Arctic Temperatures Today

[ding]

I think he said that natural variations drives the climate and causes the temperature to go up and down and CO2 just follows along for the ride

I think he is a she.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I think he is a she.

Possibly. Who can tell?

 

[mamooth]

Given that you two losers have devolved into whiny trolling, I'm done.

Good luck with your crusade to overturn the last century of science by whining really hard.

 

[ding]

Given that you two losers have devolved into whiny trolling, I'm done.

Good luck with your crusade to overturn the last century of science by whining really hard.

Empirical climate data does not lie.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Why Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles Can't Explain Earth's Current Warming

In the last few months, a number of questions have come in asking if NASA has attributed Earth’s recent warming to changes in how Earth moves through space around the Sun: a series of orbital motions known as Milankovitch cycles. What cycles, you ask? Milankovitch cycles include the shape of...

climate.nasa.gov

Your source is a classic RED HERRING deflection
since no one claims it causes global warming heck even Milutin never made such a claim either......

Your fysics degree has let you down....

 

[mamooth]

Your source is a classic RED HERRING deflection

Answering the question is a red herring? He asked what the orbital factors that kick off climate cycles were. I gave him the link to Milankovitch cycles.

since no one claims it causes global warming heck even Milutin never made such a claim either......

What _are_ you babbling about?

I've spend pages here pointing out that Milankovitch cycles only initiate climate cycles, and that CO2 ends up driving them. And here you are, claiming I said the opposite of what I've actually been saying.

If you can't debate what I say, just admit it. Don't make up dishonest strawmen to attack. That fools nobody.

Your fysics degree has let you down....

Your butthurt drives you to reflexively attack without understanding what's going on, so you end up saying all these stupid things.

 

[ReinyDays]

Given that you two losers have devolved into whiny trolling, I'm done.

Good luck with your crusade to overturn the last century of science by whining really hard.

Asking you about math is a good way to shut you up ...

 

[mamooth]

Asking you about math is a good way to shut you up ...

No. After you do that, I always ask you to explain your point directly and actually do the BS "math" you demanded of me. That always results in you pissing yourself uncontrollably and running.

I get it. Everyone gets it. You're butthurt about me humilating you over and over, so you're engaged in a weirdass personal vendetta. Why do you kooks think that hating me even more will change that science so that it says you're not wrong about every single thing?

 

[ReinyDays]

No. After you do that, I always ask you to explain your point directly and actually do the BS "math" you demanded of me. That always results in you pissing yourself uncontrollably and running.

I get it. Everyone gets it. You're butthurt about me humilating you over and over, so you're engaged in a weirdass personal vendetta. Why do you kooks think that hating me even more will change that science so that it says you're not wrong about every single thing?

My claim is that changes in obliquity has NO effect of Earth's cross-sectional area ... ≈ 113 million sq km ... therefore has NO effect on climate ...

You disagree ... why? ... and show your math ...

(6,000 km )^2 x π = 113,000 sq km ... doesn't matter which radius we use ... duh ...

 

[mamooth]

My claim is that changes in obliquity has NO effect of Earth's cross-sectional area ... ≈ 113 million sq km ...

That's correct.

therefore has NO effect on climate ...

And that's wrong. Your obvious mistake is treating the earth's surface as all being the same, when that's not the case. The southern hemisphere is mostly ocean, while the northern hemisphere has much more land.

This is basic stuff. You really didn't know it?

 

[ding]

 

[ReinyDays]

That's correct.


And that's wrong. Your obvious mistake is treating the earth's surface as all being the same, when that's not the case. The southern hemisphere is mostly ocean, while the northern hemisphere has much more land.

This is basic stuff. You really didn't know it?

What's gained in summer is lost again in winter ... the annual average remains the same ... and so does our 100-year climate averages ... SB only asks for irradiation to determine temperature, not what substance, and indeed we find the blackbody characteristics of all these materials to be the same ... whether iron, water, soil or hydrogen ... the blackbody light curves are the same ...

I do understand the "cause" that you're referencing ... but the effect cannot be differences in temperature, not with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics at play ... what we observe is a change in the location of the ICZ (= Interconvergence Zone) ... roughly speaking, the atmospheric "equator" averages around 5ºN latitude, and this difference is attributed to having more ocean surface in the Southern Hemisphere ... keep in mind, the day-to-day position of the ICZ is crazy everyplace between 35ºS and 35ºN ... when she's not actively spitting out typhoons ... to Wit: "A monsoon trough enters the Atlantic along the Sierra Leone coast near Freetown and extends southwestward to 02N20W. Scattered moderate convection is seen south of the trough from the Equator to the Liberia coast between 10W and 13W. An ITCZ continues from 02N20W across 00N28W to the Brazilian coast just east of Sao Luis. Scattered showers are present near and north of the ITCZ from the Equator to 04N between 26W and 41W.:" ...

If we're using SB, then obilquity doesn't "trigger" your CO2 outpouring like you suggested ... too little too late ... please try again ... and do reveiw Kepler's 1st Law of Planetary Motion ...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Arctic Today

Barrow -11
Isachsen -36
Vize (wiese) 21
Anabar -15

But but but but the Climate reanalyzer anomaly of .5F since 1850 makes these temperatures well above "normal"

Arctic Weather Map

 

[ReinyDays]

Arctic Today

Barrow -11
Isachsen -36
Vize (wiese) 21
Anabar -15

But but but but the Climate reanalyzer anomaly of .5F since 1850 makes these temperatures well above "normal"

Arctic Weather Map

43ºF on the campus of USC right now ...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

43ºF on the campus of USC right now ...

Thanks to all the CO2 spewing out on The 405

 

[Likkmee]

Here's the latest from the Arctic.

I try to pick the same 4 cardinal points approximating about 4.5 MILLION square miles (That's a big number). I could have added another 1 or 2MM square miles as both Russia and Canada are in deep freeze, but I'd rather stay consistent with these 4 points around the Arctic.

Cape Billings Russian Federation 1F
NordAWS Greenland -2F
Sachs Harbor Canada -6F
Cape Chelyuskin Russian Federation 16F

Arctic Weather Map

4.5 million is NOT a huge number.
If you want to have the world at FULL atten-Hut there is but one.
6 MILLION !!!!
People travel from afar to stare at a wall whilst they say to themselves"whatta fuck I B doin here" at the mere thought of that majickle numerology.

6 MILLION !!!!
6 MILLION !!!!
6 MILLION !!!!
Some readers are tossed into sadness immediately: as of NOW.

 

[ReinyDays]

Thanks to all the CO2 spewing out on The 405

It's SUPPOSED to be 41ºF ... time to shut down The 405 ...

 

[mamooth]

What's gained in summer is lost again in winter ...

No. That's not how it works.

the effect cannot be differences in temperature, not with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics at play

Say what?

You seem to be saying the 2nd law of Thermodynamics prevents any temperature differences on earth. Can you please clarify that?

 

[ding]

No. That's not how it works.



Say what?

You seem to be saying the 2nd law of Thermodynamics prevents any temperature differences on earth. Can you please clarify that?

I'm pretty sure his point is that temperature differences constantly seek equilibrium. Which means the warmer the planet gets the more heat the planet losses to outer space. I'm surprised such a highly intelligent person such as yourself couldn't figure that out.

 

[mamooth]

I'm pretty sure his point is that temperature differences constantly seek equilibrium. Which means the warmer the planet gets the more heat the planet losses to outer space. I'm surprised such a highly intelligent person such as yourself couldn't figure that out.

So according to your logic, it's impossible for ice ages to happen, or for any climate change of any sort to occur.

Your logic is remarkably stupid.