GLOBAL WARMING? NASA says Antarctic has been COOLING for past

[SSDD]

Ducking the question I see. Typical.

Not ducking the question...pointing out the f'ing obvious. CO2 is increasing but it isn't warming....CO2 has increased enough in the past couple of decades that if it did even what you believe it capable of, then we would have seen some warming....and it aint happening except in computer models and by some real creative number manipulation.

Too damned bad that you are so wrapped up in the magic that you not only can't admit that you have been wrong.. .but you can't see what is absolutely clear to everyone with any critical thinking skills at all...CO2 increasing....warming NOT INCREASING.....clearly what you believe is false. Unfortunate that you, like all warmers have become so invested in the lie that you can't face the truth.

You said CO2 does nothing. There is ample evidence to show it obstructs certain wavelengths of IR that are emitted by the surface, and would escape freely without the presence of CO2.

Sorry guy...there is ample evidence to show that it absorbs and emits...that is not obstruction....if it were obstructing...and more CO2 equaled more obstruction...then we would be seeing warming....again...it aint happening. Your belief in the magic has completely blinded you...you are as scientifically corrupt as any crazy warmer you care to name....you want at least some warming to be possible so bad that you are now onboard the crazy train completely ignoring reality.

You say the absence of a hotspot proves my point invalid. It disproves CAGW modelling but it certainly doesn't disprove my contention that any extra surface energy retained by more CO2 is simply shunted into the convection/latent heat pathway.

Another unobservable, untestable, unprovable, unfalsifiable hypothesis...congratulations...you are turning into more of a wackjob every day. CO2 IS INCREASING BUT IT AINT WARMING....why? Because CO2 doesn't cause warming. Get over yourself and take a good look at reality. Get your head out of the models and look around...atmospheric CO2 is increasing and nothing that you claim it does is happening....climate sensitivity to CO2 is ZERO...

 

[Billy_Bob]

Like any other GHG, water vapor has no directionality. The reason energy tends to leave the surface is its radiative escape at the ToA. And, as you know. water vapor has virtually NO involvement in that final step.

That's it, crick? That's your rebuttal?

WV has no directionality? What is that supposed to mean? What is the important point?

I said the surface boundary has difficulty shedding energy via radiation therefore the majority leaves by convection/latent heat. Trenberth's cartoon shows this distinctly. Do I have to explain to you how evaporation cools the surface, then both warms and lightens the air which initiates convection? Again?

WV then forms clouds which reflect solar, and then releases the transported energy when precipitation is formed. Don't take my word for it, check the measured Planck curve and see how much energy is released at 273K where WV condenses.

Trenberth's cartoon shows 40W leaving the surface through the atmospheric window, then another tranch of 30W leaving the cloudtop boundary. The rest leaves as the atmosphere becomes progressively thinner and is unable to recapture emissions before they escape into space.

Your belief that radiation is the only means of energy transport is faulty, although it is true that the final escape is always via radiation.

WV acts like a refrigerator at the surface, pumping out energy to heights where it can more easily escape. That is why I scoff at the ridiculous notion that WV triples the effect of CO2.

Nicely Done! Empirically observed evidence tells the tale while models say were gonna BURN BABY BURN... simply becasue they use the IPCC and EPA's fabricated "positive feedback". Water Vapor has exactly the opposite effect.

 

[IanC]

Ducking the question I see. Typical.

Not ducking the question...pointing out the f'ing obvious. CO2 is increasing but it isn't warming....CO2 has increased enough in the past couple of decades that if it did even what you believe it capable of, then we would have seen some warming....and it aint happening except in computer models and by some real creative number manipulation.

Too damned bad that you are so wrapped up in the magic that you not only can't admit that you have been wrong.. .but you can't see what is absolutely clear to everyone with any critical thinking skills at all...CO2 increasing....warming NOT INCREASING.....clearly what you believe is false. Unfortunate that you, like all warmers have become so invested in the lie that you can't face the truth.

You said CO2 does nothing. There is ample evidence to show it obstructs certain wavelengths of IR that are emitted by the surface, and would escape freely without the presence of CO2.

Sorry guy...there is ample evidence to show that it absorbs and emits...that is not obstruction....if it were obstructing...and more CO2 equaled more obstruction...then we would be seeing warming....again...it aint happening. Your belief in the magic has completely blinded you...you are as scientifically corrupt as any crazy warmer you care to name....you want at least some warming to be possible so bad that you are now onboard the crazy train completely ignoring reality.

You say the absence of a hotspot proves my point invalid. It disproves CAGW modelling but it certainly doesn't disprove my contention that any extra surface energy retained by more CO2 is simply shunted into the convection/latent heat pathway.

Another unobservable, untestable, unprovable, unfalsifiable hypothesis...congratulations...you are turning into more of a wackjob every day. CO2 IS INCREASING BUT IT AINT WARMING....why? Because CO2 doesn't cause warming. Get over yourself and take a good look at reality. Get your head out of the models and look around...atmospheric CO2 is increasing and nothing that you claim it does is happening....climate sensitivity to CO2 is ZERO...

