase more than one degree Celsius by 2020," but observed temperatures have been only half as high.

The TAR estimate for the climate sensitivity is 1.5 to 4.5 °C; and the average surface temperature is projected to increase by 1.4 to 5.8 Celsius degrees over the period 1990 to 2100, and the sea level is projected to rise by 0.1 to 0.9 metres over the same period.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

In another study, results estimate the heat content of the ocean in the upper 700 meters has increased significantly from 1955–2010.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

Warming of the ocean accounts for about 93% of the increase in the Earth's energy inventory between 1971 and 2010 (high confidence), with warming of the upper (0 to 700 m) ocean accounting for about 64% of the total.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

From 1961 to 2003, the global ocean temperature has risen by 0.10 °C from the surface to a depth of 700 m. There is variability both year-to-year and over longer time scales, with global ocean heat content observations showing high rates of warming for 1991 to 2003, but some cooling from 2003 to 2007.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report estimates that the upper ocean (surface to 750 m deep) has warmed by 0.09 to 0.13 degrees C per decade over the past 40 years.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

Although the most common measure of global warming is the increase in the near-surface atmospheric temperature, over 90% of the additional energy stored in the climate system over the last 50 years has warmed ocean water.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

The Earth's heat content is about .


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

The average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8° Celsius (1.4° Fahrenheit) since 1880; Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20 °C per decade.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

Global warming is projected to have a number of effects on the oceans.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

The warming has not been globally uniform.


Question: The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

"Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level."


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

If emissions remain very high, the IPCC projects sea level will rise by 52–98 cm (20–39 in).


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

The study also concluded that the Paris climate agreement emissions scenario, if met, would result in a median 52 cm (20 in) of sea level rise by 2100.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

In 2019, a study projected that in low emission scenario, sea level will rise 30 centimeters by 2050 and 69 centimetres by 2100, relatively to the level in 2000.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

In high emission scenario, it will be 34 cm by 2050 and 111 cm by 2100.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

The commission said the country must plan for a rise in the North Sea up to 1.3 metres (4 ft 3 in) by 2100 and plan for a 2–4 metres (7–13 ft) m rise by 2200.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

According to the Fourth (2017) National Climate Assessment (NCA) of the United States it is very likely sea level will rise between 30 and 130 cm (1.0–4.3 feet) in 2100 compared to the year 2000.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that sea levels will increase with up to 0.6 meters by 2100.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

According to 2007 estimates by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), “global average sea level will rise between 0.6 and 2 feet (0.18 to 0.59 meters) in the next century.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that sea levels will rise by about 50 cm (20 in) by 2100 due to global warming and a further rise would be inevitable.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

However, Greg Holland from the National Center for Atmospheric Research, who reviewed the study, noted: “There is no doubt that the sea level rise, within the IPCC, is a very conservative number, so the truth lies somewhere between IPCC and Jim.” In addition, one 2017 study's scenario, assuming high fossil fuel use for combustion and strong economic growth during this century, projects sea level rise of up to 132 cm (4.3 ft) on average — and an extreme scenario with as much as 189 cm (6.2 ft), by 2100.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

Estimates on future contribution to sea level rise from Greenland range from 0.3 to 3 metres (1 to 10 ft), for the year 2100.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

[citation needed] By 2100 the overall level of the Mediterranean could rise between 3 to 61 cm (1.2 to 24.0 in) as a result of the effects of climate change.


Question: Sea level rise could reach six or seven feet by the year 2100.

Under the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenario (SRES) A1B, by the mid-2090s global sea level will reach above 1990 levels, and is currently rising at about per year.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.

We have found that climate models and popular surface temperature data sets overstate the changes in the real atmosphere and that actual changes are not alarming."


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.

Globally, most climate models used by the IPCC in preparation of their third assessment in 2007 show a slightly greater warming at the TLT level than at the surface (0.03 °C/decade difference) for 1979–1999 while the GISS trend is +0.161 °C/decade for 1979 to 2012, the lower troposphere trends calculated from satellite data by UAH and RSS are +0.130 °C/decade and +0.206 °C/decade.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.

