Climate Science -- Fifty Years of Getting Everything Right

[mamooth]

It's around the fiftieth anniversary of one of the landmarks of climate science, the first report to a president about it, this 1965 report to President Johnson on global warming and other topics, by all the big names in the field at that time.

http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab/Caldeira downloads/PSAC, 1965, Restoring the Quality of Our Environment.pdf

If you read it, everything is correct. They predict the warming from human-emitted CO2. They say they can't model it yet, but they'll be able to do so soon, and they did (in 1974). They predict the sea level rise, ocean acidification, melting icecaps, everything. Scientists have been getting it all right about global warming for over 50 years now, and that's why the science has so much credibility.

Now, the crazies will say that's when the socialist conspiracy started, but nobody cares about them.

Count that as another coffin nail in the "but they predicted cooling!" nonsense. No, they predicted warming. That report is the statement of the scientific consensus at the time.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's around the fiftieth anniversary of one of the landmarks of climate science, the first report to a president about it, this 1965 report to President Johnson on global warming and other topics, by all the big names in the field at that time.

http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab/Caldeira downloads/PSAC, 1965, Restoring the Quality of Our Environment.pdf

If you read it, everything is correct. They predict the warming from human-emitted CO2. They say they can't model it yet, but they'll be able to do so soon, and they did (in 1974). They predict the sea level rise, ocean acidification, melting icecaps, everything. Scientists have been getting it all right about global warming for over 50 years now, and that's why the science has so much credibility.

Now, the crazies will say that's when the socialist conspiracy started, but nobody cares about them.

Count that as another coffin nail in the "but they predicted cooling!" nonsense. No, they predicted warming. That report is the statement of the scientific consensus at the time.

The complete list of failed AGW Predictions would crash the USMB Server

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Oh, and still no warming these past 2 decades

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Fifty Years of Getting Everything Right

As far as I had to read to know that reading the entire opening post would be a complete waste of my time. Intellectual debate doesn't begin with the premise that you're right about everything and everyone else is wrong.

 

[Flanders]

He is so desperate he is begging everybody —— anybody —— to talk about it. Nobody talking about it means nobody is listening.

Obama Launches Facebook Page; Calls For ‘Real Conversation’ On Climate Change
by Charlie Spiering
9 Nov 2015

Obama Launches Facebook Page; Calls For 'Real Conversation' On Climate Change - Breitbart​

 

[mamooth]

As we can see here, deniers have some cherished myths that they cling to for purely emotional reasons, and they don't like seeing those myths shattered.

"Those scientists predicted cooling" is bull.

"Those scientist got all their predictions wrong" is bull.

"There's been no warming" is a flat out lie, one told by only the most dishonest and desperate cultists.

The science has been right for over 50 years. It's only the political fringers in the USA that still push conspiracy theories about global warming being a hoax. The world understands how good the science is, and someone raging on the internet won't change that.

 

[jc456]

It's around the fiftieth anniversary of one of the landmarks of climate science, the first report to a president about it, this 1965 report to President Johnson on global warming and other topics, by all the big names in the field at that time.

http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab/Caldeira downloads/PSAC, 1965, Restoring the Quality of Our Environment.pdf

If you read it, everything is correct. They predict the warming from human-emitted CO2. They say they can't model it yet, but they'll be able to do so soon, and they did (in 1974). They predict the sea level rise, ocean acidification, melting icecaps, everything. Scientists have been getting it all right about global warming for over 50 years now, and that's why the science has so much credibility.

Now, the crazies will say that's when the socialist conspiracy started, but nobody cares about them.

Count that as another coffin nail in the "but they predicted cooling!" nonsense. No, they predicted warming. That report is the statement of the scientific consensus at the time.

Since you all don't wish to actually post your proof of human CO2 causing any issue you actually got jack shit.

So Pres. Johnson didn't have a clue what the hell they were ever talking about.

 

[jc456]

As we can see here, deniers have some cherished myths that they cling to for purely emotional reasons, and they don't like seeing those myths shattered.

"Those scientists predicted cooling" is bull.

"Those scientist got all their predictions wrong" is bull.

"There's been no warming" is a flat out lie, one told by only the most dishonest and desperate cultists.

The science has been right for over 50 years. It's only the political fringers in the USA that still push conspiracy theories about global warming being a hoax. The world understands how good the science is, and someone raging on the internet won't change that.

