Is there a Scientific Theory to explain Climate Change?

Actually ... we use kelvins in science
Or, more accurately, science uses Kelvin in thermodynamics.
... NOAA gives 13ºC for the 20th Century average
For instance, it seems these NOAA scientists are still using Celsius.
... 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]
Rolls eyes.
... we wouldn't use Fahrenheit either, 55ºF is the same as 405º Richter
Did you perhaps mean Rankin or Rankine? Richter is the scale for earthquakes. And the Rankin equivalent for 55F is 514.67R (add 459.67 to F)
... 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 ...
You're not. But you may be the only one egotistical enough to have made such a comment..
 
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 ...



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 ...
Show the math for what. I just was making a comment on your comment.

Still you did use a measurement that is based on the average for the whole planet which implies something that can be misinterpreted.
 
After correcting for the mistake


LOL....

Translation ....



R.27c7605f4fecef6ccfb46c7ea0930b8d

Fudge Recipe With Sweetened Condensed Milk And Cocoa Powder | Besto Blog

Fudge Recipe With Sweetened Condensed Milk And Cocoa Powder | Besto Blog



 
This is complete BS and yup,

100% pure taxpayer funded



R.27c7605f4fecef6ccfb46c7ea0930b8d




ClimateDashboard_thumbnails_heat-trapping-gases-AGGI-graph-20210505-700x233px.jpg


greenhouse gases have risen

ClimateDashboard_thumbnails__atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-graph-20210505-700x322px.jpg


Carbon Dioxide levels are rising

ClimateDashboard_thumbnails__glacier-mass-balance-graph-20210505-700x322px.jpg


Ice loss from glaciers

Since 1980, the cumulative ice loss from a reference network of mountain glaciers is equivalent to slicing an 87-foot-thick slab off each glacier. The rate of loss is roughly doubling each decade.
 
Show the math for what. I just was making a comment on your comment.

Still you did use a measurement that is based on the average for the whole planet which implies something that can be misinterpreted.

Good thing every little detail used to make this determination is fully documented ... go through the procedures posted at NOAA's website and tell us which step is onerous to you ...

The math says climate isn't changing ... why do you think people say it is? ... other than they're uneducated in mathematics ... there's good reason to make climatology students pass two years of calculus ... and I see UCLA has added some abstract algebra to the requirements to get a degree in climatology there ... mapping matrices into the stress tensor is part and parcel of the science here in the 21st Century ... where've ya been? ...
 
Good thing every little detail used to make this determination is fully documented ... go through the procedures posted at NOAA's website and tell us which step is onerous to you ...

The math says climate isn't changing ... why do you think people say it is? ... other than they're uneducated in mathematics ... there's good reason to make climatology students pass two years of calculus ... and I see UCLA has added some abstract algebra to the requirements to get a degree in climatology there ... mapping matrices into the stress tensor is part and parcel of the science here in the 21st Century ... where've ya been? ...
What math says the climate isn't changing. Show your work. ; - )

But, really, what math says the climate isn't changing?
 
Last edited:



ClimateDashboard_thumbnails_heat-trapping-gases-AGGI-graph-20210505-700x233px.jpg


greenhouse gases have risen

ClimateDashboard_thumbnails__atmospheric-carbon-dioxide-graph-20210505-700x322px.jpg


Carbon Dioxide levels are rising

ClimateDashboard_thumbnails__glacier-mass-balance-graph-20210505-700x322px.jpg


Ice loss from glaciers

Since 1980, the cumulative ice loss from a reference network of mountain glaciers is equivalent to slicing an 87-foot-thick slab off each glacier. The rate of loss is roughly doubling each decade.






And that perfectly explains why there is NO OCEAN RISE....



The only thing PARROTING ever proves is that the individual doing the parroting has a BIRDBRAIN....
 
And that perfectly explains why there is NO OCEAN RISE....



The only thing PARROTING ever proves is that the individual doing the parroting has a BIRDBRAIN....
Your so hard on yourself but if you have a point state it instead of parroting it
 
Good thing every little detail used to make this determination is fully documented ... go through the procedures posted at NOAA's website and tell us which step is onerous to you ...

The math says climate isn't changing ... why do you think people say it is? ... other than they're uneducated in mathematics ... there's good reason to make climatology students pass two years of calculus ... and I see UCLA has added some abstract algebra to the requirements to get a degree in climatology there ... mapping matrices into the stress tensor is part and parcel of the science here in the 21st Century ... where've ya been? ...

Yet the folks such as those at epa.gov disagree. If you disagree then I guess that makes you the minority that disagrees.



Temperatures are rising, snow and rainfall patterns are shifting, and more extreme climate events – like heavy rainstorms and record high temperatures – are becoming more common. Many of these observed climate changes are linked to rising levels of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere, caused by human activities. EPA’s indicators provide evidence of these changes and their impacts on people and the environment.
 
Your so hard on yourself but if you have a point state it instead of parroting it


You show us some tangible visual evidence of a landmark that is "sinking" due to "ocean rise"


There is none, except lying about Islands approaching the PROF
 
Still waiting....


All this noise about ice melting and NO EVIDENCE the oceans are rising??


Just how DUMB do you have to be to fall for this crap?
 

Forum List

Back
Top