If you can't use the MWP then disappear it!

Discussion in 'Environment' started by westwall, Oct 25, 2010.

  1. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    41,047
    Thanks Received:
    7,993
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,820
    In yet another example of how the alarmist camp will rewrite history that inconveniences them we have the report of how the climate mafia got together in Lisbon to try and figure out a way to eliminate the MWP as a rather annoying thorn in their side.

    I particularly like this section of one of the abstracts....

    "The trajectories of these two concepts (“Medieval Warm Period” and “Medieval Climate Anomaly “) will be traced. A case will be made for the abandonment of both of them, on the grounds that they are inappropriate, uninformative, and that they very probably divert attention from more revealing ways of thinking about the Earth’s climate over the past two millennia."



    Mike Mann’s “secret” meeting on the Medieval Warm Period | Watts Up With That?
     
  2. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,584
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,677
    If it's an anomaly, then it would seem right to discount it. If it's about the gases, what would a period of warming in the distant past, before the IR, have to do with the effects of GHG rise today? There are other reasons for temperature rise, but they don't disprove AGW. You have to account for the extra trapped energy over the last 200 years. It has to be doing something.
     
  3. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    konradv- you just don't get it. the MWP and the LIA happened. we don't know for sure how or why they did but if temps have been raising and lowering since we came out of the last real ice age, why are you so sure that CO2 has played anything but a trivial part in the latest warming trend? delve into the strengths and weaknesses of the computer climate models that are the only thing that say doubling CO2 will cause more than a degree of warming.

    they want to get rid of the MWP for the same reason as they keep going back over the historical temperature data. to smooth over inconvenient temp swings that ruin their temperature 'trends' and hide the 'acceleration'.
     
  4. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,584
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,677
    How is my position any different from the MWP being constantly brought up to support yours? You want to trivialize CO2 and promote the MWP without dealing with the very real fact that CO2 absorbs energy and the concentration in the atmosphere is continuing to climb. I have a very real objection to the notion of who doesn't get it. You want to focus on tiny details, many of which aren't relevant, and have us ignore the big picture, IMO.
     
  5. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    9,200
    Thanks Received:
    1,071
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,448
    let's break this down. do you think it is the actual energy that is absorbed by the CO2 molecules that makes up the higher global temperature?
     
  6. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,584
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,677
    What else would it be? Energy-in has to equal energy-out or you get a build up, which in this case we'd call 'heat'. This seems very basic. I hope you're not looking for an 'aha' moment in my comment. You seem to be implying that we're talking about two different things with regard to absorbed energy and heat. They're both energy and therefore interchangeable.
     
  7. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,639
    Thanks Received:
    5,431
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,423
    Once again Walleyes is quoting the mouthings of a liar. Below is real science by real scientists, not undegreed ex-tv weathermen.

    Proxy-based reconstructions of hemispheric and global surface temperature variations over the past two millennia
    Michael E. Mann*,†, Zhihua Zhang*, Malcolm K. Hughes‡, Raymond S. Bradley§, Sonya K. Miller*, Scott Rutherford¶, and Fenbiao Ni‡
    + Author Affiliations

    *Department of Meteorology and Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802;
    ‡Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721;
    §Department of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003-9298; and
    ¶Department of Environmental Science, Roger Williams University, Bristol, RI 02809
    Communicated by Lonnie G. Thompson, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, June 26, 2008 (received for review November 20, 2007)

    Abstract
    Following the suggestions of a recent National Research Council report [NRC (National Research Council) (2006) Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years (Natl Acad Press, Washington, DC).], we reconstruct surface temperature at hemispheric and global scale for much of the last 2,000 years using a greatly expanded set of proxy data for decadal-to-centennial climate changes, recently updated instrumental data, and complementary methods that have been thoroughly tested and validated with model simulation experiments. Our results extend previous conclusions that recent Northern Hemisphere surface temperature increases are likely anomalous in a long-term context. Recent warmth appears anomalous for at least the past 1,300 years whether or not tree-ring data are used. If tree-ring data are used, the conclusion can be extended to at least the past 1,700 years, but with additional strong caveats. The reconstructed amplitude of change over past centuries is greater than hitherto reported, with somewhat greater Medieval warmth in the Northern Hemisphere, albeit still not reaching recent levels.
     
  8. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    Yes the earth's atmosphere warns and cools sans human interference, true.

    The question is what effect is human activity playing in the apparent warming trend we're seeing now?

    It IS possible, ya' know, that we're responsible in part for this recent trend.

    The fact is that we just do not KNOW.

    There are obviously good reasons to think we might be, but I doubt we really know enough to say for SURE.

    Was that your point?

    If so then I agree.

    FYI, today it will reach 70 here in Maine.

    Now that might be just random walk of temperature, to be sure.

    But enough random walks in the same direction are the directional TREND in that random walk.

    The median average temperature is rising.


    Denial doesn't change the facts.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2010
  9. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    41,047
    Thanks Received:
    7,993
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,820



    And here in Nevada we've had snow in the mountains for the last two weeks and the temp this morning was 34. We have given the alarmists over 100 billion dollars to do research over the last 25 years and they can not tell us one thing with absolute certainty. They have been working on their computer models for over 20 years and they can't recreate the weather that occured last week. If you run one of their models into the fuure you have to update it every hour or the programmed in bises tell you that the Earth will have the temperature of the sun in a few years.

    There are few constants in the alarmists message. If it's too hot it's AGW. If it's too cold it's AGW. If it rains a lot it's AGW. If it doesn't rain enough it's AGW. If the wind blows it's AGW. If the wind doesn't blow it's AGW. Do you see a pattern here?

    What do the alarmists propose to mitigate the percieved danger (which after 30 years of hysteria has never come to fruition) why simple...tax everyone in the first world, so that we all get to live lives of relative austerity. In Germany they have developed little box houses that use minimal energy and these are what they envision the people living in. All in a wonderful 800-900 square feet. While all the rich folk get to live in their mansions.

    Evey scheme that the alarmists propose consists of taking your money away from you and giving it to allready wealthy paople so they can become richer and you poorer, because hey what do you need? Nothing. You have no money anyway so you don't need anything else. We'll take what you have live our lives to the fullest and you and your kids can live like the peasants you truly are...after all you were dumb enough to let us steal your money away from you so you must be incompetent..right?

    Finally, doesn't it trouble you in the slightest that all of the alarmists data is being massaged and fabricated....even a little? See last comment above.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2010
  10. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,584
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,677
    If you did some real research, instead of just going to blogs that support your bias, maybe this wouldn't confuse you so much. You're just creating a litany to make AGW theory look foolish, without regard for the facts, science or logic. It's all just a political exercise, i.e. don't worry about the facts, they're trying to steal your money! You've even thrown in an "envy the rich" twist in your spiel. How "lefty" of you! I guess there's no holds barred when spinning a convincing yarn, eh?
     

Share This Page