Even you admit that adding CO2 to the atmosphere produces warming. Claiming that it does cause warming and then that it doesn't, doesn't make you look particularly rational.
James Hansen Wishes he Wasn’t So Right about Global Warming
- Thread starter abu afak
- Start date
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 80,095
- 59,048
- 3,565
1C of incremental theoretical surface temperature per doubling of CO2. Yes, I agree with that.
That is exactly my point. The majority of the observed warming is from natural causes. Specifically the deglaciation of the northern hemisphere.
When heat is circulated from the Atlantic to the Arctic the northern hemisphere deglaciates and the planet warms.
When heat is not being circulated from the Atlantic to the Arctic the northern hemisphere glaciates and the planet cools.
The majority opinion is that the primary cause of the warming is human CO2 emissions. (1) What natural cause do you believe would increase atmospheric IR backscatter and decrease IR escaping to space - as directly observed by instruments on the ground and in orbit?
(2)Doesn't that process also cool the equatorial zone? (3)Does that cool the planet? (4)And how does either process alter the flux of energy escaping to space?
(5)Doesn't THAT process cause the equatorial region to heat up? (6)Does that warm the planet? (7)And how does either process alter the flux of energy escaping to space?
And, hey, if you're not going to answer any of those questions, just tell me so I don't have to waste my time dealing with your bullshit.
EMH
Diamond Member
- Apr 5, 2021
- 22,301
- 13,521
- 2,288
- Banned
- #387
Opinion is not DATA. What did the DATA say?
We have two and only two measures of atmospheric temps, satellites and balloons. Both showed precisely NO WARMING in the atmosphere in highly correlated fashion despite rising Co2 for decades. Then your Co2 FRAUD FUDGED BOTH....
Your side has OPINIONS that YOUR OWN DATA COMPLETELY REFUTES....
The opinion was based on the data fool.
No. YOU have two and only two measures of atmospheric temperatures and both have been repudiated, even by their authors.
In disagreement with all other data collected on the planet and eventually shown to be in error
Mainstream science figured out what was wrong with those data and corrected them. And when the correction was applied, they fell in with all the other data.
YOU have faulty data. Have you noticed that not even the staunchest denier scientists shares your beliefs concerning those data? NO ONE shares your beliefs concerning those data. Do you actually think you're the ONLY person on planet Earth that knows the truth?
EMH
Diamond Member
- Apr 5, 2021
- 22,301
- 13,521
- 2,288
- Banned
- #389
FUDGE is not data.
Translation - the Co2 FRAUD has ZERO actual evidence that increasing atmospheric Co2 causes warming, so it "repudiated" the data... by FUDGING it with laughable BULLSHIT
LOL!!!!!
The "other data" NOT FROM THE ATMOSPHERE includes the following...
FUDGE that claims ocean warming despite no breakout in cane activity, which proves oceans are NOT WARMING
Deliberate misinterpretation of Urban Heat Island Effect, the ONLY ACTUAL WARMING BACKED BY ACTUAL DATA
because Earth climate data continues to read as follows
NO WARMING in the ATMOSPHERE
NO WARMING in the OCEANS
NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT
NO BREAKOUT IN CANES
NO OCEAN RISE
What your call "mainstream science" cannot even answer the most basic climate questions, fudges data, lies, and has made dozens of predictions that are already proven 100% WRONG
What you define as "faulty" is really THE ACTUAL DATA REFUTING THE CO2 FRAUD
and what you define as "good data" is 100% PURE FUDGED FRAUD
You have never presented one shred of evidence that any temperature data have been deceptively manipulated.
It has some very basic physics. Most 6th graders could explain it to you.
That you consistently go with "evidence" several times removed from directly measurable parameters is an extremely strong indication that what you're pushing doesn't even rise to the bar for pseudo-science. It's simple bullshit.
How much impact does urban heat island effect have on SSTs?
Where are your DATA? Where are your atmospheric temperature data? Where are your sea surface temperature data? Where are your deep ocean data? Where are you sea level data?
That would be a lie.
That would be a lie.
That would be a lie
That would be a lie.
The man who collected that data, one of the staunchest global warming deniers out there, says time to give it up fool
A claim for which you have never presented a single atom of evidence.
EMH
Diamond Member
- Apr 5, 2021
- 22,301
- 13,521
- 2,288
- Banned
- #391
Absolute crap. The most important one, the atmospheric temps.... busted over and over by NBC no less....
