Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Ok.Tell us again how you’re much better informed than every science institute in the entire world, every govt and every major corporation. There is no one to back you other than the ignorant.
Agreed. And then there is the sun's effect on wind which then affects ocean currents which then affects heat transport to the arctic and explains almost everything we see for our current landmass configuration which is what led to the transition of the greenhouse state to the icehouse state which is our current climate.
So, the entire world of science practiced by every free country in the world is nothing more than sicko religion. ? That’s your story ? And btw, there are NO accredited schools anywhere in a free country where AGW is not recognized. No major religions either.This AGW bullshit is nothing more than a sicko religion to you Libtard nutcases.
Get a life. Better yet go school and get an education so that you can learn to tell the difference between reality and bullshit.
“You” sickos trying to pretend science and education is on your side is bullshit. There are no examples anywhere in the civilized world of public schools and colleges and universities that think like your warped minds do.This AGW bullshit is nothing more than a sicko religion to you Libtard nutcases.
Get a life. Better yet go school and get an education so that you can learn to tell the difference between reality and bullshit.
They have lied since they started pushing it many many decades ago. Scamapalooza. One of many. The Freon scam made people rich as an example.“You” sickos trying to pretend science and education is on your side is bullshit. There are no examples anywhere in the civilized world of public schools and colleges and universities that think like your warped minds do.
Truth is on our side and so is time.“You” sickos trying to pretend science and education is on your side is bullshit. There are no examples anywhere in the civilized world of public schools and colleges and universities that think like your warped minds do.
“ they” ? Sounds like another conspiracy coming up again.They have lied since they started pushing it many many decades ago. Scamapalooza. One of many. The Freon scam made people rich as an example.
It's just greed, bias and peer pressure.“ they” ? Sounds like another conspiracy coming up again.
Do forget The cigarette scam too .? So cigarettes second hand smoke is really good for you ?
Reading your posts is an utter waste of time. No idea why you fucked up climate. All that can be said is, shame on you little guy.Hilarious. We don’t listen to ONE GUY in science. We should evaluate thousands of GUYS who are all doing trials and experiments themselves. Deniers will type their little ideas into google, then will hang in like a leach to anyone who agrees with you....it doesn’t work that way.
He makes absolutely no attempt at questioning his beliefs. He's got religion.Reading your posts is an utter waste of time. No idea why you fucked up climate. All that can be said is, shame on you little guy.
If you're saying that doubling CO2 increases temps 1C, would you also say that halving CO2 reduces temp 1C?
Somehow this is hard for me to follow. Some say the earth was 6C cooler during the last ice age. That would mean less than ten ppm CO2. iirc there was some chart around that had it at just under 100pmm. It gets even worse when we look at how the earth was 15C hotter 100M years ago or even 4B years at 3,000C hotter.Yes, that would be true. It is the pure, instantaneous GHG effect of CO2. The actual physical process of how GHG slow the transfer of energy from earth to outer space. The absorption of long wave upward infrared radiation that excites their molecules and cause them to vibrate thereby heating the surrounding atmosphere.
That is the only effect that is certain to occur. It is instantaneous.
If you want to understand Climate, please check with Judith Curry's excellent site @ JudithCurry.com
She is not a blabber mouth. She allows scientists to discuss topics on her site.
Solving the Climate Puzzle: The Sun’s Surprising Role
by Javier Vinos This post features a chapter from my new book Solving the Climate Puzzle: The Sun’s Surprising Role. The book provides a large body of evidence supporting that changes in the polew…judithcurry.com
Solving the Climate Puzzle: The Sun’s Surprising Role
curryja
Nov 4Solving the Climate Puzzle: The Sun's Surprising Role
by Javier Vinos
This post features a chapter from my new book Solving the Climate Puzzle: The Sun’s Surprising Role. The book provides a large body of evidence supporting that changes in the poleward transport of heat are one of the main ways in which the planet's climate changes naturally. It also shows that changes in solar activity affect this transport, restoring the Sun as a major cause of global warming. Since climate models do not properly represent heat transport and the IPCC reports completely neglect this process, this new hypothesis will not be easily dismissed. I am sure that over time it will lead to a better understanding of how the climate changes naturally, and hopefully less climate hysteria.
Continue reading Solving the Climate Puzzle: The Sun’s Surprising Role
What error is that?I spent months and monts studying climate matters and I do admire Judith Curry.
But the real huge error in the climate BS is the models. In even the more critical and simpler disease models the very same errors are made.