Specifically, surface data showed substantial global-average warming, while early versions of satellite and radiosonde data showed little or no warming above the surface.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.

In comparing these measurements to surface temperature models, it is important to note that values for the lower troposphere measurements taken by the MSU are a weighted average of temperatures over multiple altitudes (roughly 0 to 12 km), and not a surface temperature (as seen in figure above).


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.

The results are thus not precisely comparable to surface temperature records or models.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.

Climate data: Air temperature, Soil temperature


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.


Question: UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

"Great Lakes water levels reaching record lows".


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

"More recently, evaporation over lakes has steadily been increasing, largely due to increases in water surface temperature," Gronewold said.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

"Climate change is lowering Great Lakes water levels.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

In 2013, record low water levels in the Great Lakes were attributed to climate change.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

Current Great Lakes Water Levels.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

Uneven distributions of increased temperatures and increased precipitation around the globe results in water surpluses and deficits, but a global decrease in groundwater suggests a rise in sea level, even after meltwater and thermal expansion were accounted for, which can provide a positive feedback to the problems sea-level rise causes to fresh-water supply.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

Evaporation is an important part of the water cycle.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

There is evidence of reduction of biomass in Saskatchewan 's boreal forests (as with those of other Canadian prairie provinces) that is linked by researchers to drought-related water stress stemming from global warming, most likely caused by greenhouse gas emissions.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

Scientists have found evidence that increased evaporation could result in more extreme weather as global warming progresses.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

Global warming is the greatest cause of impact to the environment.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

One theory is that the climate may reach a "tipping point" where positive feedback effects lead to runaway global warming; such feedbacks include decreased reflection of solar radiation as sea ice melts, exposing darker seawater, and the potential release of large volumes of methane from thawing permafrost.


Question: Recent record-low water levels in Lake Michigan are evidence that global warming is leading to "the evaporation of our Great Lakes."

About 60.5 mya at the Danian/Selandian boundary, there is evidence of anoxia spreading out into coastal waters, and a drop in sea levels which is most likely explained as an increase in temperature and evaporation, as there was no ice at the poles to lock up water.


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

Because of both drought and overuse, the section from El Paso downstream through Ojinaga was recently tagged "The Forgotten River" by those wishing to bring attention to the river's deteriorated condition.


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

The Rio Grande ([ˈriːoʊ_ˈɡrænd] or [ˈriːoʊ_ˈɡrɑːndɛ] Río Bravo del Norte, [ˈri.o ˈβɾaβo ðel ˈnorte] or simply Río Bravo) is one of the principal rivers in the southwest United States and northern Mexico (the other being the Colorado River).


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

Rio Salado (New Mexico), United States, a tributary of the Rio Grande


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

The Santa Fe River is a tributary of the Rio Grande in northern New Mexico.


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

Major tributaries of the Rio Grande are :


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

Middle Rio Grande Basin, a hydrological basin in central New Mexico


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

Rivers are part of the hydrological cycle.


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

It was formerly known as the Rio del Norte.


Question: The Rio Grande is a classic “feast or famine” river, with a dry year or two typically followed by a couple of wet years that allow for recovery.

It is represented as a river.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

It infected 500 million people around the world, or about 27% of the then world population of about 1.8 billion, including people on remote Pacific islands and in the Arctic.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

The death toll is estimated to have been 50 million, and possibly as high as 100 million (about 3 to 6 percent of Earth's population at the time), making it one of the deadliest epidemics in human history.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

Older estimates say it killed 40–50 million people, while current estimates put the death toll at probably 50 million (less than 3% of the global population), and possibly as high as 100 million (more than 5%).


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

GAS infections can cause > 500,000 deaths per year.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

In Argentina, seasonal flu outbreaks kill about 4,000 people each year, equivalent to a rate of 10 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

More than 830,000 people died.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

Archaeological evidence indicates that the death of around 90% of the Native American population of the New World was caused by Old World diseases such as smallpox, measles, and influenza.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

During epidemics the incidence of meningococcal disease approaches 100 per 100,000.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

The Tse-Tse Fly and Sleeping Sickness (1908)


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment is a 2007 Russian publication that concludes that there were 985,000 premature deaths as a consequence of the radioactivity released.


