Climate Sensitivity per the IPCC

[EMH]

No warming?

Seriously.


You're an idiot.

LOL

THE DATA, not the FUDGE...

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.


Co2 went up, atmospheric temps did NOT.

THEORY REJECTED


FUDGE JOB is laughable, only works on science invalid MORONS like you!

 

[Crick]

LOL

THE DATA, not the FUDGE...

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.


Co2 went up, atmospheric temps did NOT.

THEORY REJECTED


FUDGE JOB is laughable, only works on science invalid MORONS like you!

What evidence has led you to conclude that Spencer and Christy's out of cal data is valid while the mountains and mountains of other data is not? Who told you one was the truth and the rest were lies? Did he have a glowing aura and float 6 inches above the ground?

 

[otto105]

LOL

THE DATA, not the FUDGE...

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.


Co2 went up, atmospheric temps did NOT.

THEORY REJECTED


FUDGE JOB is laughable, only works on science invalid MORONS like you!

You just posted a link to 2005.

And you so what to be taken seriously.


Again, can you post why no scientific organization supports your opinion.

 

[EMH]

What evidence has led you to conclude that Spencer and Christy's out of cal data is valid while the mountains and mountains of other data is not? Who told you one was the truth and the rest were lies? Did he have a glowing aura and float 6 inches above the ground?

Your "mountains and mountains" is FUDGE not DATA.

WE do NOT NEED 5000 fraudulent fudgebaking taxpayer funded liars to explain the following

Co2 in atmosphere went up

Highly correlated satellite and balloon data showed NO WARMING


The reason you cannot and will not answer my questions is because they lead to the correct conclusion, that Earth climate change is 99% about where land is, and Co2 does absolutely nothing, and Earth right now is not warming.

 

[EMH]

You just posted a link to 2005.

And you so what to be taken seriously.


Again, can you post why no scientific organization supports your opinion.

LOL!!!!


2005 is WHEN YOUR SIDE FUDGED THE ATMOSPHERIC DATA SHOWING NO WARMING.

Co2 went up

Atmospheric temps did not.

THEORY REJECTED

 

[ding]

Dude, answer the question. What is the current catalyst for warming which even you fuckups have acknowledged.

Also, comparing our current climate to one over a million years ago and a idiotic.

Natural climate variability. The geologic record is littered with examples of such.

 

[Crick]

Natural climate variability. The geologic record is littered with examples of such.

Here is a handy document to keep on hand: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/faqs/IPCC_AR6_WGI_FAQs_Compiled.pdf

FAQ 2.1 | The Earth’s Temperature Has Varied Before. How Is the Current Warming Any Different? Earth’s climate has always changed naturally, but both the global extent and rate of recent warming are unusual. The recent warming has reversed a slow, long-term cooling trend, and research indicates that global surface temperature is higher now than it has been for millennia. While climate can be characterized by many variables, temperature is a key indicator of the overall climate state, and global surface temperature is fundamental to characterizing and understanding global climate change, including Earth’s energy budget. A rich variety of geological evidence shows that temperature has changed throughout Earth’s history. A variety of natural archives from around the planet, such as ocean and lake sediments, glacier ice and tree rings, shows that there were times in the past when the planet was cooler, and times when it was warmer. While our confidence in quantifying large-scale temperature changes generally decreases the farther back in time we look, scientists can still identify at least four major differences between the recent warming and those of the past. It’s warming almost everywhere. During decades and centuries of the past 2000 years, some regions warmed more than the global average while, at the same time, other regions cooled. For example, between the 10th and 13th centuries, the North Atlantic region warmed more than many other regions. In contrast, the pattern of recent surface warming is globally more uniform than for other decadal to centennial climate fluctuations over at least the past two millennia. It’s warming rapidly. Over the past 2 million years, Earth’s climate has fluctuated between relatively warm interglacial periods and cooler glacial periods, when ice sheets grew over vast areas of the northern continents. Intervals of rapid warming coincided with the collapse of major ice sheets, heralding interglacial periods such as the present Holocene Epoch, which began about 12,000 years ago. During the shift from the last glacial period to the current interglacial, the total temperature increase was about 5°C. That change took about 5000 years, with a maximum warming rate of about 1.5°C per thousand years, although the transition was not smooth. In contrast, Earth’s surface has warmed approximately 1.1°C since 1850–1900. However, even the best reconstruction of global surface temperature during the last deglacial period is too coarsely resolved for direct comparison with a period as short as the past 150 years. But for the past 2000 years, we have higher-resolution records that show that the rate of global warming during the last 50 years has exceeded the rate of any other 50-year period. Recent warming reversed a long-term global cooling trend. Following the last major glacial period, global surface temperature peaked by around 6500 years ago, then slowly cooled. The long-term cooling trend was punctuated by warmer decades and centuries. These fluctuations were minor compared with the persistent and prominent warming that began in the mid-19th century when the millennial-scale cooling trend was reversed. It’s been a long time since it’s been this warm. Averaged over the globe, surface temperatures of the past decade were probably warmer than when the long cooling trend began around 6500 years ago. If so, we need to look back to at least the previous interglacial period, around 125,000 years ago, to find evidence for multi-centennial global surface temperatures that were warmer than now. Previous temperature fluctuations were caused by large-scale natural processes, while the current warming is largely due to human causes (see, for example, FAQ 1.3, FAQ 3.1). But understanding how and why temperatures have changed in the past is critical for understanding the current warming and how human and natural influences will interact to determine what happens in the future. Studying past climate changes also makes it clear that, unlike previous climate changes, the effects of recent warming are occurring on top of stresses that make humans and nature vulnerable to changes in ways that they have never before experienced (for example, see FAQ 11.2, FAQ12.3).

