The Models are Wrong = Climate Science is Wrong

[Pop23]

Don't worry if you don't understand it. You don't have to understand anything. Just keep looking to your cult for more guidance.

Ever wonder why more and more people yawn when they hear the man made global climate change mantra?

See ya

 

[SSDD]

Don't worry if you don't understand it. You don't have to understand anything. Just keep looking to your cult for more guidance.

Ever wonder why more and more people yawn when they hear the man made global climate change mantra?

See ya

And the more years that pass without any warming while atmospheric CO2 continues to rise the more yawns they will get. It would be funny if it weren't costing actual dollars and causing untold misery to poor people the world over.

 

[gslack]

what temperature would it be today if man had never walked the face of the planet?

If you've been unable to find an answer, you've never put much effort into looking. Here's the most popular chart of it:

Your answer would be the sum of Greenhouse Gases, Ozone and sulfate. So in 1994, the human contribution since 1900 was around +0.5C. Bringing that up to today, it would be around +0.8C.

Now, there are also scientists exploring how land clearing by early humans may have affected the climate, but there's nothing firm to report there yet.

So, there you go. Sorry that you won't be able to use that talking point any longer. I know it was one of your favorites.

+0.8 degrees C..Assuming it's right, lets put that into perspective shall we...

Global Warming Frequently Asked Questions

Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74°C (plus or minus 0.18°C) since the late–19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13°C (plus or minus 0.03°C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years. The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S. and parts of the North Atlantic) have, in fact, cooled slightly over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Lastly, seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995.

So +0.74 degrees C since the late 19th century.. Wait a tick....

0.8 and 0.74...SO what you are saying is that despite all the alarmist claims, the numbers show that we as a whole since 1900 are responsible for 0.8C rise in temps, yet somehow the planet killing CO2 tragedy is responsible for 0.74C of that total...So all the rest of it, the heat islands in cities, the clear cutting, mining, black top jungles, highways and all of it we do is only responsible for a +0.06C change?

LOL, that's the problem when you worship numbers, they all too often bite you in the butt..Wait we forgot almost all of those numbers are + or - 0.03. So it could be less than that... ROFL. Thanks for curing us of our fears admiral..

Don't worry boys we can keep on breeding and expanding, as long as we curb CO2 we can double our population and expansion, and still not break a + 0.2C change..

Admiral you showed your alarmist claims are silly.. Thank you so much...

 

[mamooth]

So all the rest of it, the heat islands in cities, the clear cutting, mining, black top jungles, highways and all of it we do is only responsible for a +0.06C change?

Deciduous trees average about a 13% albedo, while crop fields are around 15%. That is, farmland is lighter than trees, and absorbs less sunlight.

Cities? An even higher albedo. That is, lighter colored. Cities absorb less sunlight, but they heat up more because they don't radiate heat out as well, and don't have the evaporative cooling going on. But in terms of heat balance, all that matters is the absorbed sunlight.

Point is, the land use changes you think must cause more global warming don't actually cause any global warming.

 

[gslack]

So all the rest of it, the heat islands in cities, the clear cutting, mining, black top jungles, highways and all of it we do is only responsible for a +0.06C change?

Deciduous trees average about a 13% albedo, while crop fields are around 15%. That is, farmland is lighter than trees, and absorbs less sunlight.

Cities? An even higher albedo. That is, lighter colored. Cities absorb less sunlight, but they heat up more because they don't radiate heat out as well, and don't have the evaporative cooling going on. But in terms of heat balance, all that matters is the absorbed sunlight.

Point is, the land use changes you think must cause more global warming don't actually cause any global warming.

SO you're saying that in effect WE do not cause global warming. Thanks admiral,I knew it.. LOL, you're talking crap again admiral. It's your usual confound the point with googled terms and save yourself...

 

[skookerasbil]

Joe Bastardi On Global Temperature: ?The Fall Is Very Very Plain To See?You?ll See This Trend Continue?


3,318 cold records set this week in U.S.


Record cold in EVERY Canadian province and territory


Climate models fail to ?predict? US droughts : Nature News & Comment


The Fantasy of Extreme Weather | Behind The Black


Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warming | Fox News






How prolific has the losing become for the climate k00ks?