The transparency of real science

Crick

Gold Member
May 10, 2014
27,862
5,289
290
N/A
A new study has found that the atmosphere, particularly over arid regions, has not been experiencing the increase in humidity that the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship predicts should accompany the temperature rise it is undergoing. General climate models (GCMs) that incorporate that relationship predict higher relative humidity values than are being seen in arid regions. The difference is sufficient to have significant effects, particularly with regard to increased fire risk and fresh water supply as temperatures continue to rise. Scientists have not identified the cause of this difference but their are several possibilities. Good information is required for resource management and fire prevention programs.



Abstract​

Arid and semi-arid regions of the world are particularly vulnerable to greenhouse gas–driven hydroclimate change. Climate models are our primary tool for projecting the future hydroclimate that society in these regions must adapt to, but here, we present a concerning discrepancy between observed and model-based historical hydroclimate trends. Over the arid/semi-arid regions of the world, the predominant signal in all model simulations is an increase in atmospheric water vapor, on average, over the last four decades, in association with the increased water vapor–holding capacity of a warmer atmosphere. In observations, this increase in atmospheric water vapor has not happened, suggesting that the availability of moisture to satisfy the increased atmospheric demand is lower in reality than in models in arid/semi-arid regions. This discrepancy is most clear in locations that are arid/semi-arid year round, but it is also apparent in more humid regions during the most arid months of the year. It indicates a major gap in our understanding and modeling capabilities which could have severe implications for hydroclimate projections, including fire hazard, moving forward.​
 
No. The answer is "No, I'm not giving up my gasoline-powered car, lawn mower, tiller, chain saw, log splitter, snow blower, weed eater, my gas stove and furnace, and my burn barrel."

I will only give them up when you personally come here and pry them from my cold, dead hands, which I sincerely doubt you have the balls to do.
 
No. The answer is "No, I'm not giving up my gasoline-powered car, lawn mower, tiller, chain saw, log splitter, snow blower, weed eater, my gas stove and furnace, and my burn barrel."

I will only give them up when you personally come here and pry them from my cold, dead hands, which I sincerely doubt you have the balls to do.
If laws should ever be passed that outright ban such equipment, I have full confidence that the police DO have the balls necessary to come take them from you... unless you're actually stupid enough to raise a weapon up in defense of your weed whacker (which you seem to be suggesting here) in which case the police will simply kill you first and then take your stuff.

None of you deniers are real bright, but some of you are exceptionally not-bright. Like this fella. Now, it's possible that he meant this post to be a jest. Come pry my weed whacker from my cold dead fingers... but the closing comment spoils that hypothesis. Naw, he's just

S-T-U-P-I-D

The point of the OP was to continue to inform the debate here but also to show that real science puts a very high priority on finding mistakes and sorting them out; something you do NOT see from the pseudo-science claptrap the fossil fuel PR campaign spews which will claim to hold the whole and unquestionable truth right from the get-go.
 
The humidity increase is over the oceans ... stupid ... why would you expect an increase over ... you know .. dry land ... HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...

Once again you've confused cause and effect ... arid regions are DRY by definition ... temperature has nothing to do with it ...

Educate yourself:

 
If laws should ever be passed that outright ban such equipment, I have full confidence that the police DO have the balls necessary to come take them from you... unless you're actually stupid enough to raise a weapon up in defense of your weed whacker (which you seem to be suggesting here) in which case the police will simply kill you first and then take your stuff.

None of you deniers are real bright, but some of you are exceptionally not-bright. Like this fella. Now, it's possible that he meant this post to be a jest. Come pry my weed whacker from my cold dead fingers... but the closing comment spoils that hypothesis. Naw, he's just

S-T-U-P-I-D

The point of the OP was to continue to inform the debate here but also to show that real science puts a very high priority on finding mistakes and sorting them out; something you do NOT see from the pseudo-science claptrap the fossil fuel PR campaign spews which will claim to hold the whole and unquestionable truth right from the get-go.

You leftist weasels are all the same: You have no balls, no spine, and need your precious "government" to protect you.