 

[ding]

Here is a handy document to keep on hand: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/faqs/IPCC_AR6_WGI_FAQs_Compiled.pdf

FAQ 2.1 | The Earth’s Temperature Has Varied Before. How Is the Current Warming Any Different? Earth’s climate has always changed naturally, but both the global extent and rate of recent warming are unusual. The recent warming has reversed a slow, long-term cooling trend, and research indicates that global surface temperature is higher now than it has been for millennia. While climate can be characterized by many variables, temperature is a key indicator of the overall climate state, and global surface temperature is fundamental to characterizing and understanding global climate change, including Earth’s energy budget. A rich variety of geological evidence shows that temperature has changed throughout Earth’s history. A variety of natural archives from around the planet, such as ocean and lake sediments, glacier ice and tree rings, shows that there were times in the past when the planet was cooler, and times when it was warmer. While our confidence in quantifying large-scale temperature changes generally decreases the farther back in time we look, scientists can still identify at least four major differences between the recent warming and those of the past. It’s warming almost everywhere. During decades and centuries of the past 2000 years, some regions warmed more than the global average while, at the same time, other regions cooled. For example, between the 10th and 13th centuries, the North Atlantic region warmed more than many other regions. In contrast, the pattern of recent surface warming is globally more uniform than for other decadal to centennial climate fluctuations over at least the past two millennia. It’s warming rapidly. Over the past 2 million years, Earth’s climate has fluctuated between relatively warm interglacial periods and cooler glacial periods, when ice sheets grew over vast areas of the northern continents. Intervals of rapid warming coincided with the collapse of major ice sheets, heralding interglacial periods such as the present Holocene Epoch, which began about 12,000 years ago. During the shift from the last glacial period to the current interglacial, the total temperature increase was about 5°C. That change took about 5000 years, with a maximum warming rate of about 1.5°C per thousand years, although the transition was not smooth. In contrast, Earth’s surface has warmed approximately 1.1°C since 1850–1900. However, even the best reconstruction of global surface temperature during the last deglacial period is too coarsely resolved for direct comparison with a period as short as the past 150 years. But for the past 2000 years, we have higher-resolution records that show that the rate of global warming during the last 50 years has exceeded the rate of any other 50-year period. Recent warming reversed a long-term global cooling trend. Following the last major glacial period, global surface temperature peaked by around 6500 years ago, then slowly cooled. The long-term cooling trend was punctuated by warmer decades and centuries. These fluctuations were minor compared with the persistent and prominent warming that began in the mid-19th century when the millennial-scale cooling trend was reversed. It’s been a long time since it’s been this warm. Averaged over the globe, surface temperatures of the past decade were probably warmer than when the long cooling trend began around 6500 years ago. If so, we need to look back to at least the previous interglacial period, around 125,000 years ago, to find evidence for multi-centennial global surface temperatures that were warmer than now. Previous temperature fluctuations were caused by large-scale natural processes, while the current warming is largely due to human causes (see, for example, FAQ 1.3, FAQ 3.1). But understanding how and why temperatures have changed in the past is critical for understanding the current warming and how human and natural influences will interact to determine what happens in the future. Studying past climate changes also makes it clear that, unlike previous climate changes, the effects of recent warming are occurring on top of stresses that make humans and nature vulnerable to changes in ways that they have never before experienced (for example, see FAQ 11.2, FAQ12.3).

That's nice. The planet cooled for millions of years with atmospheric CO2 greater than 600 ppm and the previous interglacial periods were 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less atmospheric CO2 than today. Those are established facts that no one disputes except you and apu.

 

[otto105]

Your "mountains and mountains" is FUDGE not DATA.

WE do NOT NEED 5000 fraudulent fudgebaking taxpayer funded liars to explain the following

Co2 in atmosphere went up

Highly correlated satellite and balloon data showed NO WARMING


The reason you cannot and will not answer my questions is because they lead to the correct conclusion, that Earth climate change is 99% about where land is, and Co2 does absolutely nothing, and Earth right now is not warming.

No warming?

Show your idiotic source since we can all see that you're an idiot.

 

[Crick]

That's nice. The planet cooled for millions of years with atmospheric CO2 greater than 600 ppm and the previous interglacial periods were 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less atmospheric CO2 than today. Those are established facts that no one disputes except you and apu.

