Is there a Scientific Theory to explain Climate Change?

[frigidweirdo]

This is about as pathetic as pathetic gets but given what is at stake for the Co2 fraud, it is what they have decided to do....



One million years ago all of Canada down to Indiana was covered with ice age glacier. That melted. Maps linked.

Two million years ago, the top of Northern Greenland was completely green. DNA sample linked....

Pine cones under the thickest portion of Greenland's ice carbon date 400-800k years ago - link included - proving the center of Greenland went from green to ice age during that time.

Common history - Vikings farmed on Greenland until the 1400s when the ice age reached its current location and forced them to leave because they could no longer grow crops.



DURING THE PAST MILLION YEARS, GREENLAND FROZE WHILE NORTH AMERICA THAWED


Since that truth blows away Co2 and Sun, the FRAUD's taxpayer funded liars are all here shouting down, asking questions answered over and over, trolling, and flat out lying....


Your problem, FW, is that you do not understand that your "cycles" are completely destroyed by the data....

Your cycles are bullshit. Earth does not warm and cool all at once. There is a reason why land in Greenland is covered with ice that is way south of Alaska. That is because Greenland is within 600 miles of a pole and hence is in continent specific ice age. Can you explain why there is ice on Greenland hundreds of miles south of Alaska, which has no such ice? Your "cycles" theory is WRONG, as is the Co2 explanation AND the Sun....

You said that maps are linked, I see no links or any maps.

 

[EMH]

LOL!!!

Again, look, instead of lying and asking again...

north american ice age - Google Search

 

[EMH]

After that area moved more than 600 miles from the pole? Or before?

That is how it starts. It starts 600 miles from the pole. Then it grows. Once it starts growing the entire area creates a new layer each year (what we find in ICE CORES).

Using 29 million years ago as the first time ice from Northern Canada reached Chicago, it would melt in Chicago, and then ice behind it would move forward to fill in.

The ice in Chicago 25k years ago was likely a million plus years old at the bottom of the glacier, and new at the top...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That is how it starts. It starts 600 miles from the pole. Then it grows. Once it starts growing the entire area creates a new layer each year (what we find in ICE CORES).

Using 29 million years ago as the first time ice from Northern Canada reached Chicago, it would melt in Chicago, and then ice behind it would move forward to fill in.

The ice in Chicago 25k years ago was likely a million plus years old at the bottom of the glacier, and new at the top...

Using 29 million years ago as the first time ice from Northern Canada reached Chicago, it would melt in Chicago, and then ice behind it would move forward to fill in.

If it melts in Chicago and Chicago is more than 600 miles from the pole,
your own theory says that it's impossible for it to cover Chicago again.

The ice in Chicago 25k years ago was likely a million plus years old at the bottom of the glacier, and new at the top...

Any evidence to back up the claim that million year old ice existed 25000 years ago?

 

[EMH]

LOL!!!

Toddster is obviously not interested in anything but lying and continuing to push the Co2 fraud on the American people....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

LOL!!!

Toddster is obviously not interested in anything but lying and continuing to push the Co2 fraud on the American people....

I enjoy pointing out the obvious holes in your silly theory.

 

[EMH]

I enjoy pointing out the obvious holes in your silly theory.

You haven't made a small dent yet.

None of you have. Fudge is fudge.


Greenland froze while North America thawed


proving

everyone claiming the ENTIRE PLANET WARMS AND COOLS AS ONE are completely fucking WRONG....


which disproves

Co2

and


Sun

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You haven't made a small dent yet.

None of you have. Fudge is fudge.


Greenland froze while North America thawed


proving

everyone claiming the ENTIRE PLANET WARMS AND COOLS AS ONE are completely fucking WRONG....


which disproves

Co2

and


Sun

Greenland froze while North America thawed

That means so much.

So, we can only have a glacier on Chicago when it's within 600 miles of the pole
and it can only melt when it's further than 600 miles away? And once it melts,
it can't return when Chicago is further than 600 miles from the pole?

Try to keep your answers brief.

