Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

[flacaltenn]

Like father like son.. Gore Sr was an ornament for Armand Hammer and Occidental Petrol. Used to brag that he a US Senator right here (patted his wallet pocket)..

Anyway ---

As it happens, the project’s initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. “In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years,” atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

Page 1 of the "Idiot's guide to Global Warming". The main forcing function of temperature rise from CO2concentrations says that the effect of larger concentrations reduces exponentially the warming potential. Guess that could be why the effect has been so dissappointing in terms of KILLER storms and MASS destruction..

The approximately 40% increase in CO2 still represents ~15% in increased forcing. 'Disappointing' assumes one WANTS to see "KILLER storms and MASS destruction". You don't really get what this is all about, don't you?

Oh I get what's it about. Are you saying that Al Gore and The Weather Channel aren't entirely bummed about the lack of KILLER storms and MASS destruction? They get absolutely lubricated every time the threat appears..

Yeah I get that this man-made contribution is "a tipping point" for natural CO2 processes that are 100 times larger. I believe CO2 cannot be the primary SIGNIFICANT cause of the observed warming.. "tipping point" qualifiers just seem pretty desparate to me.

 

[daveman]

One point here. Doubled CO2 would of course be 560 ppm. We are at 390 ppm at present. However, since we have also more than doubled the amount of CH4 in the atmosphere, which for the first 20 years of represents more than 20 times the effectiveness of CO2, also increased the the Nx0 also, and introduced many industrial gases that have no natural analog, some thousands of times more effective than CO2, it is safe to say we are at or past an effect GHG rate of 450 ppm.

By what we see in the Arctic, nature will soon be assisting us in adding to the GHGs in the atmosphere.

So we are going to get to see who is correct and who is not on the effect of the GHGs. Problem is, once we see that, there is no going back. Nice planet sized experiment.

Oh, you mean you guys are finally going to have an experiment instead of relying on faulty computer models?

About time.

You're behind the times. If you'd been paying attention, you'd know that the ability of GHGs to absorb IR has been proved in the lab a long time ago. The expt. OR is talking about is the expt. the deniers want to do, i.e. what happens, if we do nothing. Anyone that's been paying attention though, knows that means more heat trapped on earth.

Right. Your experiment in a small box with two variables is going to accurately predict what an entire planet's atmosphere and oceans will do when subjected to millions of variables.

Have you ever even heard of science?

 

[konradv]

Oh, you mean you guys are finally going to have an experiment instead of relying on faulty computer models?

About time.

You're behind the times. If you'd been paying attention, you'd know that the ability of GHGs to absorb IR has been proved in the lab a long time ago. The expt. OR is talking about is the expt. the deniers want to do, i.e. what happens, if we do nothing. Anyone that's been paying attention though, knows that means more heat trapped on earth.

Right. Your experiment in a small box with two variables is going to accurately predict what an entire planet's atmosphere and oceans will do when subjected to millions of variables.

Have you ever even heard of science?

If GHGs trap IR in the lab, they'll trap it in the atmosphere. That's the principle of "uniformitarianism". If you knew anything about science, you'd realize that in order to support your skepticism, you have to explain what happens to the added heat trapped by added GHGS, if not to heat the earth.

 

[daveman]

You're behind the times. If you'd been paying attention, you'd know that the ability of GHGs to absorb IR has been proved in the lab a long time ago. The expt. OR is talking about is the expt. the deniers want to do, i.e. what happens, if we do nothing. Anyone that's been paying attention though, knows that means more heat trapped on earth.

Right. Your experiment in a small box with two variables is going to accurately predict what an entire planet's atmosphere and oceans will do when subjected to millions of variables.

Have you ever even heard of science?

If GHGs trap IR in the lab, they'll trap it in the atmosphere. That's the principle of "uniformitarianism". If you knew anything about science, you'd realize that in order to support your skepticism, you have to explain what happens to the added heat trapped by added GHGS, if not to heat the earth.

Wrong. It's up to you to prove how your cute little experiment applies to the entire planet.

So far, no one's done that.

 

[Sarah G]

Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

(Reuters) - Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.

"24 Hours of Reality" will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.​

"There will be a full-on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from."

Sounds good.

 

[daveman]

Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

(Reuters) - Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.

"24 Hours of Reality" will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.​

"There will be a full-on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from."

Sounds good.

Yes, because everyone knows that pro-AGW scientists do all their work out of the goodness of their hearts and never profit from it.

Oh, wait...

 

[westwall]

You're behind the times. If you'd been paying attention, you'd know that the ability of GHGs to absorb IR has been proved in the lab a long time ago. The expt. OR is talking about is the expt. the deniers want to do, i.e. what happens, if we do nothing. Anyone that's been paying attention though, knows that means more heat trapped on earth.

Right. Your experiment in a small box with two variables is going to accurately predict what an entire planet's atmosphere and oceans will do when subjected to millions of variables.

Have you ever even heard of science?

If GHGs trap IR in the lab, they'll trap it in the atmosphere. That's the principle of "uniformitarianism". If you knew anything about science, you'd realize that in order to support your skepticism, you have to explain what happens to the added heat trapped by added GHGS, if not to heat the earth.

The experiment in your box doesn't test the GHG properties however. As has been pointed out to you on numerous occasions that experiment is demonstrating the Ideal Gas Laws and nothing else.

 

[Amelia]

Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

(Reuters) - Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.

"24 Hours of Reality" will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.​

 

[Amelia]

Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

(Reuters) - Former President Al Gore ......​

Former President??????

 

[Moonglow]

Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

(Reuters) - Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.