Question: In Alaska, already, researchers have discovered remnants of the 1918 flu that infected as many as 500 million and killed as many as 100 million”

The 1976 swine flu outbreak, also known as the swine flu fiasco, or the swine flu debacle, was a strain of H1N1 influenza virus that appeared in 1976.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

Increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide certainly affects plant morphology and is acidifying oceans, and temperature affects species ranges, phenology, and weather, but, mercifully, the major impacts that have been predicted are still potential futures.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

The concentration of secondary metabolites such as phenylpropanoids and flavonoids can also be altered in plants exposed to high concentrations of CO 2.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

Elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide affects plants in a variety of ways.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

It is expected that most ecosystems will be affected by higher atmospheric CO2 levels and higher global temperatures.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

The CO2 fertiliser effect has been greatly overestimated during Free-Air Carbon dioxide Enrichment (FACE) experiments where results show increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere enhances photosynthesis, reduce transpiration, and increase water use efficiency (WUE).


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

Potential negative environmental impacts caused by increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations are rising global air temperatures, altered hydrogeological cycles resulting in more frequent and severe droughts, storms, and floods, as well as sea level rise and ecosystem disruption.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

Higher carbon dioxide concentrations will favourably affect plant growth and demand for water.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

A 2017 Politico article states that increased CO 2 levels may have a negative impact on the nutritional quality of various human food crops, by increasing the levels of carbohydrates, such as glucose, while decreasing the levels of important nutrients such as protein, iron, and zinc.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

Since global warming is attributed to increasing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases such as CO 2 and methane, scientists closely monitor atmospheric CO 2 concentrations and their impact on the present-day biosphere.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

Land-use change can be a factor in CO (carbon dioxide) atmospheric concentration, and is thus a contributor to global climate change.


Question: The effects of enhanced CO2 on terrestrial plants are variable and complex and dependent on numerous factors.

When CO levels rise in the atmosphere the temperature increases and plants grow.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

The Devonian (/dɪˈvoʊn.i.ən, də-, dɛ-/ dih-VOH-nee-ən, də-, deh-) is a geologic period and system of the Paleozoic, spanning 60 million years from the end of the Silurian, 419.2 million years ago (Mya), to the beginning of the Carboniferous, 358.9 Mya.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

The Jurassic (/dʒʊˈræs.ɪk/ juu-RASS-ik; from the Jura Mountains) is a geologic period and system that spanned 56 million years from the end of the Triassic Period 201.3 million years ago (Mya) to the beginning of the Cretaceous Period 145 Mya.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

The Ordovician spans 41.6 million years from the end of the Cambrian Period 485.4 million years ago (Mya) to the start of the Silurian Period 443.8 Mya.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

The Silurian (/sɪˈljʊər.i.ən, saɪ-/ sih-LYOOR-ee-ən, sy-) is a geologic period and system spanning 24.6 million years from the end of the Ordovician Period, at 443.8 million years ago (Mya), to the beginning of the Devonian Period, 419.2 Mya.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

The Triassic (/traɪˈæs.ɪk/ try-ASS-ik) is a geologic period and system which spans 50.6 million years from the end of the Permian Period 251.9 million years ago (Mya), to the beginning of the Jurassic Period 201.3 Mya.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

In the early and middle Ordovician, temperatures were mild, but at the beginning of the Late Ordovician, from 460 to 450 Ma, volcanoes along the margin of the Iapetus Ocean spewed massive amounts of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere, turning the planet into a hothouse.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

Reconstructed temperature records for the last 420 million years indicate that atmospheric CO 2 concentrations peaked at ~2000 ppm during the Devonian (∼400 Myrs ago) period, and again in the Triassic (220–200 Myrs ago) period.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

Carbon dioxide concentrations dropped from 4,000 parts per million during the Cambrian periodabout 500 million years ago to as low as 180 parts per million during the Quaternary glaciation of the last two million years.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

