Climate models go cold

[peach174]

OK, Peaches, the physicists state, without reservation, the CO2 is a GHG. We have increased the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40%. Do you think that has no consequences?

We are observing the rapid heating of the arctic, after centuries of a slow decline in temperatures there. At the same time, around the world, the alpine glaciers are in rapid retreat. The ocean is becoming more acidic, creating stress at the very base of the food chain, because of the increase in the CO2 in the water. And, worldwide, the temperatures are climbing and we are observing the climate beginning to change in the major bread baskets in the world.

But let us just play stupid and keep repeating that scientists are dumb asses that really don't know as much as obese junkie radio jocks. Yeah, that the idea!

I never said they were,I am quoting what they are saying ,that they don't have enough data as they would like to really understand long term climate.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[skookerasbil]

All of the assertions made by Old Rocks are based on spectacular climate "models"....................

Ummmmmmmmmm...........................


Heres a model!!! Look familiar?

How bullseye huh??!!!!!!! And thats just looking 24 hours out...............

 

[edthecynic]

The so-called "scientists" who are involved in the global warming scam are just like you and me. If they depended on federal grants to send their kids to an Ivy League college they would find a way to prove that bigfoot built the pyramids and keep that taxpayer money flowing.

Speak for yourself! What you would do is nothing like what real scientists would do! You can't project your personal dishonesty onto everyone!!!

 

[martybegan]

OK, Peaches, the physicists state, without reservation, the CO2 is a GHG. We have increased the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40%. Do you think that has no consequences?

We are observing the rapid heating of the arctic, after centuries of a slow decline in temperatures there. At the same time, around the world, the alpine glaciers are in rapid retreat. The ocean is becoming more acidic, creating stress at the very base of the food chain, because of the increase in the CO2 in the water. And, worldwide, the temperatures are climbing and we are observing the climate beginning to change in the major bread baskets in the world.

But let us just play stupid and keep repeating that scientists are dumb asses that really don't know as much as obese junkie radio jocks. Yeah, that the idea!

40% using what baseline? Also what is the function of atmospheric retention of heat vs. CO2 concentration? I have a big doubt that it is linear. It also isnt the only function involved.

The crux of the OP's post is that the subsequent increases in CO2 are not correlating to the expected increase in average humidity in various levels of the atmosphere. As water is a better GHG than CO2 this would significantly affect any model using the older assumptions of CO2-H2O atmospheric increases.

 

[Big Fitz]

My guess is all the same idiots will make all the same posts, totally miss the point of the linked article, and continue to believe the hype. Anyone want to bat money on it?

The planet reacts to that extra carbon dioxide, which changes everything. Most critically, the extra warmth causes more water to evaporate from the oceans. But does the water hang around and increase the height of moist air in the atmosphere, or does it simply create more clouds and rain? Back in 1980, when the carbon dioxide theory started, no one knew. The alarmists guessed that it would increase the height of moist air around the planet, which would warm the planet even further, because the moist air is also a greenhouse gas. This is the core idea of every official climate model: For each bit of warming due to carbon dioxide, they claim it ends up causing three bits of warming due to the extra moist air. The climate models amplify the carbon dioxide warming by a factor of three — so two-thirds of their projected warming is due to extra moist air (and other factors); only one-third is due to extra carbon dioxide.
That’s the core of the issue. All the disagreements and misunderstandings spring from this. The alarmist case is based on this guess about moisture in the atmosphere, and there is simply no evidence for the amplification that is at the core of their alarmism.
Weather balloons had been measuring the atmosphere since the 1960s, many thousands of them every year. The climate models all predict that as the planet warms, a hot spot of moist air will develop over the tropics about 10 kilometres up, as the layer of moist air expands upwards into the cool dry air above. During the warming of the late 1970s, ’80s and ’90s, the weather balloons found no hot spot. None at all. Not even a small one. This evidence proves that the climate models are fundamentally flawed, that they greatly overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide.
This evidence first became clear around the mid-1990s.
At this point, official “climate science” stopped being a science. In science, empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are in love with the theory. If theory and evidence disagree, real scientists scrap the theory. But official climate science ignored the crucial weather balloon evidence, and other subsequent evidence that backs it up, and instead clung to their carbon dioxide theory — that just happens to keep them in well-paying jobs with lavish research grants, and gives great political power to their government masters.

Climate models go cold | FP Comment | Financial Post

They're never going to get it. Even the COWS get it by now, but they are just incapable of getting it so PLEASE!!! Quit trying to teach them how to program the VCR!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

both meteorologists and climatologist's admits that they don't have as much data as they would like to really understand long-term climate.

every scientist doesn't have as much data as they would like

Please just quit now. You lack the intellectual capability to discuss scientific issues.

 

[ScienceRocks]

 

[peach174]

Do you see any reports of what is happing that's good for the changing climate? No
Where the ice is melting we have new plant and insect growth which is good for this planet. Do we hear anything on things like this? No
Do we hear the good things about the atmospheric coverage as being a good thing that helps keep the stronger solar rays from coming through so that it protects us? No
Is reports of Mars solar caps melting just as fast being reported? NO
Why are things like this not being reported?

 

[westwall]

OK, Peaches, the physicists state, without reservation, the CO2 is a GHG. We have increased the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40%. Do you think that has no consequences?

We are observing the rapid heating of the arctic, after centuries of a slow decline in temperatures there. At the same time, around the world, the alpine glaciers are in rapid retreat. The ocean is becoming more acidic, creating stress at the very base of the food chain, because of the increase in the CO2 in the water. And, worldwide, the temperatures are climbing and we are observing the climate beginning to change in the major bread baskets in the world.

