Friends, here is some info.  'Sea surface temperatures throughout the world's oceans are predicted to rise further, threatening fish stocks and coral reefs. Almost all regions will see an increase in drought and warm days.

Globally, agricultural demand for water will rise but the water available for irrigation is forecast to decrease in almost the entire southern hemisphere. In many mid-latitude countries, crop yields are predicted to fall.

All of this paints a vivid picture that we cannot afford to ignore: climate change will pose an increasingly serious global threat to the supply of the water and food that we all rely on.

For South East Asia, the projections are particularly alarming: a 4-degree increase in temperature, a 77% increase in flood-prone land area, a 5% increase in drought days and an 8% decrease in water availability for irrigation.'

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/climate-change-the-time-to-act-is-now-ray-kyles#sthash.8CfAqqBR.dpuf

Dear Sir,

A very interesting question, I am going to follow the discussion very closely.

Up to my knowledge the temperature has been increasing. There is some random variation in it but it increases. Also, the temperature increase due to CO2 can be predicted on the base of quite simple physical models. Adding detail to these models as most GCM:s do adds realism to these predictions but the basis of climate change is physically simple and solid. To predict a scenario where CO2 does not increase the global temperature one needs to bet on very complicated feedback cycles and assigne unrealistic parameter values ot model parameters.

A sligtly old description of the global temperature trends is in the attached link.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2004/

Dear Frank, thanks you so much. I have always believed this. But now I'm not a staunch supporter of either position. What I want to know is not the data from models, but the actual data, the reliable ones what they say.  Did Don Easterbrook say falsehood?

The purpose of this question is "simple", as I would like to know more like many other people do about the actual global warming and figure out if there is someone who can help us better understand and make more clarity on how things are in this regard. Whom do we have to believe? Often the truth is never fully at one side  given the complex nature of the problem, and it is almost physiological that when facing problems of a global nature very different opinions and even conflicting ones will emerge. But what do the measured data say and what the modeled ones? Do they confirm or not the predictions of the IPCC?

Dear Giovanni,

I frequently see on television journals addressed to citizens that local climate records have been beaten since the beginning of the meteorology records in France. Some people claim that the weather will become less predictable with more variation around the average values, and some think that the rate of increase is slowing down because of the action of the oceans....

In one of my latest questions (Concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere between 2012 and 2013 grew at their fastest rate since 1984: what is your opinion?)someone showed a very close correlation between global CO2 production and global population size, which would indicate that the primary driver of climate change might be the total size of the human population?

Friends, here is some info.  'Sea surface temperatures throughout the world's oceans are predicted to rise further, threatening fish stocks and coral reefs. Almost all regions will see an increase in drought and warm days.

Globally, agricultural demand for water will rise but the water available for irrigation is forecast to decrease in almost the entire southern hemisphere. In many mid-latitude countries, crop yields are predicted to fall.

All of this paints a vivid picture that we cannot afford to ignore: climate change will pose an increasingly serious global threat to the supply of the water and food that we all rely on.

For South East Asia, the projections are particularly alarming: a 4-degree increase in temperature, a 77% increase in flood-prone land area, a 5% increase in drought days and an 8% decrease in water availability for irrigation.'

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/climate-change-the-time-to-act-is-now-ray-kyles#sthash.8CfAqqBR.dpuf

Dear Miranda,

These are pictures also given on television journals at the same time making publicity for cars..... Is this a religion-based strategy? Never stop hoping in a bright future?

Dear Marcel, I prefer to speak the truth, but religion teaches me to speak gently and be concerned about other people's feelings.  The increase in temperature here is the truth, and what we have are just ceiling fans at home and aircond in the office only.  Tutorial rooms and labs only have ceiling fans too.  Very hot!

Dear "Gianni, The Modern Temperature Trend gives fine temperature history and many analysis about! I have to study it, but for person in the field like You are, many good reading and references!

Forbes brings a good story! "Global warming activists argue that carbon dioxide emissions are the sole or primary factor in global temperature changes, yet global temperatures show no change despite a 33% increase in global carbon dioxide emissions. The fact that global temperatures are not rising despite such a significant increase in carbon dioxide emissions provides validation of skeptical arguments, not a cause for heightened alarm."

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/20ctrend.htm

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/09/carbon-dioxide-emissions-up-sharply-yet-temperatures-are-flat/

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/6704-global-temperature-is-dropping-not-rising

Dear Prof Ljubomir and friends, once Prof James told me that in Canada, his winters are becoming extremely cold with negative temperatures.  In some places the spring season is so short.  While my hot country is getting hotter, some cold countries are getting colder!  Can this extreme phenomena be brought under control?

Recently I helped Pardis to translate the abstract of her thesis into Malay language.  It's a good project in Ecology or Bioengineering; to reduce methane emissions from paddy farming, because the traditional method produces a lot of methane which is about 20 - 25 times the global warming potential of CO2.

Dear Prof. Giovanni Zurlini; It is a very interesting question I start following it and increase my little knowledge about Global Warming. Yes I  came to know by now that the temperature is rising. Is it not true. Regards

Yes, I agree with you. But there is another important phenomenon known as global cooling. In many parts of the world, especially in different parts of world oceans, the decadal cooling of sea surface temperature is also observed beside increase of the temperature.