The only cherished myth was demonstrated on the opening OP. Any time you want to post up any proof that Human CO2 actually can be seen those tests are always welcomed.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Q. Why did the OCO2 satellite show that the equatorial forests are the biggest creators of CO2?

A. Clearly, it's a DENIER!
B. Bush
C. The satellite data is unreliable and must be adjusted to show Global Warming
D. All of the Above
E. DENIER!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

^ Guam, still above water.

Guam, one of the DENIER! Islands

 

[mamooth]

Q. Why did the OCO2 satellite show that the equatorial forests are the biggest creators of CO2?

Because at that particular month of the year, they are the major sources.

And that's exactly as the models and science predicted.

Frank, thanks for showing everyone yet another example of how the science was correct.

Now, will you stop whining about the science being correct?

Oh, I reported your Guam picture as spamming. Try to act like a grownup and follow board rules, will you?

 

[mamooth]

The only cherished myth was demonstrated on the opening OP. Any time you want to post up any proof that Human CO2 actually can be seen those tests are always welcomed.

The stratospheric cooling, increase in backradiation and decrease in outgoing longwave are all proof, smoking guns for greenhouse-gas caused global warming. Proof which you've been given before, and ignored.

Thus, we ignore you, because you're not honest. You ignore the information we give you, then you lie and say it wasn't given, so go pound sand.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Q. Why did the OCO2 satellite show that the equatorial forests are the biggest creators of CO2?

Because at that particular month of the year, they are the major sources.

And that's exactly as the models and science predicted.

Frank, thanks for showing everyone yet another example of how the science was correct.

Now, will you stop whining about the science being correct?

Oh, I reported your Guam picture as spamming. Try to act like a grownup and follow board rules, will you?

Your models predicted the rain forest were the biggest generators of CO2? Can you show us where this was "predicted"?

What's your fix, cut down all the trees?

 

[mamooth]

I've already shown you that. Right here. You were on the thread.

Nasa C02 sattilite 2014 | Page 3 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

And that's why everyone ignores you as well. Like jc, you keep pretending to have never seen the debunkings of your nonsense.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I've already shown you that. Right here. You were on the thread.

Nasa C02 sattilite 2014 | Page 3 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

And that's why everyone ignores you as well. Like jc, you keep pretending to have never seen the debunkings of your nonsense.

I've already shown you that. Right here. You were on the thread.

Nasa C02 sattilite 2014 | Page 3 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

And that's why everyone ignores you as well. Like jc, you keep pretending to have never seen the debunkings of your nonsense.

Can you explain how a video from 2006 has ANYTHING to do with data that was only available in 2014?

 

[mamooth]

The video was the 2006 model of how CO2 behaves over a typical year. Therefore, it doesn't matter when the video was made. If I compare the 2006 model for mid-October to mid-October 2014, it's an apples-to-apples comparison.

And I've reported you again for spamming the jeopardy video. Again, please try behaving like a grownup.

 

[jc456]

The only cherished myth was demonstrated on the opening OP. Any time you want to post up any proof that Human CO2 actually can be seen those tests are always welcomed.

The stratospheric cooling, increase in backradiation and decrease in outgoing longwave are all proof, smoking guns for greenhouse-gas caused global warming. Proof which you've been given before, and ignored.

Thus, we ignore you, because you're not honest. You ignore the information we give you, then you lie and say it wasn't given, so go pound sand.

dude/dudette, I've asked and I've asked for you to show me the power of CO2. You refuse. Then you post up the OP like you have all of this proof. So let's see it. Post up the Human CO2 data on how warm that CO2 is.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The video was the 2006 model of how CO2 behaves over a typical year. Therefore, it doesn't matter when the video was made. If I compare the 2006 model for mid-October to mid-October 2014, it's an apples-to-apples comparison.

And I've reported you again for spamming the jeopardy video. Again, please try behaving like a grownup.

So a video based upon wishful thinking modeling released almost a decade before the data is more accurate than the actual satellite data?

Are you sure about that?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice. Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss".--BBC News, 12 Dec 2007

Old Socks posts that the American Geophysical Union is a big supporter of manmade global climate warming change

 

[skookerasbil]

But the only people who think they are getting it right are the true believers. Nobody else. All the polls since 2015 show very clearly..............nobody is giving a shit about global warming. Its so far down the list of Americans concerns its basically OFF the chart.


Who needs to see the polls???

Pick a year..........I'll post it up.


Gallup??

Pew??

Rasmussen??