1,600-plus Scientists Say Climate "Emergency" Is a Myth

[Sunsettommy]

The title's claim that that document had been signed by 1,600 scientists is clearly a lie. Can you claim otherwise?

And the declaration itself? Do you find it the least bit defensible? How many climate scientists have you seen claiming their models are magical? Do you find any part of that to be a clear refutation of any portion of AGW theory?

You can't refute a theory that hasn't been established.

Still no Hot spot found.

Still no Positive Feedback Loop found.

Still no evidence of actual climate change anywhere.

Desert is still a desert, Steppe is still a steppe, Polar is still Polar and so on....

Koppen Climate Classification

LINK

 

[Oddball]

You can't refute a theory that hasn't been established.

Still no Hot spot found.

Still no Positive Feedback Loop found.

Still no evidence of actual climate change anywhere.

Desert is still a desert, Steppe is still a steppe, Polar is still Polar and so on....

Koppen Climate Classification

LINK

NYC, London, Miami, Malibu, etcetera are still all above sea level.

 

[Crick]

You can't refute a theory that hasn't been established.

One has nothing to do with the other and AGW is exceedigly well established. AGW could be falsified a dozen different ways but has not.

Still no Hot spot found.

That is incorrect. The hot spot has been found, though it was never a test of AGW.

Still no Positive Feedback Loop found.

That is incorrect.

Still no evidence of actual climate change anywhere.

Desert is still a desert, Steppe is still a steppe, Polar is still Polar and so on....

Koppen Climate Classification

Simple ignorance.

 

[Crick]

NYC, London, Miami, Malibu, etcetera are still all above sea level.

welcome | Sea Level Research Group

sealevel.colorado.edu

 

[Oddball]

View attachment 851719

welcome | Sea Level Research Group

sealevel.colorado.edu

Ooooo, pretty colors....Must be true!

When's the great liquidation of seaside real estate beginning?

 

[Crick]

Ooooo, pretty colors....Must be true!

When's the great liquidation of seaside real estate beginning?

The University of Colorado Sea Level Research Group is considered the world's leading expert on the subject. Have you got something better or have you simply chosen to reject it because you don't like it?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 851719

welcome | Sea Level Research Group

sealevel.colorado.edu

Wow! 2.5 inches in the last 30 years.

How many died?

 

[Sunsettommy]

One has nothing to do with the other and AGW is exceedigly well established. AGW could be falsified a dozen different ways but has not.

That is incorrect. The hot spot has been found, though it was never a test of AGW.

That is incorrect.

Simple ignorance.

Crick lies again as there is NO hot spot which he didn't post evidence for and it can't be the bogus Sherwood paper because his bullshit isn't accepted by the NOAA who tracks the atmosphere data and yes, it is a test for the hotspot since it was made as one by Sherwood and other warmist scientists starting 23 years ago, my my you forget already?

From Jo Nova LINK

Hot Spot Graph Sources:

(A) Predicted changes 1958-1999. Synthesis and Assessment Report 1.1, 2006, CCSP, Chapter 1, p 25, based on Santer et al. 2000;
(B) Hadley Radiosonde record: Synthesis and Assessment Report 1.1, 2006, CCSP,, Chapter 5, p116, recorded change/decade, Hadley Centre weather balloons 1979-1999, p. 116 , fig. 5.7E, from Thorne et al., 2005.

UPDATE: The former links are broken (why do government departments do that?) All original CCSP Chapters are stored at the Wayback Machine. See Wayback Machine copies of (Chapter 1) Specifically download the PDF. and Wayback Machine Copies of (Chapter 5) Specifically download the PDF. If they disappear there is a back up copies here of Chapter 1 SAP and Chapter 5 SAP 1.

======

No Hot Spot exist.

No Positive Feedback Loop exist.

That is the reality.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is where it talks about lower troposphere warming and several papers listed showing they also talk about a "hot spot" was a fingerprint.

Page 11 at the wayback machine LINK Discusses the Hot spot region.

=======

From my old post I made at my defunct forum 12 years ago with numerous quotes from the IPCC report clearly shows they were expecting a warming lower troposphere region.

LINK

Tropospheric Hot Spot report

Question:

What is the Troposphere "Hotspot"?

Answer:

The IPCC 2007 report in this SECTION, shows a charted set of modeling runs that purports to examine the level of warm forcing in the Tropical Troposphere.

It was taken from Santer et al. 2003.Where they show based on their AGW hypothesis beliefs. That it is Well mixed greenhouse gases that would cause the "Tropospheric Hotspot".

True the IPCC did not use the phrase Tropospheric HOTSPOT. But they sure imply it strongly and based on their Greenhouse forcing hypothesis.

