Serious question for the global warming / climate change alarmists. . .

Chuz Life

Gold Member
Jun 18, 2015
9,154
3,607
345
USA
Serious question for the global warming / climate change alarmists. . .

It's a pretty simple question, really. However, I'm sure it will spark at least a few interesting answers.

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

What is the percentage breakdown?
 
The north & south Pole already loose much of its ice last decade, did the sea rise already due lowering ice mass? Answer probably = no, cuz thake for example a bottle water & freeze -> The bottle will explode cuz more mass inside bottle than water itselve. So this effect will actually lower see level. But Antarctic area for example is land ice & that will well increase the see level. The more problem is if Greenland becomes out of its old Toendra >>> Methan gass comes free out permafrost >>> about 24x times more bad than co2. That the global warming is a effect due co2 particles could be evidence by seeing to planet Venus where is high concentration of Co2 & very high temperature... the effect in Asia is more visable cuz the water density in air or humidity is higher than elsewhere at the globe. So actually what we steam in the air in Europe or USA will have even the impact to Asia more than in own country. The good news is actually that Co2 sits not in the inside Air? The inside air is 78% N, 21% Oxygen & 1% Ne&He. The outside air is Co2 & water humidity. The bad news is we may not let come in global sense at 5.00ppmv & we increased fast from 3>4.01,... due industrial revolutionaries cuz creates difficult breathing,.... the good news is that we can filter it out the air cuz it doesn't sit in the inside air. Bible said: it's time to reap. That's like different between pentafix or pentacost for our livable state. Another thing is you will have more drieds & higher floods cuz water more fall on same places at once. Cuz even the sunlight is for 1/3 darkened due the pollution & therefor normal weather system is in chaotica. Probably the Photon belt where we cross through has its effect also,... Solution? Let's act quickly!)

Ok. Trying to read that made my head hurt. If you made a good point? I have up trying to find it. I couldn't even tell what you were trying to say.
 
Serious question for the global warming / climate change alarmists. . .

It's a pretty simple question, really. However, I'm sure it will spark at least a few interesting answers.

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

What is the percentage breakdown?


Probably 30% since 1950 and 70% 19th century until the 1950's.
 
Serious question for the global warming / climate change alarmists. . .

It's a pretty simple question, really. However, I'm sure it will spark at least a few interesting answers.

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

What is the percentage breakdown?


Probably 30% since 1950 and 70% 19th century until the 1950's.


There are peer reviewed studies on the percentages of climate change that can be attributed to natural causes?

Where?

I wold like to see if they left anything out.
 
The vast majority of it.
Just a hunch? Or do you have some hard evidence to back it up?

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

There has never been man-caused warming/climate change in the past, yet sea levels have risen and fallen, just like the temperatures. Rising temperatures immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age is not alarming, unless people want it to be.

The Industrial Revolution ended almost exactly the same time as the Little Ice Age (about 150 years ago). Our industrial ways parallel the time frame of the "warming" we've seen over the last 15 or so decades - they did not cause the "warming."
 
The vast majority of it.
Just a hunch? Or do you have some hard evidence to back it up?

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

There has never been man-caused warming/climate change in the past, yet sea levels have risen and fallen, just like the temperatures. Rising temperatures immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age is not alarming, unless people want it to be.

The Industrial Revolution ended almost exactly the same time as the Little Ice Age (about 150 years ago). Our industrial ways parallel the time frame of the "warming" we've seen over the last 15 or so decades - they did not cause the "warming."


I think you might want to edit that.
 
The vast majority of it.
Just a hunch? Or do you have some hard evidence to back it up?

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

There has never been man-caused warming/climate change in the past, yet sea levels have risen and fallen, just like the temperatures. Rising temperatures immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age is not alarming, unless people want it to be.

The Industrial Revolution ended almost exactly the same time as the Little Ice Age (about 150 years ago). Our industrial ways parallel the time frame of the "warming" we've seen over the last 15 or so decades - they did not cause the "warming."


I think you might want to edit that.


Is there something you'd like to refute?
 
The vast majority of it.
Just a hunch? Or do you have some hard evidence to back it up?

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

There has never been man-caused warming/climate change in the past, yet sea levels have risen and fallen, just like the temperatures. Rising temperatures immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age is not alarming, unless people want it to be.