I have never disputed your claim. I couldn't because you've never identified the point in time in which you claim those conditions were present. And you have received responses from Abu Afak, Mamooth and several other posters that explain what factors mainstream science believes drove Earth's climate through history. There is no conflict with AGW theory. That you think you've refuted AGW - because you're so much smarter than all those scientists - really looks to verge on a mental illness.

 

[otto105]

LOL!!!!


2005 is WHEN YOUR SIDE FUDGED THE ATMOSPHERIC DATA SHOWING NO WARMING.

Co2 went up

Atmospheric temps did not.

THEORY REJECTED

Hilarious.

Feel very free to use actual science to refute this.

2019 Was the Second Warmest Year on Record

 

[otto105]

Natural climate variability. The geologic record is littered with examples of such.

So, just a coincidence?

That's you answer to our current warming?

 

[EMH]

No warming?

Show your idiotic source since we can all see that you're an idiot.

Shown over 100 times. Asking over and over for the same link is trolling.

 

[EMH]

Hilarious.

Feel very free to use actual science to refute this.

2019 Was the Second Warmest Year on Record

LOL!!!

Um, OK, you claim oceans are warming, and if they were warming there would be more and larger hurricanes, which is NOT the case because the 1940s are still the strongest decade for canes on record...

U.S. Hurricane Strikes by Decade

and the last time homO and Big Mike's beachfront property on MV got hit by Cat 5 gusts was 1938, the last time a Cat 5 got that far north on your "warming" planet...

1938 hurricane - Google Search

If Earth was actually warming, there would be an ongoing net ice melt and oceans would be rising, but there you are again with a "claim" and NO EVIDENCE to support it, because your side

CANNOT SHOW A PHOTO OF A SINGLE LANDMARK SINKING DUE TO YOUR BOGUS "OCEAN RISE..."


The variable in control of Earth climate change is not Co2, which does nothing, it is ice, and ice is all about where land is...

90% on Antarctica
7% on Greenland


and then you will tell us Antarctica is "melting" except you have NO LIQUID WATER there....


LOL!!!

 

[ding]

I have never disputed your claim. I couldn't because you've never identified the point in time in which you claim those conditions were present. And you have received responses from Abu Afak, Mamooth and several other posters that explain what factors mainstream science believes drove Earth's climate through history. There is no conflict with AGW theory. That you think you've refuted AGW - because you're so much smarter than all those scientists - really looks to verge on a mental illness.

You literally reported the graphic that showed it as spam, dummy.

 

[ding]

So, just a coincidence?

That's you answer to our current warming?

Yes, that's exactly it. They have mistaken a natural warming trend - of which the geologic record is littered with - for man made global warming. As such their dire predictions - one of which is a tripling of sea level rise by the end of the decade - will be proven wrong by time.

 

[otto105]

Shown over 100 times. Asking over and over for the same link is trolling.

Sure, failing to produce it means it must be like those 17 tapes or missing whistleblower.

 

[otto105]

Yes, that's exactly it. They have mistaken a natural warming trend - of which the geologic record is littered with - for man made global warming. As such their dire predictions - one of which is a tripling of sea level rise by the end of the decade - will be proven wrong by time.

When you have nothing, you offer nothing.

 

[EMH]

Sure, failing to produce it means it must be like those 17 tapes or missing whistleblower.

LOL!!!

We have TWO and ONLY TWO measures of atmospheric temperatures, satellites since the 1970s, and over 100 years from weather balloons.

For the first twenty years of Algore's fraud and long before it started, both the balloons and the satellites have shown NO WARMING in the atmosphere. Since the satellites went up in the 1970s, their data has correlated with the balloons, both showing a cooler than normal atmosphere during Bill Clinton's "warmest ever year in 1998." Since NBC is not journalism they slanted their piece, but it doesn't fool anyone with a working brain....

Your outside thermometer says (according to NBC "suggested") 80F. You have two choices. One, accept that it is 80F outside. Two, allow a biased, politicized narrative driven taxpayer funded "scientist" to "correct" that to 90F....

LOL!!!

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data



So, let's be clear here. The theory is that increasing atmospheric Co2 would warm the atmosphere. The DATA said NO. NOT HAPPENING.

So they fudged, and they fudged with pathetic excuses and lies. "Orbit wobble" on satellites wouldn't change the reading of the IR sensors. "Shade issues" claimed on balloons would be a one time length of period adjustment, not a slant from a flat line.


Theory - increasing atmospheric Co2 would warm atmosphere

Evidence - None, data completely refuted theory, FUDGE was used in place of truth

 

[ding]

When you have nothing, you offer nothing.

Given that the geologic record is littered with examples of warming and cooling trends that we know for certain were not caused by orbital forcing or the radiative forcing of CO2 and given that the previous interglacials were 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less atmospheric CO2 than today and given the fact that the planet cooled for millions of years with atmospheric CO2 greater than 600 ppm, it doesn't sound like nothing to me. To me it sounds like a damn good reason to question their computer models which by their own admission are running too hot too fast.