Quote:

Figure 9.1. Zonal mean atmospheric temperature change from 1890 to 1999 (°C per century) as simulated by the PCM model from (a) solar forcing, (b) volcanoes, © well-mixed greenhouse gases, (d) tropospheric and stratospheric ozone changes, (e) direct sulphate aerosol forcing and (f) the sum of all forcings. Plot is from 1,000 hPa to 10 hPa (shown on left scale) and from 0 km to 30 km (shown on right). See Appendix 9.C for additional information. Based on Santer et al. (2003a).

To show that they are advocating the distinct warming of the Troposphere due to greenhouse gases. I quote again from the IPCC report:

Greenhouse gas forcing is expected to produce warming in the troposphere, cooling in the stratosphere, and, for transient simulations, somewhat more warming near the surface in the NH due to its larger land fraction, which has a shorter surface response time to the warming than do ocean regions (Figure 9.1c).

This means that 4 years ago they tell us we should be seeing a clear warming in this area. But for some reason they spend all their time talking about modeling runs, but not about actual temperature data.

Before we go to empirical temperature data. I would like to hammer home what the IPCC themselves say about the charts I have posted above. The chart is also in the link posted below. It is a detailed explanation of the chart in question.

9.2.2 Spatial and Temporal Patterns of the
Response to Different Forcings and their
Uncertainties

9.2.2.1 Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Response
The ability to distinguish between climate responses to
different external forcing factors in observations depends
on the extent to which those responses are distinct (see, e.g.,
Section 9.4.1.4 and Appendix 9.A). Figure 9.1 illustrates the
zonal average temperature response in the PCM model (see
Table 8.1 for model details) to several different forcing agents
over the last 100 years, while Figure 9.2 illustrates the zonal
average temperature response in the Commonwealth Scientifi c
and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) atmospheric
model (when coupled to a simple mixed layer ocean model) to
fossil fuel black carbon and organic matter, and to the combined
effect of these forcings together with biomass burning aerosols
(Penner et al., 2007). These fi gures indicate that the modelled
vertical and zonal average signature of the temperature response
should depend on the forcings. The major features shown in
Figure 9.1 are robust to using different climate models. On the
other hand, the response to black carbon forcing has not been
widely examined and therefore the features in Figure 9.2 may
be model dependent. Nevertheless, the response to black carbon
forcings appears to be small.

The next paragraph is quite specific. That it is the "well mixed greenhouse gases" that is the source of the modeled Tropospheric warming signature. To support the AGW hypothesis:

Greenhouse gas forcing is expected to produce warming in
the troposphere, cooling in the stratosphere, and, for transient
simulations, somewhat more warming near the surface in the
NH due to its larger land fraction, which has a shorter surface
response time to the warming than do ocean regions (Figure
9.1c). The spatial pattern of the transient surface temperature
response to greenhouse gas forcing also typically exhibits a
land-sea pattern of stronger warming over land, for the same
reason (e.g., Cubasch et al., 2001).

The rest here LINK

Crick you are incorrect yet again, the AGW bullshit does predict a "HOT SPOT" in the atmosphere.

 

[Flash]

Man made climate change is not a "myth".

It is a scam and a religion all tied up in one.

Even L. Ron Hubbard would be zealous of this scam religion that so many yokels have fallen for.

 

[Crick]

Crick lies again as there is NO hot spot which he didn't post evidence for and it can't be the bogus Sherwood paper because his bullshit isn't accepted by the NOAA who tracks the atmosphere data and yes, it is a test for the hotspot since it was made as one by Sherwood and other warmist scientists starting 23 years ago, my my you forget already?

The Hot Spot has nothing specifically to do with AGW or greenhouse warming. It should be present for warming from ANY source.

"When the surface warms, there's more evaporation and more moisture in the air. This decreases the lapse rate - there's less cooling aloft. This means warming aloft is greater than warming at the surface. This amplified trend is the hot spot. It's all to do with changes in the lapse rate, regardless of what's causing the warming. If the warming was caused by a brightening sun or reduced sulphate pollution, you'd still see a hot spot."

Understanding the significance of the tropospheric hot spot

<p>Satellite measurements match model results apart from in the tropics. There is uncertainty with the tropic data due to how various teams correct for satellite drift. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program conclude the discrepancy is most likely due to data errors.</p>

skepticalscience.com

And the Hot Spot has been found

"...the “missing hot spot” has finally been found."

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found

Climate models have been criticised because observations could not find the predicted “hot spot” of strong warming in the troposphere. But analyses now show that the tropospheric hot spot is indeed real.

theconversation.com

No Hot Spot exist.

Wrong

No Positive Feedback Loop exist.

Wrong.

That is the reality.

Nope.

 

[Sunsettommy]

The Hot Spot has nothing specifically to do with AGW or greenhouse warming. It should be present for warming from ANY source.