Okay, let's talk about the effect of CO2. I believe it has a warming influence, because the mechanism and the physics behind it are sound and measurable. Why do you believe that the actual temperature has to go up just because one factor has increased? There are many components to the climate and CO2 is just one of them.

I don't believe CO2 was the sole cause of the warming in the 80's and 90's, and I don't believe the lack of warming since then proves CO2 has no influence.

You keep saying CO2 does nothing, then you say it does absorb IR, then you go back to saying it does nothing again. Explain how all the 15 micron surface IR can be extinguished in the first 10 metres without adding that energy to the air, and hence to the temperature. Adding more CO2 incrementally lowers the height which means the same amount of energy is absorbed by less volume, again increasing temperature (all other things remaining the same).

Your understanding of the physics involved seems incoherent to me. Can you explain it more precisely? All you ever seem to do is tell others they are wrong, insult them for being stupid, and ignore any questions sent your way. I would be more than happy to see other aspects to this problem but you never actually explain your position.

 

[Muhammed]

I just read an article regarding central Europe's longest running temperature data set and they found that central Europe is cooling as well. It takes a lot of data manipulation to give the appearance of warming when the earth is, in fact, cooling.

Yeah, some places are cooling, and many places are warming, which must mean the Earth is cooling.

Not only that it's besides the point.

If there is NATURAL cooling alongside MAN MADE warming, and temperatures are still going up, what does this suggest to you?

Oh, and you know all this CO2 we're pumping into the air, do you know which place it has the biggest impact on?

On the oceans, we're killing the oceans first. Great. So temperatures are neither here nor there, the oceans will be dead soon anyway.

Iv'e done extensive studies regarding that.

As usual the, GWNJs, are totally out of their minds.

It should be illegal to give them LSD. They simply can't handle it.

 

[SSDD]

Okay, let's talk about the effect of CO2. I believe it has a warming influence, because the mechanism and the physics behind it are sound and measurable. Why do you believe that the actual temperature has to go up just because one factor has increased? There are many components to the climate and CO2 is just one of them.

What is there to talk about Ian?...other than the failed GCM's and failed mathematical models that have predicted what would happen as CO2 increases? You don't need to talk about what might happen when you can see what has happened... CO2 is steadily increasing...warming is not....If the hypothesis were correct, warming would be increasing with CO2...it isn't. What does that tell you about the hypothesis?

I don't believe CO2 was the sole cause of the warming in the 80's and 90's, and I don't believe the lack of warming since then proves CO2 has no influence.

You believe Ian...enough said.

You keep saying CO2 does nothing, then you say it does absorb IR, then you go back to saying it does nothing again.

Which is precisely what I mean...absorption and emission are nothing but absorption and emission...run a quantity of water that can easily flow through a big bore water pipe through that water pipe...the water went in...the water went out...what happened to the flow?...going through the pipe did nothing. You are claiming that the pipe is to small for the water to flow uninterrupted through the pipe...if the statement were true...then there would be a visible back up. If there is no back up, then clearly your claim that the pipe is to small to easily accommodate the flow is false. At some point, even you must admit that the claim was false...what might that point be Ian?

Explain how all the 15 micron surface IR can be extinguished in the first 10 metres without adding that energy to the air, and hence to the temperature. Adding more CO2 incrementally lowers the height which means the same amount of energy is absorbed by less volume, again increasing temperature (all other things remaining the same).

One doesn't need to explain what one can directly observe....if CO2 were impeding the outflow of energy to the upper atmosphere...then more CO2 would result in a hot spot in the troposphere....it isn't happening so clearly your mathematical model is incorrect. My bet would be that it is because it is based on a faulty understanding of the physics involved since at it's root, your mathematical model is based on your understanding of physics...physics are what they are...you make a prediction based on your understanding of them...the result you predict does not come to pass even though the conditions described in your model are present...the only thing to take away from that is that your understanding of physics is flawed. You are to invested to see that glaring fact...so you, like the rest of the warmers, are preaching your faith and nothing else.

Your understanding of the physics involved seems incoherent to me.

And yet, what I predicted is, in fact happening...CO2 increasing...warming additional warming not happening. Your inability to acknowledge that goes back to your investment in your "understanding" of physics. There is no explanation that would satisfy you. I have stated over and over that I believe the statement of the second law is a precise description of what is happening...IR radiation is moving towards a condition of more entropy...warm is moving in the most direct route to cool...you can't accept that even though it is what the law states and what we are observing...you are stuck in your mathematical model which is not matching up and never has matched up with what we can observe.

 

[Crick]

Dipshit. Those quotes aren't mine.

 

[SSDD]

Dipshit. Those quotes aren't mine.

The bottom two are...you have already acknowledged the death wish...the second can be found here...A poll re the value of the consensus on anthropogenic global warming | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Crick]

Thank you for fixing your fucked up quotes.

 

[SSDD]

Thank you for fixing your fucked up quotes.

You sure seem to be taking a lot of pleasure in finding a simple formatting error...to bad you have been reduced to that level....must suck to be you.

 

[flacaltenn]

Moderation Issue:

Thread is way off-topic --- time to close...