Your question is basically asking “where does a fact come from”.
There isn’t a single national or international scientific organisation on the planet that refutes that humans are influencing the climate. That’s a fact, it’s how the world is, you might not like it but that doesn’t alter reality.
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which is who you are quoting, does not dispute that global warming is real; for the last few years they have adopted a non-committal stance. For many years they claimed there was no such thing as global warming, nowadays they’re basically saying that they don’t know.
I fail to see how their position detracts from the validity of the statement. Please elaborate.
Here’s something to consider – why do you think they added the statement about 200,000 years of predictivity. Does it not strike you as being a truly idiotic and half-baked thing to say? If you know anything about the climate then it should.
- - - - - - - - -
RANGER – The planet is 1.44*10^17 seconds old, if your statistic were correct then we’ve been monitoring the climate for less then one millionth of a second. Whoever told you that figure is an out and out liar and clearly has to fabricate evidence to support their claims, if they have to make stuff up it means they have no real evidence to use.
- - - - - - - - - - -
RE: YOUR ADDED DETAILS
The AAPG is NOT claiming that AGW is not real (nor are they claiming it is real), therefore the statement is correct. If the opinion of the AAPG was that global warming was not real then the statement would be falsified, but that is NOT their position; because they are non-committal the statement is correct. It shouldn’t be difficult to grasp.
As for the 200,000 years… It shouldn’t need explaining. What they’re introduced is the concept of natural fluxes consequent to changes within Earth’s orbital variations – absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with manmade global warming. It’s a complete red herring.
We’re talking about warming on a scale of perhaps 2°C to 4°C over 100 years. If this level of warming persisted for 200,000 years then Earth would be hotter than the Sun.
We know what the natural cycles are that the planet goes through, we know what influence they have on the climate. By introducing this fallacy they’re effectively showing their dishonesty, what thy conveniently forgot to mention was that we’re in a COOLING phase within the scheme of these long term natural cycles.
The last ‘ice-age’ ended 10,000 years ago, we’re now heading toward the next one. For the last 10,000 years the planet has cooled, excepting any human influence then it will keep cooling for the next 80,000 years. We should be cooling down, not warming up at a rate many times faster than anything that could possibly be ascribed to nature and not to a level that makes this planet warmer now than at any time for the last 130,000 years.
As a further humiliation for the AAPG, climate models can take natural variations into consideration. Run them for 200,000 years and they do show very significant temperature changes consequent to these cycles. And by hindcasting they accurately replicate historical variations such as ice-ages. Shame the AAPG didn’t have the honesty and integrity to admit this.