But let us just play stupid and keep repeating that scientists are dumb asses that really don't know as much as obese junkie radio jocks. Yeah, that the idea!

You make a faulty assumption there olfraud. CO2 has indeed increased but the proximal cause is unknown. Mankinds contribution to the worlds CO2 budget is less then 5% of the total. The Vostock Ice cores show that 800 years after an increase in temperatures the CO2 levels increase. It just so happens that it is 800 or so years after the MWP so it is just as likely that the increase in CO2 is due to that reason.

Science is about figuring out which hypothesis is correct. You abandoned the scientific method long ago. The SM requires you to test ALL POSSIBLE THEORIES and you guys don't. You only test for one hypothesis. That's why you are made fools of every other week.

 

[IanC]

Do you see any reports of what is happing that's good for the changing climate? No
Where the ice is melting we have new plant and insect growth which is good for this planet. Do we hear anything on things like this? No
Do we hear the good things about the atmospheric coverage as being a good thing that helps keep the stronger solar rays from coming through so that it protects us? No
Is reports of Mars solar caps melting just as fast being reported? NO
Why are things like this not being reported?

good news doesnt make for good news

 

[Quantum Windbag]

OK, Peaches, the physicists state, without reservation, the CO2 is a GHG. We have increased the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40%. Do you think that has no consequences?

We are observing the rapid heating of the arctic, after centuries of a slow decline in temperatures there. At the same time, around the world, the alpine glaciers are in rapid retreat. The ocean is becoming more acidic, creating stress at the very base of the food chain, because of the increase in the CO2 in the water. And, worldwide, the temperatures are climbing and we are observing the climate beginning to change in the major bread baskets in the world.

But let us just play stupid and keep repeating that scientists are dumb asses that really don't know as much as obese junkie radio jocks. Yeah, that the idea!

What about the fact that, despite plenty of evidence, the climate models you cling to still use an assumption that has been demonstrated to be wrong?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The so-called "scientists" who are involved in the global warming scam are just like you and me. If they depended on federal grants to send their kids to an Ivy League college they would find a way to prove that bigfoot built the pyramids and keep that taxpayer money flowing.

Speak for yourself! What you would do is nothing like what real scientists would do! You can't project your personal dishonesty onto everyone!!!

Yet they do it everyday. Are you trying to tell me these guys are not real scientists? When did not being human become a condition for getting a degree?

 

[percysunshine]

Climate models go cold

What we need is a TV series where climate wives go hot.

 

[edthecynic]

Do you see any reports of what is happing that's good for the changing climate? No
Where the ice is melting we have new plant and insect growth which is good for this planet. Do we hear anything on things like this? No
Do we hear the good things about the atmospheric coverage as being a good thing that helps keep the stronger solar rays from coming through so that it protects us? No
Is reports of Mars solar caps melting just as fast being reported? NO
Why are things like this not being reported?

And why exactly should that be "reported" regarding Earth's global warming????

 

[edthecynic]

The so-called "scientists" who are involved in the global warming scam are just like you and me. If they depended on federal grants to send their kids to an Ivy League college they would find a way to prove that bigfoot built the pyramids and keep that taxpayer money flowing.

Speak for yourself! What you would do is nothing like what real scientists would do! You can't project your personal dishonesty onto everyone!!!

Yet they do it everyday. Are you trying to tell me these guys are not real scientists? When did not being human become a condition for getting a degree?

Again, you can't project your personal dishonesty on others. Being human does not require dishonesty like CON$ervatism does!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Speak for yourself! What you would do is nothing like what real scientists would do! You can't project your personal dishonesty onto everyone!!!

Yet they do it everyday. Are you trying to tell me these guys are not real scientists? When did not being human become a condition for getting a degree?

Again, you can't project your personal dishonesty on others. Being human does not require dishonesty like CON$ervatism does!

Do you realize that I have actually started threads about scientists who attack other scientists who challenge the politically acceptable junk science? My personal dishonesty has nothing to do with this, it is a fact, and I can provide examples. All you can provide is the belief in something you cannot see or produce evidence of.

You should look up the word cynic and give it back to the real cynics.

 

[konradv]

Do you see any reports of what is happing that's good for the changing climate? No
Where the ice is melting we have new plant and insect growth which is good for this planet. Do we hear anything on things like this? No
Do we hear the good things about the atmospheric coverage as being a good thing that helps keep the stronger solar rays from coming through so that it protects us? No
Is reports of Mars solar caps melting just as fast being reported? NO
Why are things like this not being reported?

Who says it hasn't been reported? Skeptics have been posting it to boards for years and they must have heard it somewhere. How a about a cite for what you're reporting? You know, just because melting has one cause on Mars doesn't mean it can't have a different one here. Without the facts, how do we know your post isn't irrelevant to the whole topic of AGW?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm not a "skeptic" either, I know for a fact the Warmers are totally full of shit.

 

[edthecynic]

Yet they do it everyday. Are you trying to tell me these guys are not real scientists? When did not being human become a condition for getting a degree?

Again, you can't project your personal dishonesty on others. Being human does not require dishonesty like CON$ervatism does!

Do you realize that I have actually started threads about scientists who attack other scientists who challenge the politically acceptable junk science? My personal dishonesty has nothing to do with this, it is a fact, and I can provide examples. All you can provide is the belief in something you cannot see or produce evidence of.

You should look up the word cynic and give it back to the real cynics.

WOW! That settles it then!