Fuck you, bro. If you think gasoline-powered cars, lawn mowers, tillers, and chainsaws leave a big carbon footprint, just come and see how big a carbon footprint my guns make.
 
climate change.jpg
 
No. The answer is "No, I'm not giving up my gasoline-powered car, lawn mower, tiller, chain saw, log splitter, snow blower, weed eater, my gas stove and furnace, and my burn barrel."

I will only give them up when you personally come here and pry them from my cold, dead hands, which I sincerely doubt you have the balls to do.
Lol.
Good thing I hid a Red Barchetta in my uncle's barn.
 
The humidity increase is over the oceans ... stupid ... why would you expect an increase over ... you know .. dry land ... HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW ...

Once again you've confused cause and effect ... arid regions are DRY by definition ... temperature has nothing to do with it ...

Educate yourself:

Have you ever heard of a dynamic transport process called "wind"?

Are you familiar with the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship in thermodynamics? It goes like this:

The Clausius–Clapeyron relation, in chemical thermodynamics specifies the temperature dependence of pressure, most importantly vapor pressure, at a discontinuous phase transition between two phases of matter of a single constituent. It's named after Rudolf Clausius[1] and Benoît Paul Émile Clapeyron.[2] However, this relation was in fact originally derived by Sadi Carnot in his Reflections on the Motive Power of Fire, which was published in 1824 but largely ignored until it was rediscovered by Clausius, Clapeyron, and Lord Kelvin decades later.[3] Kelvin said of Carnot's argument that "nothing in the whole range of Natural Philosophy is more remarkable than the establishment of general laws by such a process of reasoning."[4]

Kelvin and his brother James Thomson confirmed the relation experimentally in 1849-50, and it was historically important as a very early successful application of theoretical thermodynamics.[5] Its relevance to meteorology and climatology is the increase of the water-holding capacity of the atmosphere by about 7% for every 1 °C (1.8 °F) rise in temperature.


Education is a good thing. For everyone.
 
Last edited:
You leftist weasels are all the same: You have no balls, no spine, and need your precious "government" to protect you.
The shortcoming that is having the greatest effect around here is that of your knowledge and your intellect...
Fuck you, bro. If you think gasoline-powered cars, lawn mowers, tillers, and chainsaws leave a big carbon footprint, just come and see how big a carbon footprint my guns make.
Stupid AND pathetic.
 
A new study has found that the atmosphere, particularly over arid regions, has not been experiencing the increase in humidity that the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship predicts should accompany the temperature rise it is undergoing. General climate models (GCMs) that incorporate that relationship predict higher relative humidity values than are being seen in arid regions. The difference is sufficient to have significant effects, particularly with regard to increased fire risk and fresh water supply as temperatures continue to rise. Scientists have not identified the cause of this difference but their are several possibilities. Good information is required for resource management and fire prevention programs.



Abstract​

Arid and semi-arid regions of the world are particularly vulnerable to greenhouse gas–driven hydroclimate change. Climate models are our primary tool for projecting the future hydroclimate that society in these regions must adapt to, but here, we present a concerning discrepancy between observed and model-based historical hydroclimate trends. Over the arid/semi-arid regions of the world, the predominant signal in all model simulations is an increase in atmospheric water vapor, on average, over the last four decades, in association with the increased water vapor–holding capacity of a warmer atmosphere. In observations, this increase in atmospheric water vapor has not happened, suggesting that the availability of moisture to satisfy the increased atmospheric demand is lower in reality than in models in arid/semi-arid regions. This discrepancy is most clear in locations that are arid/semi-arid year round, but it is also apparent in more humid regions during the most arid months of the year. It indicates a major gap in our understanding and modeling capabilities which could have severe implications for hydroclimate projections, including fire hazard, moving forward.​

I know you want to breed fear with your crap. Ain’t working
 
Stopped reading at "general climate models"...They've never ever been predictive.

You warmer loons have absolutely no "real science".
I can't tell you how unsurprised I am but three, polysyllabic words in a row can be a real challenge for some.
 
Stopped reading at "general climate models"...They've never ever been predictive.

You warmer loons have absolutely no "real science".

Here are a few of those "scientists" practicing their "science." :21:

greenies.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top