Dear Giovanni,

Dear All,

Majority of the participants here are not specialists thus some approaches seem to be a bit talk show like.

The James Taylor indication http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/09/carbon-dioxide-emissions-up-sharply-yet-temperatures-are-flat/ on the question is but a caricature. The first citation is missing and the data on the rise of CO2 emissions and the global temperature level were drafted for American house wives.

Another comment http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/6704-global-temperature-is-dropping-not-rising is also simple media note. Any of them cannot be scientifically evaluated.

The mechanism of warming including also the impact of CO2 emission cannot be truly modelled because the whole circumstances and efficiency factors have not been known. Here I mention that not only the CO2 emission has effect on warming but methane and other gases.

There is a strong uncertainty as in almost any unknown phenomena. The really scientific approach would be too long and most of us were not able to rightly interpret it.

My trouble is that observed global warming, the rise (not always continual) of CO2 emission are only parts of the blind industrialisation which by the way covered with poisons the soil, the surface water and penetrated into air and evidently devastated many thousand species http://www.iucnredlist.org/. Now, this is not prepared for house wives…

This fact is depend on the hydrocarbon utilization, forest fire and other natural phenomena likes volcanos etc . Forest fire is  some what control by modern  techniques.

but hydrocarbon utilization is increasing , which may cause atmospheric temperature.

I was just wondering of the following:

Did anybody take into consideration that, in the modern times, more meteorological stations were added to subtropical and tropical areas in developing countries with sometimes incompetent staff not following the international standards. How are the statistical data treated? Is this somehow corrected for? If we added, let us say, 50% more stations from Antarctica and let them do whatever they do, the average temperature confused with the "global temperature" would decrease. Can somebody comment on this?

Second, it was shown in the CERN's experiment CLOUD that cosmic rays have no effect on the cloud formation. Hence, the basic explanation of the BBC4 documentary "The greatest swindle of global warming" turned out to be wrong. But have anybody proven that, in the long period, CO2 levels are delayed after the ocean temperature by 800 years so that CO2 in the atmosphere cannot be the cause of the warming; it is rather a consequence. Warmer ocean water can dissolve less gases so it releases CO2 back into the atmosphere, as stated in the BBC4 documentary. Of course, the housewives cannot see this 800-year lag in Al Gore's "clear graphs" with the x scale of 200'000 years or more (

Dear @Gianni, Is this really a pause In global warming? Fine article and scientific resource links are attached. 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2015/06/15/a-pause-in-global-warming-not-really/

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2015/06/05/science.aaa5632.full

The study, published today in Nature Climate Change, uses complex Earth system models to simulate long-term warming in response to the burning of Earth’s remaining fossil fuel resources. We talked to lead author Katarzyna Tokarska from the University of Victoria to find out why her results are so much more extreme than previous estimates...

Temperatures to rise about 8°C by 2300 if emissions are not mitigated, new Nature study finds!!!

https://www.researchgate.net/blog/post/temperatures-to-rise-about-8-c-by-2300-if-emissions-are-not-mitigated-new-nature-study-finds

According to NASA website, there is an upward trend in the global temperatures. I live in Brisbane-Australia and here It is officially winter starting in 4 days time, yet we are still living in summer, wondering when the winter is going to come and if it will come at all? I find it hard to not to believe in global warming. I respect the scientists questioning everything, but I am also aware of people/scientists/politicians on the payroll of corporate polluters and their associated media. If there is no global warming why the ice and glaciers are disappearing all around the world?

http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

best wishes, Refik

yes we know in which direction. In my recent papers I have proven the solar origins of climate variability and quantified it. We know that in the next 100 years the climate shall be cooling down.

https://youtu.be/UvaRcDvGPck

Sometimes people think that IPCC does investigate into global warming, but indeed it looks into climate change. The expression global warming is out since many years as it is acknowldeged that it is much more than around temperature change. Global cooling, if it exists is also climate change.

In Germany we can have temperatures in winter of minus 20 degrees Celsius. That is winter and we call this winter weather. Some years winters are mild, other years very harsh, long and very cold. Weather and climate are different things, and the weather is never the same. It changes and also if the sun energy received on January 1 at a particular place would be the same every year (which is not the case as the sender (sun) sends not always the same) it still would result in different weather as the energy received is only one from many, many factors that makes the weather. I think that the cooling effect due to reduced sun activity (if it exists) moderates anthropogenic warming impacts, the same other natural impacts on the climate would such as volcanic eruptions etc. We should realise that something as complex as climate has many contributing factors that lead to change. To assume that everything is caused by humans or everything by natural causes is far too simplistic. For that reason it is rather difficult to make any precise predictions of the future. So both (processes that contribute to warming and such contributing to cooling) not only can happen, but they do, and they always did. What now is sold as new ideas and change to previous scientific knowledge is actually nothing really new other than that one aspect from an extremely complex process is taken out and displayed as the whole truth.