We did the Global Warming Experiment and No One Noticed.

[flacaltenn]

I know this is somewhat cryptic, but I wanted to let my buds know that I'm working on an idea. It could be that mankind has done the CO2 experiment that all the skeptics have been waiting on.. I'll be spending my GWarming time looking into this, and the time will come out of posting on this forum.. But here's the deal --- If I'm right about this --- I may no longer be as big a skeptic as I am today..

And the folks that have been doctoring the historical temperature record, are gonna be rushing to UN-Doctor it --- if I'm correct..

Promise you'll be the first to know if there's anything to my hunch.. Check this thread for updates.. 85% of good technical hunches are sheer crap. So this may never be bumped again.

In the mean time --- here's my challenge to you on GW evidence..
How would you run a run a Global Experiment on the effects of adding man-made CO2 to the atmos? (Other than the one we're currently doing and merely SPECULATING about the results)

 

[Abraham3]

Bump

 

[Abraham3]

Anything?

 

[SSDD]

Anything?

Actual thinking takes time abraham...unlike belief which is what you engage in.

 

[flacaltenn]

Dont think the data available for this idea is good enogh to make the case right now. I will explain the idea when I get time off from my USMB "community service" commitment. The basic idea is expecting a multi year CO2 spike during WW2. And the resulting warm spike in the early 40s. But ice cores seem to be the only data for Co2, and SOMEHOW, THEY INDICATE A FLAT PERIOD. Prob Bcuz there are unknown delays in the ice core time marks,

 

[Old Rocks]

Really fucking dumb. Flat period? Have a look at the prior ups and downs. Natural variation superimposed on a rising temperature. Since 1998, instead of that, we have a period of fairly flat temperatures with two major warm years. Flat temperatures, with the ten warmest years within that period.

In other words, where the hell is the expected down periods? Low TSI, La Nina's, and yet 2013 manages to place in the top ten.

UAH Global Temperature Update for January 2014: +0.29 deg. C « Roy Spencer, PhD

In the meantime, the continental ice caps continue to melt by the giga ton, the alpine glaciers continue to recede, and the Arctic Ice continues to go away.

 

[Kosh]

Do you have another planet just like Earth with the same age and climate without humans on it?

 

[SSDD]

Dont think the data available for this idea is good enogh to make the case right now. I will explain the idea when I get time off from my USMB "community service" commitment. The basic idea is expecting a multi year CO2 spike during WW2. And the resulting warm spike in the early 40s. But ice cores seem to be the only data for Co2, and SOMEHOW, THEY INDICATE A FLAT PERIOD. Prob Bcuz there are unknown delays in the ice core time marks,

And the "only data" for CO2 tells us that increased atmospheric CO2 is the result of warming, not the cause. The earth has fallen into deep ice ages with atmospheric CO2 in the thousands of ppm. CO2 doesn't drive anything but money grubbing glorified weathermen with less education than an actual weatherman and hysterical AGW cultists who are apparently frightened of everything on earth that might result in someone making a dollar.

Those idiots should exit society entirely and try and live for a while on "nature". More than 90% would take their rightful place in the food chain and the survivors might gain a newfound appreciation for what modern petroleum based technology has saved them from.

 

[flacaltenn]

Really fucking dumb. Flat period? Have a look at the prior ups and downs. Natural variation superimposed on a rising temperature. Since 1998, instead of that, we have a period of fairly flat temperatures with two major warm years. Flat temperatures, with the ten warmest years within that period.

In other words, where the hell is the expected down periods? Low TSI, La Nina's, and yet 2013 manages to place in the top ten.

UAH Global Temperature Update for January 2014: +0.29 deg. C « Roy Spencer, PhD

In the meantime, the continental ice caps continue to melt by the giga ton, the alpine glaciers continue to recede, and the Arctic Ice continues to go away.

What does ANY of that tirade have to do with the idea of inspecting a potential temperature bump possibly due to a World War?

Intuitively, man probably spiked emissions quite a bit from 39 -- to 46 or so.. And screwed land use by burning down forests in Europe and Russia. But yet, no one was really MEASURING CO2 accurately back then.. So it looks like I don't have a case to make.

Except for that interesting warming bump that occurred during the time of War and the Run-up..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Vostok Ice Cores show CO2 LAGGING Temperature both on the increase and decrease so the proposition that CO2 is now a DRIVER of climate can only mean there's been some recent, fundamental transformation of CO2

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Take 2 fish tanks, place a thermometer in each; one has Earth atmoshphere, the other add 200PPM CO2 then stand back and watch the Cat 5 hurricanes, droughts and flood in the CO2 tank

 

[mamooth]

Take 2 fish tanks, place a thermometer in each; one has Earth atmoshphere, the other add 200PPM CO2 then stand back and watch the Cat 5 hurricanes, droughts and flood in the CO2 tank

Here, Frank behaves like an Islamicist screaming "Allahu Akhbar!". The point of his constant repetitive mantras isn't to make any sense. The point is to loudly demonstrate to the other cultists how he's such a very devoted cult member.

 

[SSDD]

Take 2 fish tanks, place a thermometer in each; one has Earth atmoshphere, the other add 200PPM CO2 then stand back and watch the Cat 5 hurricanes, droughts and flood in the CO2 tank

Here, Frank behaves like an Islamicist screaming "Allahu Akhbar!". The point of his constant repetitive mantras isn't to make any sense. The point is to loudly demonstrate to the other cultists how he's such a very devoted cult member.

I don't hear frank demanding that I change my lifestyle, or pay a penny to anyone for anything...you and yours, on the other hand are constantly demanding that we "mend our ways" and do what you say and pay through the nose for your hairbrained schemes. If anyone is acting like uulating islamists, it is you and yours.

