The sun is constant yet ocean temperatures increase and decrease. Why?

[Slade3200]

Here's your first clue, moron. IR is really WEAK, and THAT is why it does NOTHING...

What do you mean when you say IR does nothing? Are you claiming that the IR emitted by the earth does not have a warming effect?

 

[EMH]

The heat is released into space and the ash which lingers in our atmosphere reflects the suns solar radiation preventing the earth from warming in its normal way. So yes the net effect is a short period of cooling. And a long term period of warming from the greenhouse effect

Releasing 2k F gas and ash "cools" Earth my ass...

You keep parroting the "Greenhouse effect." That entire concept is functionally bullshit. Greenland froze while North America thawed, and your Co2 FRAUD cannot explain that....

 

[EMH]

IR emitted by the earth

Actually the SUN, moron.

Are you claiming that the IR emitted by the earth does not have a warming effect?

All gasses absorb a part of EM spectrum. IR is weak EM. That is why increasing Co2 doesn't warm anything. We could increase atmospheric Co2 10 fold and it would still do nothing.

Increasing the overall gas in the atmosphere, THAT DOES DO SOMETHING regardless of gasses added.

 

[Slade3200]

and that is a constant issue which is "corrected" by adding or subtracting a constant, which would keep a flat line a flat line, yet somehow that resulted in a flat line changing to an upward slope.

IQ over 5 required to see through that BS

OK well at least youre admitting that the raw data you keep bringing up was inaccurate and in need of adjusting, that’s a start. So you don’t like the analysis used to make the adjustments. How in depth have you gone into that analysis?

 

[EMH]

t youre admitting that the raw data you keep bringing up was inaccurate

Nice try. Satellite and balloon data was highly correlated. There was no reason at all to "correct" it other than

IT COMPLETELY REFUTED THE Co2 FRAUD

 

[EMH]

How in depth have you gone into that analysis?

You have no clue at all what you are talking about, and who you are talking to. You do not practice science. You parrot.

 

[ding]

Don't need one, the volcano explanation is 100% spot on and you cannot refute it.

No. You can't provide one because no one agrees with you.

 

[ding]

'
Exactly.
This is his latest ass-backwards concoction in his desperate and dishonest attempt to avoid acknowledging AGW. (EMH is 100% Committable/don't waste time replying to him. Ding's sociopathy is more subtle)
Our exchange two weeks ago:::

• Oct 5, 2024

Too good not to post again as Ding repeats his refuted claims hundreds/thousands of times.

1. You really are Too Stupid to debate.
2. And what "deglaciates the Northern Hemisphere"?
3. Magic?
Or would that be...
4a. The Earth tilts with the N Pole more towards the sun!
4b. the many times mentioned Milankovitch cycles enhance that which THEN have melted the 90% less volume arctic/N pole area.
5. So Of course even if true, it was an effect, Not the cause....
6. And ergo It sheds no light on the current cause (either way) Co2/GHGs causing THIS instance.
7. So the claim is a Giant non sequitur and blind stupidity.

8. Finally and obviously you [ding] are 40 IQ points too low to play with me.
You really should try and avoid me, not stalk me with your 8 word posts you deluded yourself into believing were trick questions, but just expose you as an ldiot.
Stay in the Religion section.
- - - - -
`

Thermohaline circulation deglaciates the northern hemisphere because it brings heat to the Arctic from the Atlantic.

 

[ding]

Solar output is fairly constant, but the earth's Orbit is Not.
It changes angles/tilt relative to the sun and those orbital changes (Milankovich cycles) in absorbtion are the CAUSE of peaks and troughs in he historical graphs of Ice ages and interglacials.
Ocean currents just an Effect.

Solar output is has been Constant in Our present very short SPIKE in Temp, BUT
It is far too fast for orbital motion to be the cause.
We know the cause is the explosion of human GHG emissions Trapping more of that sunlight that would otherwise be reflected back out into space.

Ocean Currents are a lagging Effect, Not the Cause.
`

The IPCC recognizes no orbital radiative forcing component in their energy balance. You lose.

 

[Slade3200]

Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other?

Antarctica is a continent, a huge land mass that has accumulated its ice sheet over millions of years. The Arctic doesn’t have the same land mass and also is impacted by ocean currents and weather so there is much more fluctuation in the north.

Why are you asking about ice at the poles?

 

[abu afak]

The IPCC recognizes No Orbital radiative forcing component in their energy balance. You lose.

No, I win, You Lie.

IPCC: archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-6-1

FAQ 6.1 What Caused the Ice Ages and Other Important Climate Changes Before the Industrial Era?​

Frequently Asked Question 6.1
What Caused the Ice Ages and Other Important Climate Changes Before the Industrial Era?
[........]
Global climate is determined by the radiation balance of the planet (see FAQ 1.1). There are three fundamental ways the Earth’s radiation balance can change, thereby causing a climate change: (1) changing the incoming solar radiation (e.g., by changes in the Earth’s orbit or in the Sun itself), (2) changing the fraction of solar radiation that is reflected (this fraction is called the albedo – it can be changed, for example, by changes in cloud cover, small particles called aerosols or land cover), and (3) altering the longwave energy radiated back to space (e.g., by changes in greenhouse gas concentrations). In addition, local climate also depends on how heat is distributed by winds and ocean currents. All of these factors have played a role in past climate changes.


FAQ 6.1, Figure 1. Schematic of the Earth’s orbital changes (Milankovitch cycles) that drive the ice age cycles.
‘T’ denotes changes in the tilt (or obliquity) of the Earth’s axis, ‘E’ denotes changes in the eccentricity of the orbit (due to variations in the minor axis of the ellipse), and ‘P’ denotes precession, that is, changes in the direction of the axis tilt at a given point of the orbit. Source: Rahmstorf and Schellnhuber (2006).
[......]

