|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
On 12/9/11 1:11 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Prove CO2 is responsible for climate change. Hell, even show evidence that it is. The evidence is that atmospheric CO2 concentration LAGS warming, not leads it. The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm Scientific Evidence - Increasing Temperatures & Greenhouse Gases http://www.whrc.org/resources/primer_fundamentals.html Turns out CO2 rise is both a cause and an effect of warming http://www.grist.org/article/co2-doesnt-lead-it-lags Energy balance points to man-made climate change http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 A climate model based on the "global energy balance" has provided new evidence for human-induced climate change, according to its creators. Using this simple model, researchers in Switzerland conclude that it is extremely likely (95% probability) that at least 74% of the observed warming since 1950 has been caused by human activity. Previously, climate scientists have used a technique called "optimal fingerprinting" to pinpoint the causes of global warming. This involves using complex models to simulate the climate response to different "forcings". These include greenhouse gases, aerosols and ozone, as well as natural factors such as solar and volcanic variability. The relative contribution of each forcing is then assessed by a statistical comparison of the model outputs to the real-life warming pattern. However, this method relies on the ability of climate models to accurately simulate the response patterns to each forcing, and also assumes that the responses can be scaled and added. Furthermore, changes in the energy balance of the climate system are not explicitly See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
On 12/9/11 7:35 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
The Dust Bowl was caused by a prolonged drought. Otherwise it would have happened much earlier. It's not like that was the first year they farmed the place, after all. Had humans not ravished the land the dust bowl would not have happened in the 30s. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
On 12/7/11 8:21 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Your 'feeling' doesn't constitute proof. Hell, given your record for nonsense, it doesn't even constitute reasonable doubt. How'd we cause it and what do you propose we do? Energy balance points to man-made climate change http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 A climate model based on the "global energy balance" has provided new evidence for human-induced climate change, according to its creators. Using this simple model, researchers in Switzerland conclude that it is extremely likely (95% probability) that at least 74% of the observed warming since 1950 has been caused by human activity. Previously, climate scientists have used a technique called "optimal fingerprinting" to pinpoint the causes of global warming. This involves using complex models to simulate the climate response to different "forcings". These include greenhouse gases, aerosols and ozone, as well as natural factors such as solar and volcanic variability. The relative contribution of each forcing is then assessed by a statistical comparison of the model outputs to the real-life warming pattern. However, this method relies on the ability of climate models to accurately simulate the response patterns to each forcing, and also assumes that the responses can be scaled and added. Furthermore, changes in the energy balance of the climate system are not explicitly See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
On 12/9/11 12:05 PM, Marvin the Martian wrote:
It is funny how you idiots always talk about how you know what is or isn't accepted in the scientific community when you don't know ****. First of all, you're making one big bandwagon fallacy. Secondly, your bandwagon fallacy is based on a lie that Al Gore told you. Energy balance points to man-made climate change http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 A climate model based on the "global energy balance" has provided new evidence for human-induced climate change, according to its creators. Using this simple model, researchers in Switzerland conclude that it is extremely likely (95% probability) that at least 74% of the observed warming since 1950 has been caused by human activity. Previously, climate scientists have used a technique called "optimal fingerprinting" to pinpoint the causes of global warming. This involves using complex models to simulate the climate response to different "forcings". These include greenhouse gases, aerosols and ozone, as well as natural factors such as solar and volcanic variability. The relative contribution of each forcing is then assessed by a statistical comparison of the model outputs to the real-life warming pattern. However, this method relies on the ability of climate models to accurately simulate the response patterns to each forcing, and also assumes that the responses can be scaled and added. Furthermore, changes in the energy balance of the climate system are not explicitly See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 13:33:57 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 12/9/11 12:05 PM, Marvin the Martian wrote: It is funny how you idiots always talk about how you know what is or isn't accepted in the scientific community when you don't know ****. First of all, you're making one big bandwagon fallacy. Secondly, your bandwagon fallacy is based on a lie that Al Gore told you. Energy balance points to man-made climate change http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 A climate model based on the "global energy balance" has provided new evidence for human-induced climate change, according to its creators. Using this simple model, researchers in Switzerland conclude that it is extremely likely (95% probability) that at least 74% of the observed warming since 1950 has been caused by human activity. Previously, climate scientists have used a technique called "optimal fingerprinting" to pinpoint the causes of global warming. This involves using complex models to simulate the climate response to different "forcings". These include greenhouse gases, aerosols and ozone, as well as natural factors such as solar and volcanic variability. The relative contribution of each forcing is then assessed by a statistical comparison of the model outputs to the real-life warming pattern. However, this method relies on the ability of climate models to accurately simulate the response patterns to each forcing, and also assumes that the responses can be scaled and added. Furthermore, changes in the energy balance of the climate system are not explicitly See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/48057 Humm... "The model, driven by observational records of climate forcings, surface temperature and ocean heat uptake, was run many thousands of times with different parameter combinations. The combinations that best matched the observations were then fed through the model a second time in order to simulate the climate response to each individual forcing." In other words, it is yet ANOTHER example of fitting a spanning set of basis functions to a curve, and then extrapolating that curve to the future to get the (desired) results. In short, another bunch of idiots think that if they do a Fourier fit to a given wave function over a given time period, that the wave function will predict the future. No, it won't. Every undergrad EE major KNOWS this to be an error, but making this STUPID BLUNDER is SOP for the AGW frauds, because YOU CAN PREDICT ANY DAMNED THING YOU WANT. And Wormley, ONCE AGAIN you totally missed the point I made about post hoc fallacies and bandwagon fallacies and you GIBBERED something irrelevant into the conversation. This idiot post you made just comes out of NOWHERE. Don't you get tired of being the fool of sci.physics? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message ... "Jonathan" wrote: "Fred J. McCall" wrote in message . .. "Jonathan" wrote: I strongly feel global warming is mostly man-made, and something needs to be done soon. Your 'feeling' doesn't constitute proof. Hell, given your record for nonsense, it doesn't even constitute reasonable doubt. How'd we cause it Thanks for replying My source is NASA, and they claim there's no other plausible explanation for the recent warming. Maybe you should look at this chart. http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ Prove CO2 is responsible for climate change. Thanks for replying, these debates are fun. So you're saying it's a big coincidence that greenhouse gasses spiked, climate warmed and the Industrial age exploded .....all at the same time? That's like saying it's a big coincidence that Twin Towers happened to explode just as those jets rammed into them. No proof is needed for what is plainly obvious. If you want to claim there's no connection between a 757 hitting the Twin Towers and their destruction, then the burden of proof falls on...you. Hell, even show evidence that it is. The evidence is that atmospheric CO2 concentration LAGS warming, not leads it. Provide a link please to that claim please. NASA says "...most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years." And that bolsters your argument h o w e x a c t l y? However, the change in temperature IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT Then why is the ice melting then? And provide a link to your data please. I have data below showing it's a very significant rate. through the last decade, despite what CO2 concentrations have done during that same decade and preceding it. Oh, and NASA does *NOT* claim in the cite you gave that "there's no other plausible explanation for recent warming". Yes they do, on the last line below, read it and weep~ "NASA Earth Observatory Q and A" "If Earth has warmed and cooled throughout history, what makes scientists think that humans are causing global warming now? "The first piece of evidence that the warming over the past few decades isn't part of a natural cycle is how fast the change is happening. The biggest temperature swings our planet has experienced in the past million years are the ice ages. Based on a combination of paleoclimate data and models, scientists estimate that when ice ages have ended in the past, it has taken about 5,000 years for the planet to warm between 4 and 7 degrees Celsius. The warming of the past century-0.7 degrees Celsius-is roughly eight times faster than the ice-age-recovery warming on average." "The second reason that scientists think the current warming is not from natural influences is that, over the past century, scientists from all over the world have been collecting data on natural factors that influence climate-things like changes in the Sun's brightness, major volcanic eruptions, and cycles such as El Niño and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. /These observations have failed to show any long-term changes that could fully account for the recent, rapid warming of Earth's temperature."/ http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/ EIGHT TIMES certainly is statistically significant Let's review quickly, the highest concentration of Co2 in 650,000 years, a rate of warming 8 times faster than in the last 1,000,000 years. And all in the last 50 years or so, most of it in the last 20 years. Hmmm.....what a mystery....NOT On my side is most of the scientists of the world, NASA with their fleet of high tech instruments and dozens of climate specialists, and shear common sense. On your side it's just ...you. Jonathan s |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