"When the surface warms, there's more evaporation and more moisture in the air. This decreases the lapse rate - there's less cooling aloft. This means warming aloft is greater than warming at the surface. This amplified trend is the hot spot. It's all to do with changes in the lapse rate, regardless of what's causing the warming. If the warming was caused by a brightening sun or reduced sulphate pollution, you'd still see a hot spot."

Understanding the significance of the tropospheric hot spot

<p>Satellite measurements match model results apart from in the tropics. There is uncertainty with the tropic data due to how various teams correct for satellite drift. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program conclude the discrepancy is most likely due to data errors.</p>

skepticalscience.com

And the Hot Spot has been found

"...the “missing hot spot” has finally been found."

Climate meme debunked as the ‘tropospheric hot spot’ is found

Climate models have been criticised because observations could not find the predicted “hot spot” of strong warming in the troposphere. But analyses now show that the tropospheric hot spot is indeed real.

theconversation.com

Wrong

Wrong.

Nope.

The NOAA doesn't accept the claims a fact you ignored which is why Sherwoods paper was savaged because it was STUPID sad that you and cartoon asshole Cook will lie away this inconvenience it is why you guys will lie when challenged but be very quiet hoping no one else sees it.

Integrated Global Radiosonde Archive (IGRA)​

LINK


You and dishonest SKS ignored what the IPCC specifically stated which I quoted in full:

Greenhouse gas forcing is expected to produce warming in the troposphere, cooling in the stratosphere, and, for transient simulations, somewhat more warming near the surface in the NH due to its larger land fraction, which has a shorter surface response time to the warming than do ocean regions (Figure 9.1c).

red bolding mine
Here is the data based chart from climate4you

The initial versions of satellite and radiosonde datasets suggested that the tropical surface had warmed more than the troposphere, while climate models consistently showed tropospheric amplification of surface warming in response to human-caused increases in well-mixed greenhouse gases, as shown by the diagrams above. This observation gave rise to deep concern, and resulted in a number of studies (e.g. NRC 2000) where strong attempts were made to find warming in the troposphere. As new data sets have been made available and new corrections introduced, the scientific literature have witnessed a number of attempts of reconciling the modelled and the observed atmospheric warming pattern. Conflicting conclusions have, however, been reached. Some scientists conclude that a discrepancy between modelled and observed trends in tropical lapse rates still exists, while other argue that there is no longer a serious discrepancy. A few key references on this debate are represented by Lindzen 1999 and 2007, NRC 2000, Douglass et al 2007, and Santer et al 2008. Ongoing web-based discussions can be followed here and here. This debate reflects the importance of the point raised by Lindzen (1999) on monitoring temperature changes at the height in the troposphere corresponding to an infrared optical depth near 1.

Diagram showing observed linear decadal temperature change at surface, 300 hPa and 200 hPa, between 20oN and 20oS, since January 1979. Data source: HadAT and HadCRUT4. Click here to compare with modelled altitudinal temperature change pattern for doubling atmospheric CO2. Last month included in analysis: December 2012. Last diagram update: 4 May 2013.



The three diagrams above (using data from HadAT and HadCRUT4) show the linear trend of the temperature change since 1979 between 20oN and 20oS to be ca. 0.00089oC/month at the surface, 0.00095oC/month at 300 hPa, and -0.00009oC/month at 200 hPa, corresponding to 0.10698, 0.11414 and -0.01022oC/decade, respectively (see bar chart above).

Thus, these radiosonde and surface meteorological data from the Equatorial region do not at the moment display the signature of enhanced greenhouse warming. With the observed warming rate of about 0.10698oC/decade at the surface, a warming rate of about 0.21-0.31oC/decade would have been expected at the 200 and 300 hPa levels to comply with the prognosis on this derived from the CO2 hypothesis.

LINK

 

[Crick]

The NOAA doesn't accept the claims a fact you ignored which is why Sherwoods paper was savaged because it was STUPID sad that you and cartoon asshole Cook will lie away this inconvenience it is why you guys will lie when challenged but be very quiet hoping no one else sees it.

Integrated Global Radiosonde Archive (IGRA)​

LINK


You and dishonest SKS ignored what the IPCC specifically stated which I quoted in full:



red bolding mine
Here is the data based chart from climate4you

The initial versions of satellite and radiosonde datasets suggested that the tropical surface had warmed more than the troposphere, while climate models consistently showed tropospheric amplification of surface warming in response to human-caused increases in well-mixed greenhouse gases, as shown by the diagrams above. This observation gave rise to deep concern, and resulted in a number of studies (e.g. NRC 2000) where strong attempts were made to find warming in the troposphere. As new data sets have been made available and new corrections introduced, the scientific literature have witnessed a number of attempts of reconciling the modelled and the observed atmospheric warming pattern. Conflicting conclusions have, however, been reached. Some scientists conclude that a discrepancy between modelled and observed trends in tropical lapse rates still exists, while other argue that there is no longer a serious discrepancy. A few key references on this debate are represented by Lindzen 1999 and 2007, NRC 2000, Douglass et al 2007, and Santer et al 2008. Ongoing web-based discussions can be followed here and here. This debate reflects the importance of the point raised by Lindzen (1999) on monitoring temperature changes at the height in the troposphere corresponding to an infrared optical depth near 1.