"24 Hours of Reality" will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.​

well I damn sure will not be listening to Al.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

(Reuters) - Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.

"24 Hours of Reality" will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.​

If I knew I was going to be stuck on a elevator with al gore becaus of a black out I wouldn't take a shower for two weeks, I would keep my dirtiest work clothes on for that event. Then let's hear his story about global warming.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Honestly don't know what the hell to think...
On one hand I understand that the sun reached its peak in 1955 for TSI. So we really shouldn't of been warming in the 1980s-2000s at all...Look at any tsi chart and you will find that we should of slowly been cooling. A net negative forcing on the system from our star. So we have to explain the warming of the past few decades somehow...Co2 makes some sense as there surely isn't any internal "cycle" within the climate record that can force .4c of warming or cooling on a decadal scale on the global scale. Maybe the PDO within North America or the AMO within the Atlantic surface temperatures, but this surely isn't global. The sun solar cycles make the grand mins and max's, but that is already explained for. External forcing it is.

If co2 is against the laws of physics--- then I'm stumped on what it could be. If it is co2 then you have to ask your self's a shit load of questions. 1# Why did the warming slow in the 2000's, if not stop? Hansen believes Aerosols and grand minimum that led to the negative forcing countering over half of the co2 forcing(-1.6 watts/meter^2 negative forcing for aerosols). Works with the oceans too as that has surely slowed its upward climb for the same reason..... 2# How is this negative forcing going to react in the future? 3# When are we going to start warming again at a noticeable rate? 4# What effects will it have.

In my opinion it's a far more complex climate system then the science gives off. I believe that most of the advances within the science within the next decade will be understanding the negatives...As we will need to understand them to understand how our climate system would work within the pro warming side of things.

If co2 truly doesn't have any effect then we still have the red hiring of why it warmed in the 1980s-2000's. We have to ask our selfs why? Then if you care enough to went to figure out the climate "then" we have to get a better understand of it through studying the sun and internal workings of the system...With the cosmic process too. We still have to understand the drivers of it.

We will know who is right by 2025.

 

[Amelia]

Al Gore is insane.

If he were sane, and if he really cared about the environment, he would see how much damage he is doing to the cause and he would shut his big fat mouth.

He's a nut job. If he's right about AGW, the world is going to burn to a cinder because he wouldn't shut up and hand the baton over to someone who wasn't a joke.





.

 

[skookerasbil]

not for nothing but nobody cares about Al Gore anymore except the k00ks.............

 

[wirebender]

I'd spring for "pay per view" for that grudge match.. But you're right. There would be mass protests about the selection and the moderation and the terms of debate. And probably a lot of "the more popular" AGW advocates would never accept the challenge.

Of course not. They have billions in funding to lose by attempting to debate with other actual scientists. Big difference between actual debate and dictating dogma to the press.

 

[wirebender]

So say a bunch of internet idiots, while almost all of the world's scientists are stating just the opposite.

Sorry rocks, your "consensus" is as big a hoax as AGW.

The challenge is still out there. One Scientific Society, one National Academy of Science, or even on major University that states that AGW is not a fact.

There is a difference between the political head of a society and the actual membership. The vast bulk of members in all scientific societies are not on board with AGW.

GHGs absorb energy that would otherwise be radiated into space. That energy stays here on earth in the atmosphere and ocean. Refute that, dumb asses.

Yep, but then they immediately emit that energy in all directions effectively scattering it. You don't create warming by scattering IR but hey, if you want to describe the mechanism by which you believe CO2 holds in heat, by all means, describe it. While you are at it, name the law(s) of physics that support and predict it as well.

 

[wirebender]

Like father like son.. Gore Sr was an ornament for Armand Hammer and Occidental Petrol. Used to brag that he a US Senator right here (patted his wallet pocket)..

Anyway ---

As it happens, the project’s initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. “In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years,” atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

Page 1 of the "Idiot's guide to Global Warming". The main forcing function of temperature rise from CO2concentrations says that the effect of larger concentrations reduces exponentially the warming potential. Guess that could be why the effect has been so dissappointing in terms of KILLER storms and MASS destruction..

The approximately 40% increase in CO2 still represents ~15% in increased forcing. 'Disappointing' assumes one WANTS to see "KILLER storms and MASS destruction". You don't really get what this is all about, don't you?

Tell me konradv, how much forcing do you think 15% of zero is?

 

[wirebender]

more than 20 times the effectiveness of CO2,

How much do you think 20 times zero is rocks?

 

[wirebender]

You're behind the times. If you'd been paying attention, you'd know that the ability of GHGs to absorb IR has been proved in the lab a long time ago. The expt. OR is talking about is the expt. the deniers want to do, i.e. what happens, if we do nothing. Anyone that's been paying attention though, knows that means more heat trapped on earth.

What you aren't mentioning konradv, either through ignorance or dishonesty is the fact that whatever they absorb, they immediately emit; effectively scattering IR thus dissipating it rather than concentrating it.

 

[wirebender]

If GHGs trap IR in the lab, they'll trap it in the atmosphere. That's the principle of "uniformitarianism". If you knew anything about science, you'd realize that in order to support your skepticism, you have to explain what happens to the added heat trapped by added GHGS, if not to heat the earth.

They don't "trap" anything konradv. They absorb and emit. IR passes through CO2 molecules at, or very near the speed of light. There is no trapping and there is no "beaming" IR back to the surface of the earth to be reabsorbed in contradiction to the second law of thermodynamics. Energy doesn't flow spontaneously from cool to warm.