 

[Abraham3]

Dont think the data available for this idea is good enogh to make the case right now. I will explain the idea when I get time off from my USMB "community service" commitment. The basic idea is expecting a multi year CO2 spike during WW2. And the resulting warm spike in the early 40s. But ice cores seem to be the only data for Co2, and SOMEHOW, THEY INDICATE A FLAT PERIOD. Prob Bcuz there are unknown delays in the ice core time marks,

Or there was no spike.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Take 2 fish tanks, place a thermometer in each; one has Earth atmoshphere, the other add 200PPM CO2 then stand back and watch the Cat 5 hurricanes, droughts and flood in the CO2 tank

Here, Frank behaves like an Islamicist screaming "Allahu Akhbar!". The point of his constant repetitive mantras isn't to make any sense. The point is to loudly demonstrate to the other cultists how he's such a very devoted cult member.

I don't hear frank demanding that I change my lifestyle, or pay a penny to anyone for anything...you and yours, on the other hand are constantly demanding that we "mend our ways" and do what you say and pay through the nose for your hairbrained schemes. If anyone is acting like uulating islamists, it is you and yours.

She's part of the Progressive Jihad on Western Civilization. She considers our Carbon Footprint irrefutable evidence that we are indeed The Great Satan

 

[flacaltenn]

Dont see how it is plausible that the world didnt burn CONSIDERABLY more fuel and firebomb multiple major cities, burn forest and jungle areas as big as some states and NOT bump CO2 EMISSIONS by a considerable amount. If all thatbad behaviour had no effect whatsoever on the Global thermometer, then we're barking up the wrong tree. BUT if all that abuse can be adequately quantized, then there IS ameasureable temp spike during that period, waiting for an explanation.

Wouldnt it be juicy ironic if the efforts to rewrite those 1940s temps lower, had to be rethought because they are suddenly useful to the GW argument.. I have no interest inspending years estimating the CO2 emissions from a World War tho.. So we will just never know.... Ice cores are not good enough for the purpose.....

 

[mamooth]

That's nice. The Law Dome ice cores still show CO2 levels flattened out during WWII. And your conspiracy theories aren't very interesting.

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/antarctica/law/law_co2.txt

 

[Abraham3]

Dont see how it is plausible that the world didnt burn CONSIDERABLY more fuel and firebomb multiple major cities, burn forest and jungle areas as big as some states and NOT bump CO2 EMISSIONS by a considerable amount. If all thatbad behaviour had no effect whatsoever on the Global thermometer, then we're barking up the wrong tree. BUT if all that abuse can be adequately quantized, then there IS ameasureable temp spike during that period, waiting for an explanation.

Wouldnt it be juicy ironic if the efforts to rewrite those 1940s temps lower, had to be rethought because they are suddenly useful to the GW argument.. I have no interest inspending years estimating the CO2 emissions from a World War tho.. So we will just never know.... Ice cores are not good enough for the purpose.....

So your idea was that the large and extended dip in temperatures between 1941 and 1979 took place despite a spike in CO2 and that this would refute the Greenhouse Effect.

Don't you recall what Swimexpert, one of the most gifted of all human beings and thus certainly the most gifted of deniers said concerning anyone that rejected the Greenhouse Effect?

And surely YOU would not go looking for - nay, demanding - an immediate and linear response to such complex radiative forcing issues.

Well, our work is done here.

 

[flacaltenn]

Dont see how it is plausible that the world didnt burn CONSIDERABLY more fuel and firebomb multiple major cities, burn forest and jungle areas as big as some states and NOT bump CO2 EMISSIONS by a considerable amount. If all thatbad behaviour had no effect whatsoever on the Global thermometer, then we're barking up the wrong tree. BUT if all that abuse can be adequately quantized, then there IS ameasureable temp spike during that period, waiting for an explanation.

Wouldnt it be juicy ironic if the efforts to rewrite those 1940s temps lower, had to be rethought because they are suddenly useful to the GW argument.. I have no interest inspending years estimating the CO2 emissions from a World War tho.. So we will just never know.... Ice cores are not good enough for the purpose.....

So your idea was that the large and extended dip in temperatures between 1941 and 1979 took place despite a spike in CO2 and that this would refute the Greenhouse Effect.

Don't you recall what Swimexpert, one of the most gifted of all human beings and thus certainly the most gifted of deniers said concerning anyone that rejected the Greenhouse Effect?

And surely YOU would not go looking for - nay, demanding - an immediate and linear response to such complex radiative forcing issues.

Well, our work is done here.

No assholic simian.. I'm NOT referring to the temp record between 1941 and 1979.. You are a simple insincere rant machine.. I'm referring to the BUMP in temperatures between 1939 and 1949. And you fling POO like a assholic simian as well. The evidence I was looking for was ACTUAL CONSUMPTION of fuel during that period.. Not a random chart of what might have been produced.. The USE would include STORED stockpiles of fuels, the rather HUGE SYNFUEL production in Europe and various OTHER things beyond the poo-flinging simian imagination..

Since there ARE no CO2 records for the period with a RELIABLE ANNUAL resolution, and because it would take more than a PhD thesis effort to resurrect annual fuel consumption, land use issues et al during the war --- I suppose NO ONE will ever care to attempt to document this experiment in atmospheric science. YET -- it is the closest thing we have done to providing experimental evidence on the connection between CO2 emissions and effects on the climate. I'm certain there WAS a satisfactory bump in emissions, it's just too damn hard to quantify.

 

[mamooth]

Since there ARE no CO2 records for the period with a RELIABLE ANNUAL resolution,

But the ice cores give a sort of 5-year average, which is fine for a 5-year event. CO2 levels ceased rising and flattened out during WWII.

You're discarding good data because the data disagrees with you. That's a sure sign of pseudoscience.