View attachment 852447

Diagram showing observed linear decadal temperature change at surface, 300 hPa and 200 hPa, between 20oN and 20oS, since January 1979. Data source: HadAT and HadCRUT4. Click here to compare with modelled altitudinal temperature change pattern for doubling atmospheric CO2. Last month included in analysis: December 2012. Last diagram update: 4 May 2013.



The three diagrams above (using data from HadAT and HadCRUT4) show the linear trend of the temperature change since 1979 between 20oN and 20oS to be ca. 0.00089oC/month at the surface, 0.00095oC/month at 300 hPa, and -0.00009oC/month at 200 hPa, corresponding to 0.10698, 0.11414 and -0.01022oC/decade, respectively (see bar chart above).

Thus, these radiosonde and surface meteorological data from the Equatorial region do not at the moment display the signature of enhanced greenhouse warming. With the observed warming rate of about 0.10698oC/decade at the surface, a warming rate of about 0.21-0.31oC/decade would have been expected at the 200 and 300 hPa levels to comply with the prognosis on this derived from the CO2 hypothesis.

LINK

Have you looked at the dates in the text you posted?

 

[FA_Q2]

Funny that this thread runs into a single data point trying to refute an entire field of research that includes millions of those details all in order to avoid a simple fact: the thread OP and premise was an outright lie.

 

[Crick]

Funny that this thread runs into a single data point trying to refute an entire field of research that includes millions of those details all in order to avoid a simple fact: the thread OP and premise was an outright lie.

What data point? The Tropospheric Hot Spot

 

[FA_Q2]

What data point? The Tropospheric Hot Spot

Yes, that is what he keeps going back to as if it refutes AGW in totality and as if it addressed the simple reality that the title is a fabrication.

 

[Crick]

Yes, that is what he keeps going back to as if it refutes AGW in totality and as if it addressed the simple reality that the title is a fabrication.

Okay. Then he missed:

Climate scientists find elusive tropospheric hot spot

Researchers have published results in Environmental Research Letters confirming strong warming in the upper troposphere, known colloquially as the tropospheric hotspot. The hot has been long expected as part of global warming theory and appears in many global climate models.

phys.org

ShieldSquare Captcha

Climate scientists find elusive tropospheric hot spot

newsroom.unsw.edu.au

Spatiotemporal changes in tropospheric nitrogen dioxide hotspot due to emission switch-off condition in the view of lockdown emergency in India - Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health

The COVID-19 outbreak has elicited forced lockdown conditions for all anthropogenic emissions across the globe. It has brought an opportunity for the researchers to sort out the relative contribution of the environmental pollutants which are emerged from the coal-based thermal power plants and...

link.springer.com

Satellite-detected tropospheric nitrogen dioxide and spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Northern Italy

Following the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome CoronaVirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) last December 2019 in China, Italy was the first European country to be severely affected, with the first local case diagnosed on 20 February 2020. The virus spread ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

New study finds a hot spot in the atmosphere | John Abraham

John Abraham: The temperature in the tropical atmosphere is rising roughly 80% faster than at the Earth’s surface

www.theguardian.com

Persistent Hot Spot Detection and Characterisation Using SLSTR

Gas flaring is a disposal process widely used in the oil extraction and processing industry. It consists in the burning of unwanted gas at the tip of a stack and due to its thermal characteristic and the thermal emission it is possible to observe and to quantify it from space. Spaceborne...

www.mdpi.com

Tropospheric hot spot?

I think I might just briefly mention the recent Sherwood & Nishant paper, Atmospheric changes through 2012 as shown by iteratively homogenized radiosonde temperature and wind data, which appear…

andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2021EF002027

 

[ding]

View attachment 851719

welcome | Sea Level Research Group

sealevel.colorado.edu

So no different from any other interglacial period.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Climate Emergency is just another way of saying the US economy needs to kill itself to Make China Great Again

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Man made climate change is not a "myth".

It is a scam and a religion all tied up in one.

Even L. Ron Hubbard would be zealous of this scam religion that so many yokels have fallen for.

It’s one that’s Made in China too. Apparently American CO2 is different because it’s Per Capita CO2