The Warmers Case to the APS

[westwall]

Sorry, each student is required to do their own homework.

In other words, you couldn't find one either! Thanks for the assist!

 

[Abraham3]

I've had more studies that I could read in my lifetime since before I ever came here. Admitting that you're unable to find any is more than a little pathetic.

 

[jc456]

Sorry, each student is required to do their own homework.

It just keeps getting better. Provide a link, do your homework. Nice. You got jack!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mamooth's AGW Theory was that doubling CO2 yields a 3 degree temperature increase and seemed to be a testable hypothesis

Actually, that was predicted by Arrhenius in 1896. But it won't happen the instant that the CO2 level hits 560 ppm. There is still the matter of inertia in the system. Just as today, the warmth that we see is the result of the GHG levels from the 80's, there will be a lag. Barring, of course, a major emission of CH4 in the Arctic. Then all bets are off.

So there is no direct correlation between CO2 increase and temperature?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Your chart is a "Denier!"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mamooth's AGW Theory was that doubling CO2 yields a 3 degree temperature increase and seemed to be a testable hypothesis

Actually, that was predicted by Arrhenius in 1896. But it won't happen the instant that the CO2 level hits 560 ppm. There is still the matter of inertia in the system. Just as today, the warmth that we see is the result of the GHG levels from the 80's, there will be a lag. Barring, of course, a major emission of CH4 in the Arctic. Then all bets are off.

So why has there been no "Warming" these past 15 year?

 

[Abraham3]

I've got the 2,216 pages of Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Climate Change: The Physical Science Basis. That is followed by the work of WG-II and WG-III. What have you got?

 

[Abraham3]

Sorry, each student is required to do their own homework.

It just keeps getting better. Provide a link, do your homework. Nice. You got jack!

Does it?

On top of ~12,000 peer reviewed studies whose conclusions support the validitiy of AGW, I've got the 2,216 pages of Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Climate Change: The Physical Science Basis. That is followed by the work of WG-II and WG-III. What have you got?

 

[Abraham3]

Sorry, each student is required to do their own homework.

It just keeps getting better. Provide a link, do your homework. Nice. You got jack!

Does it?

On top of ~12,000 peer reviewed studies whose conclusions support the validitiy of AGW, I've got the 2,216 pages of Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Climate Change: The Physical Science Basis. That is followed by the work of WG-II and WG-III. What have you got?

Anything?

 

[SSDD]

Read it all. I guarantee you it'll do you good. A few points, though:

1) If you haven't read it, how do you know its crap?
2) Judging something before you know enough to make that judgement has a name.
3) Admitting that you haven't read any of the IPCC's material is not going to advance your credibility in these discussions.

I wandered around on the site and could find no actual studies. I found loads of press releases and rah rah pieces, but no actual scientific studies.

So, after 26 years, you still don't know how the IPCC works. Got it.

The IPCC doesn't work....that's the point.

 

[SSDD]

Assholism thy name is mammoth! Look in the mirror when you make that claim silly person.

You made claims that were laughably disproved, you presented a DD-214 that was clearly stolen from someone else's website, and you claimed to be a "nuclear watch officer" a designation/MOS that doesn't exist in the US Navy.

In other words, piss off....admiral.

Reported. Sorry it comes to this, but you leave me little choice.

Hey, I've spent the last year hoping you would change, being civil, asking nicely many times for you to stop mocking my service, eventually warning you, but you just keep getting worse. So I'm no longer putting up with it.

The irony literally drips hairball....it literally drips.

 

[jc456]

Sorry, each student is required to do their own homework.

It just keeps getting better. Provide a link, do your homework. Nice. You got jack!

Does it?

On top of ~12,000 peer reviewed studies whose conclusions support the validitiy of AGW, I've got the 2,216 pages of Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Climate Change: The Physical Science Basis. That is followed by the work of WG-II and WG-III. What have you got?

So again, where did the warming go? last fifteen years no warming, IPCC agrees. I don't need a link.

 

[Abraham3]

The IPCC and you agree on virtually nothing.

Global warming continues. The greenhouse effect continues. The melting of the world's ice and snow continues. The timing changes in a hundred seasonal biological events continues. The Earth's accumulation of solar energy continues. The rise of the world's ocean's level continues. It all continues.

 

[flacaltenn]

To be continued..

Except that there are many papers, several published by IPCC authors, that agree the warming has statistically CEASED for at least 15 yrs..

 

[Old Rocks]

And here is one that says otherwise;
https://www.skepticalscience.com/cowtan_way_surface_temperature_data_update.html

 

[flacaltenn]

And here is one that says otherwise;
https://www.skepticalscience.com/cowtan_way_surface_temperature_data_update.html

BullHockey.. Another SkepticalScience WitchDoctor production.. These jerks are doctoring fixed land records with "in-filled" sat data.. Thus allowiing them to monkey the stats to their hearts content to get DIFFERENT RANKING of years.. NOT to measure the warming rate.

And furthermore --- there's no need for their whining about "gaps" and "land/sea" differences.. JUST FUCKING USE THE SATELLITE DATA... Never occurs to those deniers over at SkScience..

Global warming 'hiatus' puts climate change scientists on the spot - Los Angeles Times

Global warming 'hiatus' puts climate change scientists on the spot
Theories as to why Earth's average surface temperature hasn't risen in recent years include an idea that the Pacific Ocean goes through decades-long cycles of absorbing heat.

Curry isn't the only one to suggest flaws in established climate models. IPCC vice chair Francis Zwiers, director of the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium at the University of Victoria in Canada, co-wrote a paper published in this month's Nature Climate Change that said climate models had "significantly" overestimated global warming over the last 20 years — and especially for the last 15 years, which coincides with the onset of the hiatus.

The models had predicted that the average global surface temperature would increase by 0.21 of a degree Celsius over this period, but they turned out to be off by a factor of four, Zwiers and his colleagues wrote. In reality, the average temperature has edged up only 0.05 of a degree Celsius over that time — which in a statistical sense is not significantly different from zero.

That paper? September 2013... No wonder Cooked and Nutti are crapping their pants over at SkS...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And here is one that says otherwise;
https://www.skepticalscience.com/cowtan_way_surface_temperature_data_update.html

The Warmer stopped

The Ocean ate the Warming

The Warming never stopped

A story a Day from the AGWCult