 

[Kilroy2]

warmers can't prove it. How's that?

Yet there is the Paris accord agreement signed by The EU and its Member States are among the close to 190 Parties to the Paris Agreement.

So what do non believers have. Oh anti warmers can't prove it so there is no need to.

 

[Kilroy2]

Ours is the usual claim based on treating the evidence in a usual manner ... temperatures have gone up 1ºC in the past 140 years ... where has climate changed? ... we "expect" temperatures to rise another 1ºC in the next 140 years ... where will climate change? ... if both answers above are "no where" ... then climate isn't changing ... what more proof do you need? ...

Let's see your proof that man has a MEASURABLE effect on the weather ... and show your math ... (hint: think "clearcutting") ...

Sorry your just quoting the average temperature between the high and lows and your using Celsius. The number looks small but it is larger in Fahrenheit Still you have the surface temperature which has records dated starting in 1880 and the atmospheric temperatures readings which began in 1979. Then there is water temperatures. Sea levels have risen 4 to 10 inches in the last 100 years as heat causes water to expand. Most of this come from ice melting.

Ice Sheets | NASA Global Climate Change

Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. Current news and data streams about global warming and climate change from NASA.

climate.nasa.gov

When fossil fuels are burned, they release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This is a greenhouse gas and greenhouses gases trap heat in our atmosphere.

You see how sources work?

 

[jc456]

Yet there is the Paris accord agreement signed by The EU and its Member States are among the close to 190 Parties to the Paris Agreement.

So what do non believers have. Oh anti warmers can't prove it so there is no need to.

What’s your question?

 

[Crick]

everyone claiming the ENTIRE PLANET WARMS AND COOLS AS ONE are completely fucking WRONG....

Who do you believe has claimed that the entire planet warms and cools as one?

Climate change - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

World of Change: Global Temperatures

The average global temperature has increased by a little more than 1° Celsius (2° Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975.

earthobservatory.nasa.gov

Climate Change: Global Temperature

Earth's surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850. It may seem like a small change, but it's a tremendous increase in stored heat.

www.climate.gov

 

[Kilroy2]

What’s your question?

No question just statement of facts

 

[EMH]

Who do you believe has claimed that the entire planet warms and cools as one?

Climate change - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

World of Change: Global Temperatures

The average global temperature has increased by a little more than 1° Celsius (2° Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975.

earthobservatory.nasa.gov

Climate Change: Global Temperature

Earth's surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850. It may seem like a small change, but it's a tremendous increase in stored heat.

www.climate.gov

Fudge fudge fudge and

still

precisely

NO WARMING in the ATMOSPHERE
NO WARMING in the OCEANS
NO NET ICE MELT
NO OCEAN RISE
NO BREAKOUT IN CANE ACTIVITY


The people who still fall for Co2 are the same idiots who think covid is still here and believe the official version of 911...

They are MORONS...

 

[Crick]

Fudge fudge fudge and

still

precisely

NO WARMING in the ATMOSPHERE
NO WARMING in the OCEANS
NO NET ICE MELT
NO OCEAN RISE
NO BREAKOUT IN CANE ACTIVITY


The people who still fall for Co2 are the same idiots who think covid is still here and believe the official version of 911...

They are MORONS...

Why didn't you answer my question? Who do you believe has stated that the world warms and cools as a whole?

 

[EMH]

greenhouses gases trap heat in our atmosphere.

And so your "greenhouse gas" increased in the atmosphere, and the two and only two measures of atmospheric temps both showed

NO WARMING

Science - THEORY REJECTED

Your side = fudge the data and keep lying...

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

Co2 absorbs WEAK IR EM. That does NOTHING according to the DATA, the preFUDGED data....

 

[Crick]

And so your "greenhouse gas" increased in the atmosphere, and the two and only two measures of atmospheric temps both showed

NO WARMING

Science - THEORY REJECTED

Your side = fudge the data and keep lying...

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

Co2 absorbs WEAK IR EM. That does NOTHING according to the DATA, the preFUDGED data....

