Nasa C02 sattilite 2014

[westwall]

Watch a Year's Worth of Carbon Dioxide Billow Around the Globe

Well, instead of being just a stumblebum, why didn't you follow up and look at the whole record? This link will give you some of that.

Yeah sure dude. We'll take a MODEL (truly dude, you're a tard) over actual real world observations.

How fucking stupid are you anyway?

 

[westwall]

I stand by my claim that they match well. I mean, you can play Ian's video to mid-October and see how well it matches the OCO-2 measurement. Maybe it was the different color scaling that confused Ian so.

Anyways, good luck trying to pass off your bogus claims to real scientists. Stuff like that certainly plays well in denierstan, but not with those who can evaluate evidence independently.

Of course you do! You're fucking brain dead! How the hell you can look at real world observations, then look at a computer model that is the exact opposite of the real world observations...and claim they are the same.....is beyond me.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I stand by my claim that they match well. I mean, you can play Ian's video to mid-October and see how well it matches the OCO-2 measurement. Maybe it was the different color scaling that confused Ian so.

Anyways, good luck trying to pass off your bogus claims to real scientists. Stuff like that certainly plays well in denierstan, but not with those who can evaluate evidence independently.

Of course you do! You're fucking brain dead! How the hell you can look at real world observations, then look at a computer model that is the exact opposite of the real world observations...and claim they are the same.....is beyond me.

Communist glasses are rose colored... Between that and blinders they dont see much else.


I looked at those and came to the same conclusion you did. How in the hell did they come up with that? Even the levels of rise are different by a factor of ten. The models have some serious input or mathematical modeling errors.

 

[mamooth]

Sigh. I shouldn't want to have to do this. You know, do the legwork for the deniers because their cult forbids them from looking at any data themselves. But I have to, so I can rub their faces in their attempted deception, just like you'd rub a puppy's nose in it when it poops on the floor.

So, I have to run the model video, stop it mid-October, take a screenshot, paste it into MS Paint, chop and edit it into a JPEG file, upload it to photobucket, then link to it, all because some people can't manage the simple task of comparing charts.

Ah well, here goes.

<cue Jeopardy music>

All done.

Model

Observation

Yep, very similar. Different color scaling confuses simple minds, but not intelligent people. Being winds are chaotic, and it's a snapshot of that chaos vs. a long term average, there has to be some difference. And if the models were perfect, we wouldn't need observations. Point is, anyone honest will say the match is quite good. Obviously, partisan hacks are not honest.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Sigh. I shouldn't want to have to do this. You know, do the legwork for the deniers because their cult forbids them from looking at any data themselves. But I have to, so I can rub their faces in their attempted deception, just like you'd rub a puppy's nose in it when it poops on the floor.

So, I have to run the model video, stop it mid-October, take a screenshot, paste it into MS Paint, chop and edit it into a JPEG file, upload it to photobucket, then link to it, all because some people can't manage the simple task of comparing charts.

Ah well, here goes.

<cue Jeopardy music>

All done.

Model

Observation

Yep, very similar. Different color scaling confuses simple minds, but not intelligent people. Being winds are chaotic, and it's a snapshot of that chaos vs. a long term average, there has to be some difference. And if the models were perfect, we wouldn't need observations. Point is, anyone honest will say the match is quite good. Obviously, partisan hacks are not honest.

Mampoo.. You fail at model rendering. Take a close look at the numbers.. Your model failed by a factor of ten... No reality predictive powers as reality has shown your model broken...

 

[Wyatt earp]

What the deniers aren't telling everyone here is that the date on that image isn't the whole story. It's not a snapshot of Nov. 11, it's an average of Oct 1 -- Nov 11.

News | NASA's Spaceborne Carbon Counter Maps New Details

For mid-October, the 2006 model matches observations very well. It doesn't match well for Nov. 11, which is why deniers deliberately so often misrepresent the date by pretending it's a snapshot of Nov 11.

So, chalk this up as yet another demonstration of denier dishonesty. Frank, you got some 'splainin to do. Was your attempted deception deliberate, or had you just been played for a rube again?

The link is from living science, now you have a problem with them?

Damn you are drinking the kool aid so bad you will dismiss anyone that don't fit your narrative.... That's not science.

I sure glad I don't have a close mind like you , old rocks and all the rest of the AGW cult. Not sure how you guys can function normal in that type of world...At 50 I still learn a New thing everyday.

 

[westwall]

Sigh. I shouldn't want to have to do this. You know, do the legwork for the deniers because their cult forbids them from looking at any data themselves. But I have to, so I can rub their faces in their attempted deception, just like you'd rub a puppy's nose in it when it poops on the floor.