Hurricane data = strongest decade 1940s, second strongest 1890s, so why is Co2 FRAUD claiming canes are increasing?
LOL!!
IR is IR, whether it is 100 miles away or 100 miles and 12 feet away....
A "shade issue" on a balloon is a CONSTANT. If "real" it would be "corrected" by a CONSTANT added or subtracted to ALL DATA, which would keep a FLAT LINE a FLAT LINE, yet somehow this FUDGE twisted a flat line into an upward slope... complete FUDGE FRAUD BULLSHIT!!!
Before you fudged it in 2005, NBC even admitted it...
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
Translation - the highly correlated satellite and balloon data showed NO WARMING in highly correlated fashion for decades of rising Co2
and the term "suggested" is like you coming to Nashville today and saying the thermometer "suggests" it is really 84F outside, but as a taxpayer funded "top climate scientist" you have to "correct" that to 104 so your Co2 FRAUD can claim "warming" that does not exist.
NBC? That's where you go for global temperature data? Have you tried the National Enquirer? The Washington Times? WUWT? NewsMax? Breitbart? Daily Caller? Bongino? Fox News?
Why do you continue to lie about actual temperature data?
And what is that supposed to mean? Please explain how you apparently come to conclude that the greenhouse effect doesn't exist or that it doesn't exist for CO2 or whatever the fuck it is you actually believe.
Why don't we have a look at some of the details of your "highly correlated" data and the biases they were found to contain. As for your flat line, allow me to point you to the term "drift"
Error Estimates of Version 5.0 of MSU–AMSU Bulk Atmospheric Temperatures
Abstract Deep-layer temperatures derived from satellite-borne microwave sensors since 1979 are revised (version 5.0) to account for 1) a change from microwave sounding units (MSUs) to the advanced MSUs (AMSUs) and 2) an improved diurnal drift adjustment for tropospheric products. AMSU data...
Reducing Noise in the MSU Daily Lower-Tropospheric Global Temperature Dataset
Abstract The daily global-mean values of the lower-tropospheric temperature determined from microwave emissions measured by satellites are examined in terms of their signal, noise, and signal-to-noise ratio. Daily and 30-day average noise estimates are reduced by almost 50% and 35%...
Do you mean the article that states "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."Before you fudged it in 2005, NBC even admitted it...
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.
Satellite and balloon data that underwent faulty analyses.
Translation: you're an ignorant schizo.
Ignorant, LYING schizo.
They are wrong. They are attributing all warming to CO2 and ignoring natural climate fluctuations cause by ocean currents. In fact they don't even consider the ocean at all which is ludicrous.
The data shows - without question - that the ocean and the atmosphere cools when the northern hemisphere glaciates and warms when the northern hemisphere deglaciates. There is physical evidence that shows ocean currents are responsible for the northern hemisphere glaciating and deglaciating.
Cart. Horse. You are one stupid motherfucker.
Do you dispute the ocean can and has caused glacial and interglacial type swings in temperature?
How is the ocean affecting IR backscatter and IR escape at the ToA?
It's not. Never said it was. What I said was... They are wrong. They are attributing all warming to CO2 and ignoring natural climate fluctuations.
The planet - atmosphere and ocean - warms when the NH is deglaciating. The NH deglaciates when heat is circulated from the Atlantic to the Arctic.
So you agree that the oceans are not responsible for IR backscatter or decreased IR escape to space. Good. Because those are the actual measures of the one and only process that is actually making the planet warmer at present.
Incorrect. The heat is stored in the ocean. The ocean is responsible for establishing climate. The ocean is responsible for climate changes. The ocean is responsible for abrupt climate changes.
The data shows - without question - that the ocean and the atmosphere cools when the northern hemisphere glaciates and warms when the northern hemisphere deglaciates. There is physical evidence that shows ocean currents are responsible for the northern hemisphere glaciating and deglaciating.
Whether the Earth's temperature goes up, down, or stays the same depends EXPLICITLY on the energy flux balance at the ToA. No matter WHAT the cause might be, to change the Earth's temperature REQUIRES a change in the sum of energy flows at the system bounday - the ToA. I've been trying to tell you that for a couple weeks now but you're either too stupid to understand or too dishonest to admit that it shoots your idea down the fucking tubes.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
RCMP leader accused suspended Coquitlam officers of mounting 'campaign of hate'- Started by shockedcanadian
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
