Less than a billion years....probably a lot less....

[ding]

Never. I pointed you to the IPCC report, and what it says about doubling the CO2 from the pre industrial levels.

1degC is not even in the range.

So we can ignore your verbose and repeated falsehoods.

Apparently you know nothing about TCR.

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/figures/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Figure_7_18.png

 

[ding]

Never. I pointed you to the IPCC report, and what it says about doubling the CO2 from the pre industrial levels.

1degC is not even in the range.

So we can ignore your verbose and repeated falsehoods.

I have provided multiple citations and a link to the IPCC's report itself.

 

[ding]

Did ya read the IPCC yet?

Yes. I wish you would. Because you have no concept of TCR and ECR and the difference between the two or what the significance of the difference between the two is.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yes. I wish you would. Because you have no concept of TCR and ECR and the difference between the two or what the significance of the difference between the two is.

And you need to look up the range of warming from doubling of CO2 since preindustrial era levels in the IPCC, so that you can stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No we aren't.

Stop making up stupid shit, Frank.

So there's so AGW Sixth Extinction?? Did you check with Xi and the home office?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So there's so AGW Sixth Extinction?? Did you check with Xi and the home office?

OR

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[ding]

And you need to look up the range of warming from doubling of CO2 since preindustrial era levels in the IPCC, so that you can stop embarrassing yourself.

Apparently you do not understand the physics of GHG's. It's an instantaneous effect. It's the only warming that can be quantified by physics; by science. So what "science" do you suppose they are basing their ranges upon?

But putting all of that aside... what I am telling you is that this relationship is literally the basis for the IPCC's TCR estimate. And the fact, that you fail to acknowledge this simple and incontrovertible truth says you know that this truth is a death blow to your beliefs. Otherwise, why else would you keep denying it?

 

[ding]

FortFun never has to argue against ridiculousness of the feedbacks if he never acknowledges the basis of the GHG effect itself. Brilliant.

 

[ding]

And you need to look up the range of warming from doubling of CO2 since preindustrial era levels in the IPCC, so that you can stop embarrassing yourself.

What do you suppose those ranges are based upon? What's the minimum number in the IPCC's TCR range based upon?

Could it be the simple physics of the GHG effect of CO2 which is 1C per doubling of CO2?

Could everything above this number be the feedback?

Is it really this simple?

How long are you going to dodge this discussion?

 

[ding]

I can picture FortFun on Fantasy Island pointing his chubby fingers saying "de range, de range."

What's the range based on, FortFun?

 

[ding]

And you need to look up the range of warming from doubling of CO2 since preindustrial era levels in the IPCC, so that you can stop embarrassing yourself.

I have. And I can discuss it. Can you?

 

[ding]

OR

You don't know what you're talking about.

You certainly don't. Is now the time when you argue you aren't an expert and rely upon experts? Because if so, you are admitting that you aren't qualified to argue anything at all. Yet you continue to do so. You're like Georgie Porgie.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You certainly don't. Is now the time when you argue you aren't an expert and rely upon experts? Because if so, you are admitting that you aren't qualified to argue anything at all. Yet you continue to do so. You're like Georgie Porgie.

yawn

You aren't going to whine your way into being correct.

 

[ding]

yawn

You aren't going to whine your way into being correct.

How much of the IPCC's projected temperature range is due to the instantaneous radiative forcing of CO2 and how much is due to feedback?

And if you tell me to look it up I will say I have. The answer is 1C of instantaneous radiative forcing of CO2 and 3.5 C of feedbacks.

Do you have a different answer?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

How much of the IPCC's projected temperature range is due to the instantaneous radiative forcing of CO2 and how much is due to feedback?

And if you tell me to look it up I will say I have. The answer is 1C of instantaneous radiative forcing of CO2 and 3.5 C of feedbacks.

Do you have a different answer?

Irrelevant.

But I know the hard estimates for ECS range from 2.5degC to 4degC.

If you have a problem with that, don't whine to me. Publish your science. Until then, don't waste your time.

 

[ding]

Irrelevant.

But I know the hard estimates for ECS range from 2.5degC to 4degC.

If you have a problem with that, don't whine to me. Publish your science. Until then, don't waste your time.

We are talking about TCR. The instantaneous radiative forcing of CO2. The IPCC has it at 1C per doubling of CO2. It's in their reports. I linked to it. Why do you keep denying their own report?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We are talking about TCR. The instantaneous radiative forcing of CO2. The IPCC has it at 1C per doubling of CO2. It's in their reports. I linked to it. Why do you keep denying their own report?

No, you are. I am laughing at deniers thinking they outsmarted the scientists.

Let's be clear.

 

[ding]

No, you are. I am laughing at deniers thinking they outsmarted the scientists.

Let's be clear.

TCR is the GHG effect, dummy. Clearly you don't understand what you are talking about.

Everything above 1C per doubling of CO2 is considered to be feedbacks. Say it with me.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

TCR is the GHG effect, dummy. Clearly you don't understand what you are talking about.

Everything above 1C per doubling of CO2 is considered to be feedbacks. Say it with me.

Nah, I will defer to the experts, while you guys sit here where you belong and pull each other's taffy.

 

[ding]

Irrelevant.

But I know the hard estimates for ECS range from 2.5degC to 4degC.

If you have a problem with that, don't whine to me. Publish your science. Until then, don't waste your time.

The answer is 1C of instantaneous radiative forcing of CO2 and 3.5 C of feedbacks.

Do you have a different answer?