Your link refutes your statement and its from 2005.

And I'd still like to know who you believe says that the Earth warms and cools as a whole?

 

[EMH]

Your link refutes your statement and its from 2005.

And I'd still like to know who you believe says that the Earth warms and cools as a whole?

Not exactly...

The link correctly states that the highly correlated satellite and balloon data showed precisely NO WARMING during a time of rising Co2.

Your side had a choice.

Admit the THEORY is WRONG and terminate all government funding for it

or

FUDGE the data with bullshit uncorrelated "corrections" and keep the FRAUD going...


What do you think they decided to do...???




Co2 and Sun are planetary. Their effect is not localized. Co2 is entirely planetary. The Sun has a longitudinal curve but is constant. Neither explains the data


GREENLAND FROZE WHILE NORTH AMERICA THAWED




Which proves that any PLANETARY THEORY is WRONG...

 

[Crick]

Not exactly...

The link correctly states that the highly correlated satellite and balloon data showed precisely NO WARMING during a time of rising Co2.

Your side had a choice.

Admit the THEORY is WRONG and terminate all government funding for it

or

FUDGE the data with bullshit uncorrelated "corrections" and keep the FRAUD going...


What do you think they decided to do...???




Co2 and Sun are planetary. Their effect is not localized. Co2 is entirely planetary. The Sun has a longitudinal curve but is constant. Neither explains the data


GREENLAND FROZE WHILE NORTH AMERICA THAWED




Which proves that any PLANETARY THEORY is WRONG...

Your link states NO SUCH THING. Here is its concluding paragraph:

But in another Science paper published today, Carl Mears and Rank Wentz, scientists at the California-based Remote Sensing Systems, examined the same data and identified an error in Spencer's analysis technique.
After correcting for the mistake, the researchers obtained fundamentally different results: whereas Spencer's analysis showed a cooling of the Earth's troposphere, the new analysis revealed a warming.
Using the analysis from Mears and Wentz, Santer showed that the new data was consistent with climate models and theories.
"When people come up with extraordinary claims -- like the troposphere is cooling -- then you demand extraordinary proof," Santer said. "What's happening now is that people around the world are subjecting these data sets to the scrutiny they need."

And, having made the claim that scientists are falsifying data dozens of time here, I think it is time that you provide some supporting references.

 

[ReinyDays]

Sorry your just quoting the average temperature between the high and lows and your using Celsius. The number looks small but it is larger in Fahrenheit Still you have the surface temperature which has records dated starting in 1880 and the atmospheric temperatures readings which began in 1979. Then there is water temperatures. Sea levels have risen 4 to 10 inches in the last 100 years as heat causes water to expand. Most of this come from ice melting.

Ice Sheets | NASA Global Climate Change

Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. Current news and data streams about global warming and climate change from NASA.

climate.nasa.gov

When fossil fuels are burned, they release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This is a greenhouse gas and greenhouses gases trap heat in our atmosphere.

View attachment 771620


You see how sources work?

Actually ... we use kelvins in science ... NOAA gives 13ºC for the 20th Century average ... we'd use 286 K in our radiative physics equations ... so in SB, the T^4 term is 6,690,585,616, not 28,561 ... [rolls eyes] ... we wouldn't use Fahrenheit either, 55ºF is the same as 405º Richter ... maybe this isn't taught anymore in chemistry class ... more lost knowledge to keep the cgs system company I guess ... I may be the only one here who knows what a torr of atmospheric pressure is ...

Anyway ... kelvin uses the same scale as Celsius ... a degree change kelvin is exactly equal to a degree change Centigrade ... thus the two are interchangeable when addressing change in the scientific literature ...

This is a greenhouse gas and greenhouses gases trap heat in our atmosphere.

How much? .. and show your math ... I'm very curious what you're using for a constant of proportionality that's scaled in Fahrenheit ...

=====

ETA: My answer to the OP is "yes" ... and this AGW Theory is scientifically sound ... shine a light on a vessel of atmospheric gases and see what happens ...