Precipitation events.

[CrusaderFrank]

How to guard against future precipitation events

 

[westwall]

konrad,

I posted this for you before but clearly you either chose to not read it or didn't see it the first time around so here you go. Maybe there isn't missing energy after all?

Some Comments on Earth?s ?Missing Energy? Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

It is clear that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has nothing to do with the earth temperature.
-----------------------------

That's ridiculous and clearly violates a fundamental law of science called Conservation of Energy. If heat isn't created, where's the extra energy trapped by CO2 going? Statistically only half would be released into space. What about the other half?

 

[westwall]

Hi Barb,

I am a geologist and what you say is only partially true. Weather patterns do indeed change but for what you say to occur you have to ignore prior well documented history. Back when old Al Gore was promoting his movie he claimed that hurricanes were growing more powerful and were occuring more frequently. And that was true for the period he was covering. However he chose to ignore all of the data that was older than 30 years old and you know what 50 years ago the hurricanes were more violent and occured more frequently than they are even today.

Also if you look at a good meterological textbook you will see that the violent storms occur because they are interacting with colder weather patterns...that is the engine that creates powerful storms. When the atmosphere is universally warm (like along the equator) storms are less frequent and very mild.

Throughout history when the climate was warm there was prosperity. When it was cold there was war, famine, disease, misery and death. I think I'll go with the warmth.

Its gen ed earth science for crissakes.

General earth science??

okay then tell me, is current weather (now or the short term) any valid indicator of overall climate?

Well if you say yes like the OP tries to imply, than the same answer would have to apply when the claims go the other way.

For example: A year ago we had an increase in arctic ice coverage, and along with that we had a very cold winter and lower overall temps worldwide. When we (anti-AGW crowd) mentioned this we were summarily told how this was unscientific and that current weather (now or local) was not a valid indicator of overall climate (long term or global). And if we did not provide scientific sources we were doubly corrected....

Now we have oldrocks posting a topic talking about current weather (now and local), and implying it being an indicator of overall climate (long term or global). With no scientific evidence to base this claim on in the OP at all.

So then I ask you a simple logical question.... What is the difference?

Weather patterns change, and part of what drives those changes is warmer water. That doesn't mean its going to be overall colder or hotter in the immediate future, but that storms will be stronger. Any general education earth science book will explain this. Those stronger storms have happened. Additionally, when ice forms on the top, the surface, that does not mean that HUGE layers of arctic ice have not melted precedent to the event of new ice forming. That arctic ice melt added freshwater to the oceans. That brackish water warms faster than saltwater, and that warmth powers stronger storms. These storms fueled by warmer water are part of a pattern of climate change. It isn't just co2 (and yes I'm to lazy to use the script to make that look correct), but methane released by the glaciers, and that gas makes co2 look like a punk in comparison.

ANY general education earth science book, and it goes back a smidge to when I got out of high school. Did everyone here skip science class? This is NOT new people.

 

[konradv]

konrad,

I posted this for you before but clearly you either chose to not read it or didn't see it the first time around so here you go. Maybe there isn't missing energy after all?

Some Comments on Earth?s ?Missing Energy? Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

It is clear that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has nothing to do with the earth temperature.
-----------------------------

That's ridiculous and clearly violates a fundamental law of science called Conservation of Energy. If heat isn't created, where's the extra energy trapped by CO2 going? Statistically only half would be released into space. What about the other half?

How about telling me about it. I'm able to succinctly frame my argument. How about doing the same for yours. I don't have time to waste reading every little article you find that may bolster your point. How about in your own words, if you have any? Simply parroting someone else dosen't cut it. I might as well go talk to them. You'd be a waste of time.

 

[gslack]

konrad,

I posted this for you before but clearly you either chose to not read it or didn't see it the first time around so here you go. Maybe there isn't missing energy after all?

Some Comments on Earth?s ?Missing Energy? Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

It is clear that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has nothing to do with the earth temperature.
-----------------------------

That's ridiculous and clearly violates a fundamental law of science called Conservation of Energy. If heat isn't created, where's the extra energy trapped by CO2 going? Statistically only half would be released into space. What about the other half?

How about telling me about it. I'm able to succinctly frame my argument. How about doing the same for yours. I don't have time to waste reading every little article you find that may bolster your point. How about in your own words, if you have any? Simply parroting someone else dosen't cut it. I might as well go talk to them. You'd be a waste of time.

And ther you have konradv in a nutshell.... He can't be bothered to read what he is going argue about in here..... How big of you to admit your an impatient and ignorant child..... Good for you junior....

 

[westwall]

OK,

In a nutshell the good Doctor postulates that there is no missing energy. Instead he suggests that the missing energy is from the incoming solar radiation , not the outgoing IR radiation.

The mount of energy supposedly missing is actually very small, roughly 1 watt per square meter out of a total incoming energy of 235-240 watts per square meter. The problem as he sees it and he mentions the work of two other researches who's names I don't recall (because you want me to use my own words) is that the instrumentation is not accurate enough to measure such small amounts of energy.

He further states that between 2000 and 2008 CERES (the satellite data he used) shows no trend at all which suggests to him that the measurements themselves are suspect. He then goes on to show that measuring the temperatures of the oceans is much easier than trying to calculate the Earth Radiation Budget which is what the AGW folks were trying to do.

So in a nutshell there you go. Pseudo scientists trying to measure a extraordinarily small amount of energy with instruments that are not capable of the job while ignoring the extraordinarily difficult task of calculating the ERB in the first place.

konrad,

I posted this for you before but clearly you either chose to not read it or didn't see it the first time around so here you go. Maybe there isn't missing energy after all?

Some Comments on Earth?s ?Missing Energy? Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

It is clear that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has nothing to do with the earth temperature.
-----------------------------

That's ridiculous and clearly violates a fundamental law of science called Conservation of Energy. If heat isn't created, where's the extra energy trapped by CO2 going? Statistically only half would be released into space. What about the other half?

How about telling me about it. I'm able to succinctly frame my argument. How about doing the same for yours. I don't have time to waste reading every little article you find that may bolster your point. How about in your own words, if you have any? Simply parroting someone else dosen't cut it. I might as well go talk to them. You'd be a waste of time.