The Industrial Revolution ended almost exactly the same time as the Little Ice Age (about 150 years ago). Our industrial ways parallel the time frame of the "warming" we've seen over the last 15 or so decades - they did not cause the "warming."


I think you might want to edit that.


Is there something you'd like to refute?

That. . .

Or, I can just ask for you to provide a link to the source you are using to conclude that the industrial revolution actually ENDED 150 years ago.
 
Serious question for the global warming / climate change alarmists. . .

It's a pretty simple question, really. However, I'm sure it will spark at least a few interesting answers.

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

What is the percentage breakdown?


Probably 30% since 1950 and 70% 19th century until the 1950's.


There are peer reviewed studies on the percentages of climate change that can be attributed to natural causes?

Where?

I wold like to see if they left anything out.

Oh, you're a scientists? Where's your peer reviewed papers so we can check it?


Uh?

1. What makes you think I claimed to be a scientist?
2. Why do you think the only people who can read, comprehend and / or scrutinize a peer reviewed published paper are "scientists" themselves?

Appeal to authority much?
 
The vast majority of it.
Just a hunch? Or do you have some hard evidence to back it up?

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

There has never been man-caused warming/climate change in the past, yet sea levels have risen and fallen, just like the temperatures. Rising temperatures immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age is not alarming, unless people want it to be.

The Industrial Revolution ended almost exactly the same time as the Little Ice Age (about 150 years ago). Our industrial ways parallel the time frame of the "warming" we've seen over the last 15 or so decades - they did not cause the "warming."


I think you might want to edit that.


Is there something you'd like to refute?

That. . .

Or, I can just ask for you to provide a link to the source you are using to conclude that the industrial revolution actually ENDED 150 years ago.

Correction, the transition to industrial manufacturing.
 
Just a hunch? Or do you have some hard evidence to back it up?

"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

There has never been man-caused warming/climate change in the past, yet sea levels have risen and fallen, just like the temperatures. Rising temperatures immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age is not alarming, unless people want it to be.

The Industrial Revolution ended almost exactly the same time as the Little Ice Age (about 150 years ago). Our industrial ways parallel the time frame of the "warming" we've seen over the last 15 or so decades - they did not cause the "warming."


I think you might want to edit that.


Is there something you'd like to refute?

That. . .

Or, I can just ask for you to provide a link to the source you are using to conclude that the industrial revolution actually ENDED 150 years ago.

Correction, the transition to industrial manufacturing.

See?

I was trying to help.
 
"What percentage of the Earths temperature increases or rising sea levels (if any) can be attributed to natural causes?"

There has never been man-caused warming/climate change in the past, yet sea levels have risen and fallen, just like the temperatures. Rising temperatures immediately following the end of the Little Ice Age is not alarming, unless people want it to be.

The Industrial Revolution ended almost exactly the same time as the Little Ice Age (about 150 years ago). Our industrial ways parallel the time frame of the "warming" we've seen over the last 15 or so decades - they did not cause the "warming."


I think you might want to edit that.


Is there something you'd like to refute?

That. . .

Or, I can just ask for you to provide a link to the source you are using to conclude that the industrial revolution actually ENDED 150 years ago.

Correction, the transition to industrial manufacturing.

See?

I was trying to help.

Could've just said so in the first place. lol :beer:
 
I think you might want to edit that.


Is there something you'd like to refute?

That. . .

Or, I can just ask for you to provide a link to the source you are using to conclude that the industrial revolution actually ENDED 150 years ago.

Correction, the transition to industrial manufacturing.

See?

I was trying to help.

Could've just said so in the first place. lol :beer:

Was trying to be discrete
:cheers2:
 
Last edited:
Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years
  1. Thomas J. Crowley
View Full Text

Abstract

Recent reconstructions of Northern Hemisphere temperatures and climate forcing over the past 1000 years allow the warming of the 20th century to be placed within a historical context and various mechanisms of climate change to be tested. Comparisons of observations with simulations from an energy balance climate model indicate that as much as 41 to 64% of preanthropogenic (pre-1850) decadal-scale temperature variations was due to changes in solar irradiance and volcanism. Removal of the forced response from reconstructed temperature time series yields residuals that show similar variability to those of control runs of coupled models, thereby lending support to the models' value as estimates of low-frequency variability in the climate system. Removal of all forcing except greenhouse gases from the ∼1000-year time series results in a residual with a very large late-20th-century warming that closely agrees with the response predicted from greenhouse gas forcing. The combination of a unique level of temperature increase in the late 20th century and improved constraints on the role of natural variability provides further evidence that the greenhouse effect has already established itself above the level of natural variability in the climate system. A 21st-century global warming projection far exceeds the natural variability of the past 1000 years and is greater than the best estimate of global temperature change for the last interglacial.

Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years | Science

That is one.
 
access_free.gif
Solar and Greenhouse Gas Forcing and Climate Response in the Twentieth Century



Gerald A. Meehl, Warren M. Washington, T. M. L. Wigley, Julie M. Arblaster, and Aiguo DaiNational Center for Atmospheric Research, † Boulder, Colorado

Abstract
Ensemble experiments with a global coupled climate model are performed for the twentieth century with time-evolving solar, greenhouse gas, sulfate aerosol (direct effect), and ozone (tropospheric and stratospheric) forcing. Observed global warming in the twentieth century occurred in two periods, one in the early twentieth century from about the early 1900s to the 1940s, and one later in the century from, roughly, the late 1960s to the end of the century. The model's response requires the combination of solar and anthropogenic forcing to approximate the early twentieth-century warming, while the radiative forcing from increasing greenhouse gases is dominant for the response in the late twentieth century, confirming previous studies. Of particular interest here is the model's amplification of solar forcing when this acts in combination with anthropogenic forcing. This difference is traced to the fact that solar forcing is more spatially heterogeneous (i.e., acting most strongly in areas where sunlight reaches the surface) while greenhouse gas forcing is more spatially uniform. Consequently, solar forcing is subject to coupled regional feedbacks involving the combination of temperature gradients, circulation regimes, and clouds. The magnitude of these feedbacks depends on the climate's base state. Over relatively cloud-free oceanic regions in the subtropics, the enhanced solar forcing produces greater evaporation. More moisture then converges into the precipitation convergence zones, intensifying the regional monsoon and Hadley and Walker circulations, causing cloud reductions over the subtropical ocean regions, and, hence, more solar input. An additional response to solar forcing in northern summer is an enhancement of the meridional temperature gradients due to greater solar forcing over land regions that contribute to stronger West African and South Asian monsoons. Since the greenhouse gases are more spatially uniform, such regional circulation feedbacks are not as strong. These regional responses are most evident when the solar forcing occurs in concert with increased greenhouse gas forcing. The net effect of enhanced solar forcing in the early twentieth century is to produce larger solar-induced increases of tropical precipitation when calculated as a residual than for early century solar-only forcing, even though the size of the imposed solar forcing is the same. As a consequence, overall precipitation increases in the early twentieth century in the Asian monsoon regions are greater than late century increases, qualitatively consistent with observed trends in all-India rainfall. Similar effects occur in West Africa, the tropical Pacific, and the Southern Ocean tropical convergence zones.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016<0426:SAGGFA>2.0.CO;2

Go to google scholar and put in "Natural forcing versus ghg forcing in the warming of the climate".
 
Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years
  1. Thomas J. Crowley
View Full Text

Abstract

Recent reconstructions of Northern Hemisphere temperatures and climate forcing over the past 1000 years allow the warming of the 20th century to be placed within a historical context and various mechanisms of climate change to be tested. Comparisons of observations with simulations from an energy balance climate model indicate that as much as 41 to 64% of preanthropogenic (pre-1850) decadal-scale temperature variations was due to changes in solar irradiance and volcanism. Removal of the forced response from reconstructed temperature time series yields residuals that show similar variability to those of control runs of coupled models, thereby lending support to the models' value as estimates of low-frequency variability in the climate system. Removal of all forcing except greenhouse gases from the ∼1000-year time series results in a residual with a very large late-20th-century warming that closely agrees with the response predicted from greenhouse gas forcing. The combination of a unique level of temperature increase in the late 20th century and improved constraints on the role of natural variability provides further evidence that the greenhouse effect has already established itself above the level of natural variability in the climate system. A 21st-century global warming projection far exceeds the natural variability of the past 1000 years and is greater than the best estimate of global temperature change for the last interglacial.

Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years | Science

That is one.







Wow. Look at all of that science fiction masquerading as fact. Models here, models there, reconstructions over there! And NOWHERE is there actually real, empirical, verifiable, data. Nowhere!

That's where climatology is now, nowhere.
 

Forum List

Back
Top