{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/23/2013 1:45:35 PM
2
[quote]Most scientists believe that the warming has continued over the past 15 years, but more of the heat has gone into the oceans. They are unsure about the mechanisms driving this change in behaviour.
The most recent peer reviewed article suggested that a periodic, natural cooling of the Pacific Ocean was counteracting the impact of carbon dioxide.
"1998 was a particular hot year due to a record-breaking El Niño event, while recently we have had mostly the opposite - cool conditions in the tropical Pacific," Prof Stefan Rahmstorf, from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, told BBC News.
"That warming has not stopped can be seen from the ongoing heat accumulation in the global oceans."
[/quote]
Did you even read all of the article?
English
-
Edited by lonepaul2441: 9/23/2013 1:50:50 PMIn 2007, the IPCC said that temperatures in the Arctic increased at almost twice the global average rate in the past 100 years. They pointed out that the region can be highly variable, with a warm period observed between 1925 and 1945. In the drafts of the latest report, the scientists say there is stronger evidence that ice sheets and glaciers are losing mass and sea ice cover is decreasing in the Arctic. In relation to Greenland, which by itself has the capacity to raise global sea levels by six metres, the panel says they are 90% certain that the average rate of ice loss between 1992 and 2001 has increased six-fold in the period 2002 to 2011. While the Arctic mean sea ice extent has declined by around 4% per decade since 1979, the Antarctic has increased up to 1.8% per decade over the same time period. Some recent newspaper reports have suggested that sea ice in the Arctic has recovered in 2013, but scientists are virtually certain about the trend. Basically there are things happening that are against their projections and are twisting it by saying "It's unpredictable".
-
Paragraphs 1-3(of what you posted) involve only the arctic. Only in paragraph 4 was the antarctic mentioned, and only briefly. Nowhere in the article was there any mention of the predictions of the antartic. There was nothing in what you posted that was contradictory.