IPCC:

FAQ 6.1 - AR4 WGI Chapter 6: Palaeoclimate

archive.ipcc.ch

`

 

[Slade3200]

Releasing 2k F gas and ash "cools" Earth my ass...

You keep parroting the "Greenhouse effect." That entire concept is functionally bullshit. Greenland froze while North America thawed, and your Co2 FRAUD cannot explain that....

Think of it like an umbrella or a shadow blocking solar radiation from warming the earth.

The Greenhouse effect is basic science. Heat getting absorbed and emitted by our atmosphere to sustain our climate. It's why we don't experience the temperature extremes we see on the moon. Do you really not understand this? Its basic science.

You don't believe the earth is flat do you?

 

[Slade3200]

Greenland froze while North America thawed, and your Co2 FRAUD cannot explain that....

Yes Greenland froze while North America thawed... Two different regions impacted differently by climate. Thats how it works. Climate is not uniform. Weather patterns circulate. One area can warm while another freezes. This shouldn't be hard for you to understand.

 

[abu afak]

Think of it like an umbrella or a shadow blocking solar radiation from warming the earth.

The Greenhouse effect is basic science. Heat getting absorbed and emitted by our atmosphere to sustain our climate. It's why we don't experience the temperature extremes we see on the moon. Do you really not understand this? Its basic science.

You don't believe the earth is flat do you?

Enough you desperate Asshole.
Can't you see EMH is Certifiably Crazy?
Ignore him.
He made 8 consecutive wacky posts on the last page.

`

 

[ding]

No, I win, You Lie.

IPCC: archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-6-1

FAQ 6.1 What Caused the Ice Ages and Other Important Climate Changes Before the Industrial Era?​

Frequently Asked Question 6.1
What Caused the Ice Ages and Other Important Climate Changes Before the Industrial Era?
[........]
Global climate is determined by the radiation balance of the planet (see FAQ 1.1). There are three fundamental ways the Earth’s radiation balance can change, thereby causing a climate change: (1) changing the incoming solar radiation (e.g., by changes in the Earth’s orbit or in the Sun itself), (2) changing the fraction of solar radiation that is reflected (this fraction is called the albedo – it can be changed, for example, by changes in cloud cover, small particles called aerosols or land cover), and (3) altering the longwave energy radiated back to space (e.g., by changes in greenhouse gas concentrations). In addition, local climate also depends on how heat is distributed by winds and ocean currents. All of these factors have played a role in past climate changes.


FAQ 6.1, Figure 1. Schematic of the Earth’s orbital changes (Milankovitch cycles) that drive the ice age cycles.
‘T’ denotes changes in the tilt (or obliquity) of the Earth’s axis, ‘E’ denotes changes in the eccentricity of the orbit (due to variations in the minor axis of the ellipse), and ‘P’ denotes precession, that is, changes in the direction of the axis tilt at a given point of the orbit. Source: Rahmstorf and Schellnhuber (2006).
[......]

IPCC:

FAQ 6.1 - AR4 WGI Chapter 6: Palaeoclimate

archive.ipcc.ch

`

They don't account for it in the energy balance, dummy. Your post is lip service.

 

[ding]

Enough you desperate Asshole.
Can't you see EMH is Certifiably Crazy?
Ignore him.
He made 8 consecutive wacky posts on the last page.

`

EMH is a mirror image of you.

 

[ding]

Yes Greenland froze while North America thawed... Two different regions impacted differently by climate. Thats how it works. Climate is not uniform. Weather patterns circulate. One area can warm while another freezes. This shouldn't be hard for you to understand.

The areal extent of ice coverage in Antarctica doesn't change from glacial to interglacial period. It just gets thicker and colder. That's because the ocean moderates ice growth. Ice spreads on land "easier" than it does over water. That's why the northern hemisphere has such extensive areal glaciation when the temperature threshold for glaciation is reached relative to the south. Tons of land surrounding the north pole for glaciers to spread. Also the temperature threshold for extensive continental glaciation at the south pole is about 3 to 5C warmer than it is in the north because it's harder for glaciation to initiate with a mostly land locked ocean over the pole relative to a continent parked over it.

 

[Slade3200]

Actually the SUN, moron.





All gasses absorb a part of EM spectrum. IR is weak EM. That is why increasing Co2 doesn't warm anything. We could increase atmospheric Co2 10 fold and it would still do nothing.

Increasing the overall gas in the atmosphere, THAT DOES DO SOMETHING regardless of gasses added.

The Sun emits a spectrum of radiation most of which is absorbed by the Earth, the Earth then warms and emits IR (long wave). This is a measurable fact. Co2 in the atmosphere absorbs IR and emits it in all directions, including back to earth. This is the Greenhouse effect. It isn't fiction it is science. The more Co2, the more IR gets absorbed and emitted.

 

[Slade3200]

Nice try. Satellite and balloon data was highly correlated. There was no reason at all to "correct" it other than

IT COMPLETELY REFUTED THE Co2 FRAUD

You acknowledge that the thermometer tech has changed and become more insulated. If the measuring devices change then adjustments need to be made to account for those differences otherwise you are comparing apples to oranges. So yes, the data did need to be corrected.

 

[Slade3200]

You have no clue at all what you are talking about, and who you are talking to. You do not practice science. You parrot.

You know nothing about me, so how about you stop with the ignorant proclamations about what I practice. You just make yourself sound more ignorant.