On 12/9/2011 1:11 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote: "Fred J. wrote in message ... wrote: I strongly feel global warming is mostly man-made, and something needs to be done soon. Your 'feeling' doesn't constitute proof. Hell, given your record for nonsense, it doesn't even constitute reasonable doubt. How'd we cause it Thanks for replying My source is NASA, and they claim there's no other plausible explanation for the recent warming. Maybe you should look at this chart. http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ Prove CO2 is responsible for climate change. Hell, even show evidence This is very readily available. Satellite observations show a drop in emitted radiation from the Earth that is consonant with the increase in CO2 concentration. Here's an illustrated explanation for you; http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...use-effect.htm that it is. The evidence is that atmospheric CO2 concentration LAGS warming, not leads it. Show that evidence. Make sure it isn't refuted by this; http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-...emperature.htm NASA says "...most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years." However, the change in temperature IS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT through the last decade, despite what CO2 concentrations have done during that same decade and preceding it. What does 10 years have to do with anything, cherrypicker? CO2 is not the only thing influencing global temperature. But the trend over the past 150 years of steadily increasing industrialization is clearly up. Oh, and NASA does *NOT* claim in the cite you gave that "there's no other plausible explanation for recent warming". Perhaps you should learn to read and think? Says the person who doesn't appear to know anything about the subject. Your source would be what? My source for what? I didn't make a claim. ..and what do you propose we do? My post already addressed that question. Well, no, it didn't, unless you think 'something' is a definitive action. Is there something specific in his NASA cite you want to take issue with? .. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
"Quadibloc" wrote in message ... So how do we keep the Western industrialized world strong and free, while preventing global warming? Nuclear power. By spreading freedom and democracy! So more can ...afford...solutions such as nuclear power, space solar power etc. As things stand now, the second explosion of the Industrial Age (China et al) will be increasingly powered by...coal. John Savard |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
"Marvin the Martian" wrote in message ... On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 09:00:31 -0800, Quadibloc wrote: It is funny how you idiots always talk about how you know what is or isn't accepted in the scientific community when you don't know ****. First of all, you're making one big bandwagon fallacy. Secondly, your bandwagon fallacy is based on a lie that Al Gore told you. Al Gore, who got a D in "earth science", his only science class. I get my opinions on this topic mostly from here.... http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/ http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ NASA accounts for some 3/4ths of all US govt spending on studying climate change most years. They operate a fleet of the highest tech instruments around, and have the largest concentration of climate scientists in the world. And their motives or political agenda isn't that strong either way. It has shifted left somewhat since Bush left office, but the change is marginal. But let's forget debating the facts and figures either way for a minute. And answer this question instead. Should we develop the ability to manage our biosphere or just let Nature takes it's course, and hope it all works out??? Once that is answered, then we can start wondering what we need to do about it, if anything. I think the answer is spreading free-market democracies across the globe. As such systems best mimic natural processes which settle on the optimum solutions...all by themselves. We don't need to find an 'big fix' for climate change. We need to build a world that fixes...itself. Jonathan s |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded
On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:22:05 -0500, Jonathan wrote:
"Marvin the Martian" wrote in message ... On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 09:00:31 -0800, Quadibloc wrote: It is funny how you idiots always talk about how you know what is or isn't accepted in the scientific community when you don't know ****. First of all, you're making one big bandwagon fallacy. Secondly, your bandwagon fallacy is based on a lie that Al Gore told you. Al Gore, who got a D in "earth science", his only science class. I get my opinions on this topic mostly from here.... http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/ http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ NASA accounts for some 3/4ths of all US govt spending on studying climate change most years. They operate a fleet of the highest tech instruments around, and have the largest concentration of climate scientists in the world. And their motives or political agenda isn't that strong either way. It has shifted left somewhat since Bush left office, but the change is marginal. So, basically, you don't understand science at all, much less the science of climate change, and you're going with the guys who get the most money for the predetermined answer to tell you what to think. And saying that Hansen, who leads the NASA climate change fraud, is not only unbiased but not a hard over lunatic is a bit of a stretch; he's the guy who wanted to put "deniars" on trial for crimes against humanity and nature, and execute a death sentence upon them to shut them up. Sort of like screaming for Burno to be burnt at the stake. Never mind that e-mail thing which some of the NASA "climate scientist" were caught up in, or the whole issue of picking data sources to show warming over time that NASA got caught doing. snip stupid question about controlling the environment You have to understand it first before you can control it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Carbon Emissions Show Biggest Jump Ever Recorded | Jonathan | Policy | 23 | January 5th 12 04:58 PM |
Human-related carbon emissions may skew isotope analysis for food-qualitycontrol | Sam Wormley[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | February 8th 10 07:11 PM |
This call may be recorded. No please, not big brother! This call will be recorded for government purposes. | gb6726 | Astronomy Misc | 1 | October 29th 07 03:57 PM |
Carbon Dioxide Emissions Three Times Higher Than Expected | kT | Policy | 44 | June 8th 07 03:06 AM |
One U.S. state is creating more carbon emissions than nearly every nation in the world=Texas | gb6726 | Astronomy Misc | 1 | June 3rd 07 09:47 PM |