What caused his error and how does it relate to GCMs?[Imperial College epidemiologist Neil] Ferguson was behind the disputed research that sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die. There were fewer than 200 deaths. . . .
What led to his overestimate and how does that relate to GCMs?In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from BSE.
What led to his overestimate and how does that relate to GCMs?In 2005, Ferguson predicted that up to 150 million people could be killed from bird flu. In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009.
So they didn't suffer the worst case scenario. That's good.In 2009, a government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a “reasonable worst-case scenario” was that the swine flu would lead to 65,000 British deaths. In the end, swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.
Is that old influenza code being used in the CMIP GCMs?Last March, Ferguson admitted that his Imperial College model of the COVID-19 disease was based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus. Ferguson declined to release his original code so other scientists could check his results. He only released a heavily revised set of code last week, after a six-week delay.
I don't know. But is he writing climate models? That seems like an odd thing for an epidemiologist.So the real scandal is: Why did anyone ever listen to this guy?"
Standard error of the meanNo one's mathed this yet? ...
Yes ... we can measure the Sun's output to a fairly high degree of accuracy ... 1,362.4184 W/m^2 ... however, we only measure Earth's surface temperature to the nearest whole degree Celsius ... 14 ... haha ... that's a bit of exaggeration ... we're technically using the kelvin scale and that's 287 ... three significant digits ... and that's 1,360 W/m^2 for the same accuracy ...
Indeed, the calculated difference is a tenth of a degree ... so using the 1,360 W/m^2 number is perfectly safe ... and DOES NOT CHANGE ... ever ...
Why scientists call this number the Solar Constant ... because it is indeed constant for atmospheric science purposes ...
Stefan-Boltzmann Equation in the form:
T = (( S x ( 1 - a )) / 4oe)^0.25 [ where T=temperature, S=Solar constant, a=albedo, o=Stefan-Boltzmann constant and e=emissivity ] ...
Using 0.3 for albedo and 1 for emissivity, then:
For S = 1,360 W/m^2, the calculated temperature is 254.54 K
For S = 1,361 W/m^2, the calculated temperature is 254.59 K
For S = 1,370 W/m^2, temperature is 255.00 K (yes, that's exact to a hundredth of a degree)
So you can see that even fairly large changes in solar output effects Earth's surface temperature just a little bit ... not that the Sun's output doesn't effect temperature, it just too little for us to measure using these cheap Walmart thermometers NOAA (and Republicans) are fond of using ...
That's the fucking SUN ... now explain why 120 ppm CO2 is more powerful that a sub-dwarf G2 star ... is common sense completely gone now? ... I showed you my math, now you show me yours ... do these 30,000 universities not have Mathematics Departments or something? ...
The IPCC's assessments have never said anything else.Let's agree there are other factors at play here.
I told you that Professor Lindzen told me himself that averages should not be used. And you bring up what he said is what should be used, the Mean.Standard error of the mean
The standard deviation measures the precision of a single typical measurement.
It is common experience that the mean of a number of measurements gives a more precise estimation than a single measurement. This experience is quantified by the standard error of the mean.
If each measurement has a standard deviation s and the measurements are all independent, then the mean of the N measurements has a standard deviation s/√N. This quantity is called the standard error of the mean. For a proof of this formula see the tutorial on expectations and estimators .
Thus, for the mean to be ten times more precise than a single measurement, 100 independent measurements need to be taken.
Estimating precision
Somehow this is hard for me to follow. Some say the earth was 6C cooler during the last ice age. That would mean less than ten ppm CO2. iirc there was some chart around that had it at just under 100pmm. It gets even worse when we look at how the earth was 15C hotter 100M years ago or even 4B years at 3,000C hotter.
Let's agree there are other factors at play here.
I'm sorry Robert but contending that averages should not be used is just nonsensical. It's like saying you shouldn't use long division or take square roots and I can only think there was some misunderstanding between you and Lindzen.I told you that Professor Lindzen told me himself that averages should not be used. And you bring up what he said is what should be used, the Mean.
I don't believe there was ever an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 10 ppm or less. Why would you believe that?Somehow this is hard for me to follow. Some say the earth was 6C cooler during the last ice age. That would mean less than ten ppm CO2. iirc there was some chart around that had it at just under 100pmm. It gets even worse when we look at how the earth was 15C hotter 100M years ago or even 4B years at 3,000C hotter.
Let's agree there are other factors at play here.
Except according to the IPCC none of them were responsible for the warming trend of the past 250 years - even though it began 400 years ago - because they have attributed almost all warming to CO2.The IPCC's assessments have never said anything else.