(BBC) 4 April A new, detailed record of past climate change has shown compelling evidence that the last ice age was ended by a rise in temperature driven by an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

Atmospheric CO2 has risen over the last 150 years to current levels of over 390 ppmv, from the 180 – 300 ppmv of the prior 800 thousand years This rise in temperature has reduced the Arctic ice cap to 1,100,000 sq mi (2,800,000 km2),[citation needed] smaller than ever recorded.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

Keeling’s Tellus article of 1960 presented the first monthly CO 2 records from Mauna Loa and Antarctica (1957 to 1960), finding a “distinct seasonal cycle…and possibly, a worldwide rise in CO2 from year to year.” By the 1970s, it was well established that the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide was ongoing and due to anthropogenic emissions.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

CO 2 currently forms about 410 parts per million (ppm) of earth's atmosphere, compared to about 280 ppm in pre-industrial times, and billions of metric tons of CO 2 are emitted annually by burning of fossil fuels.


Question: "The killer proof that CO2 does not drive climate is to be found during the Ordovician- Silurian and the Jurassic-Cretaceous periods when CO2 levels were greater than 4000 ppmv (parts per million by volume) and about 2000 ppmv respectively.

Some climate change denial groups say that because CO 2 is only a trace gas in the atmosphere (roughly 400ppm, or 0.04%, 4 parts per 10,000) it can only have a minor effect on the climate.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

The efforts of Al Gore and other environmental campaigns have focused on the effects of global warming and have managed to increase awareness and concern, but despite these efforts, the number of Americans believing humans are the cause of global warming was holding steady at 61% in 2007, and those believing the popular media was understating the issue remained about 35%.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

Science education is under attack… by climate change deniers, who ignore a mountain of evidence gathered over the last fifty years that the planet is warming and that humans are largely responsible.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

"A controversy over leaked e-mails exchanged among global warming scientists is part of a 'smear campaign' to derail next month's United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen, one of the scientists, meteorologist Michael Mann, said Tuesday...Climate change sceptics 'don't have the science on their side any more, so they've resorted to a smear campaign to distract the public from the reality of the problem and the need to confront it head-on in Copenhagen' said Mann"; Feldman, Stacy (25 November 2009).


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

During the Climatic Research Unit email controversy (also known as "Climategate") in 2009 in the lead-up to the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, the Times wrote in an editorial "these revelations of fudged science should have a cooling effect on global-warming hysteria and the panicked policies that are being pushed forward to address the unproven theory."


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

They argued that the emails showed that global warming was a scientific conspiracy and that scientists manipulated climate data and attempted to suppress critics.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

Some climate change sceptics including bloggers asserted that a number of the leaked e-mails contain evidence supporting their global warming conspiracy theory that scientists had allegedly conspired to manipulate data and to keep scientists who have contrary views out of peer-review literature.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

Most of the emails concerned technical and mundane aspects of climate research, such as data analysis and details of scientific conferences.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

A common argument used to dismiss the significance of human-caused climate change is to allege that scientists showed concerns about global cooling which did not materialise, and there is therefore no need to heed current scientific concerns about global warming.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

After all, some of those emails, taken out of context, sounded damning.


Question: Focusing on a few suggestive emails, taken out of context, merely serves to distract from the wealth of empirical evidence for man-made global warming.

"'Conspiracy theories finally laid to rest' by report on leaked climate change emails".


Question: there were no ice sheets covering either Greenland or West Antarctica, and much of the East Antarctic ice sheet was gone.

The mass balance of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet as a whole is thought to be slightly positive (lowering sea level) or near to balance.


Question: there were no ice sheets covering either Greenland or West Antarctica, and much of the East Antarctic ice sheet was gone.

The Greenland ice sheet (, ) is a vast body of ice covering , roughly 80% of the surface of Greenland.


Question: there were no ice sheets covering either Greenland or West Antarctica, and much of the East Antarctic ice sheet was gone.

West Antarctica is covered by the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.