So, I have to run the model video, stop it mid-October, take a screenshot, paste it into MS Paint, chop and edit it into a JPEG file, upload it to photobucket, then link to it, all because some people can't manage the simple task of comparing charts.

Ah well, here goes.

<cue Jeopardy music>

All done.

Model

Observation

Yep, very similar. Different color scaling confuses simple minds, but not intelligent people. Being winds are chaotic, and it's a snapshot of that chaos vs. a long term average, there has to be some difference. And if the models were perfect, we wouldn't need observations. Point is, anyone honest will say the match is quite good. Obviously, partisan hacks are not honest.

Similar? On what planet prey tell?

Cue Jeopardy music.....

 

[mamooth]

Mampoo..

I'm not interested in your scat fetish.

You fail at model rendering. Take a close look at the numbers.. Your model failed by a factor of ten... No reality predictive powers as reality has shown your model broken...

I believe I mentioned you couldn't under the different scaling.

However, I give you credit for at least trying, and admitting the pictures looked similar, something that anyone with integrity now admits.

Anyways, it's been nice educating you all. No need to thank me, but it would be appropriate.

 

[westwall]

Mampoo..

I'm not interested in your scat fetish.

You fail at model rendering. Take a close look at the numbers.. Your model failed by a factor of ten... No reality predictive powers as reality has shown your model broken...

I believe I mentioned you couldn't under the different scaling.

However, I give you credit for at least trying, and admitting the pictures looked similar, something that anyone with integrity now admits.

Anyways, it's been nice educating you all. No need to thank me, but it would be appropriate.

That's not what he said at all. So nice to see you are so blatant in your truthiness!

 

[flacaltenn]

Sigh. I shouldn't want to have to do this. You know, do the legwork for the deniers because their cult forbids them from looking at any data themselves. But I have to, so I can rub their faces in their attempted deception, just like you'd rub a puppy's nose in it when it poops on the floor.

So, I have to run the model video, stop it mid-October, take a screenshot, paste it into MS Paint, chop and edit it into a JPEG file, upload it to photobucket, then link to it, all because some people can't manage the simple task of comparing charts.

Ah well, here goes.

<cue Jeopardy music>

All done.

Model

Observation

Yep, very similar. Different color scaling confuses simple minds, but not intelligent people. Being winds are chaotic, and it's a snapshot of that chaos vs. a long term average, there has to be some difference. And if the models were perfect, we wouldn't need observations. Point is, anyone honest will say the match is quite good. Obviously, partisan hacks are not honest.

Yeah -- QUITE close.. Only off by a hemisphere..

Seems like AGAIN -- they under-estimated the NATURAL CO2 cycle and over-estimated the man-made contributions..

But I TRULY do appreciate your diligient work.. SOMEBODY had to do it....

 

[jc456]

Watch a Year's Worth of Carbon Dioxide Billow Around the Globe

A supercomputer-generated visualization from NASA and Oregon State University reveals how CO2 emissions flow around the planet over the span of one year.

Using data from NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2), a newly launched remote-sensing satellite that studies CO2's global movements, the visualization shows how though the vast majority of CO2 comes from the Northern Hemisphere's industrial centers, it doesn't stay there year-round. Piggybacking on the planet's weather systems, the gases billow from continent to continent, and in the springtime, are largely absorbed by new vegetation. Once winter rolls back around, plants die, and CO2 emissions roar back.

Narrated by the research meteorologist Bill Putman, the visualization is a useful reminder that greenhouse gases don't come in silos. Earlier this month, newresearch from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) indicated that in 2015, CO2 emissions from the U.S. energy sector are on track to fall to their lowest levels since 1994, mostly thanks to a record number of coal plants shuttering around the country. But globally, CO2 emissions are still increasing, year after year—and regardless of where they originate, the entire planet is impacted.

Why yes, it is a model, produced from exactly the same data as that one picture of a moment in time. Only this model covers the whole year, not just one moment in time, and shows the lies being told by using that one picture.

So I looked at this goofy video, and like everyone has already pointed out it is a model since the date is from 2006 in the images. But if I may point out the one flaw in the video that perhaps not everyone noticed, but during the northern hemisphere winter months is the only time they showed CO2 in the norther hemisphere. How the hell can that be, we still drive cars during the summer, so where is the influence of the summer CO2 in this. Where do all those CO2 molecules go? I found the video very funny and it again demonstrates the out of touch nature of the models.

The same people go to work everyday, the same jets are in the air, all spitting carbon exhausts in the summer months and yet........no evidence in the video.

I also would like to know where it all went, the modeled CO2 from the winter NH area. It all depleted in the summer months, there were no upticks in other areas of the globe in the video, so where'd it go?