Three years left to limit warming to 1.5C, leading scientists warn

[EMH]

My, my, and I have several college chemistry textbooks that state exactly the opposite. Now who to believe, some silly anonymous flap yap on the internet or the PhD's in chemistry that wrote those books. And, no, you are simply lying about the satellite and ballon data.

Really... what did the ACTUAL DATA say before your side FUDGED IT in 2005???

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling



gotta love NBC, where "documented" becomes "suggested."

A thermometer "suggested" it was 70F outside, but the "top climate scientist" "corrected" that to 77F....

LOL~~~

 

[EMH]

So from 280 ppm at the start of the Industrial Revolution to present, we have an increase to 421 ppm of CO2

that caused absolutely NO WARMING in the atmosphere according to the two and only two measures we have...

 

[ding]

Are religious superstitious beliefs clouding your judgment? Do you believe that only the god has the power to influence the earth's climate?

I believe they will eventually discover that the planet’s climate is driven by how the ocean circulates heat and the resulting effect that has on the planet’s unique landmass configuration.

 

[ding]

What do you think?

I think you are an idiot.

 

[ding]

Wrong.
There have been over 12 normal ice age and warming cycles.
But they are over 110k years long, and we have compressed a new artificial cycle down to only about 500 years, so have accelerated the natural cycle by over 2000 times faster.
That does not allow for adaptation.

When heat is being circulated from the Atlantic to the arctic like it is today, the northern hemisphere deglaciates and the oceans and the atmosphere warm.

 

[ding]

I disagree.

The natural warming/cooling is a 110k year long cycle that we have compressed into less than 500 years.
We also are adding an artificial warming right on top of the warmest part of the natural cycle.

We don't know when this current warming will stop as heat is going to keep accumulating for a very long time, even if we were to stop adding more CO2.
It could be like Venus where the global warming keeps it over 400 degrees.

And forget about water vapor.
First of all, heat retention at the surface is irrelevant.
It only counts on the boundary to space.
That is where the solar energy has to leave the planet, and can't if blocked by CO2.
Only infrared photons can leave through the vacuum of space, and CO2 blocks infrared.
And there is no water vapor at the boundary to space since it is so cold that it precipitates out.
Water vapor has the opposite effect of cooling the planet by reflecting incoming solar energy, by increased albedo.

Disagree all you want. The ocean drives the climate of the planet, not the atmosphere. Heat from the atmosphere is lost to space. Heat in the ocean is stored.

 

[Donald H]

I think you are an idiot.

That's about what I expect from any Christian who is fighting to uphold the bible's lies, against what he knows to be the truth.

You've chosen to come back and immediately try to start a fight. You're only fighting against your conscience and your rational self.

 

[Donald H]

I believe they will eventually discover that the planet’s climate is driven by how the ocean circulates heat and the resulting effect that has on the planet’s unique landmass configuration.

I'm no expert but I think that AGW is already having an effect on ocean circulations. In any case, we agree that it's not the god that is causing rapid climate change.

 

[ding]

That's about what I expect from any Christian who is fighting to uphold the bible's lies, against what he knows to be the truth.

You've chosen to come back and immediately try to start a fight. You're only fighting against your conscience and your rational self.

Actually it was due to your ignorance on this subject coupled with your zealotry for this subject.

 

[ding]

I'm no expert but I think that AGW is already having an effect on ocean circulations. In any case, we agree that it's not the god that is causing rapid climate change.

If you understood what drives the ocean’s circulation currents you’d know just how stupid your claim is.

 

[Sunsettommy]

If you understood what drives the ocean’s circulation currents you’d know just how stupid your claim is.

People like him have been so brainwashed with the stupid long dead AGW bullcrap, and the two failed cornerstones of the AGW bullshit,

NO Hot Spot exists.

NO Positive Feedback Loop exist.

Warm forcing at the 430 ppm level is negligible while the postulated doubling from 280 pmm to 560 ppm generated only an increase of 3.8 W/m2 against the backdrop of the downwelling of he he... ha ha.... 508 W/m2 spread out over 200 years time from 1880.

=====

Next, here is the radical change in downwelling radiation at the surface from the increase in CO2 that is supposed to be driving the “CLIMATE EMERGENCY!!!” What I’ve shown is the change that in theory would have occurred from the changes in CO2 from 1750 to the present, and the change that in theory will occur in the future when CO2 increases from its present value to twice the 1750 value. This is using the generally accepted (although not rigorously derived) claim that the downwelling radiation change from a doubling of CO2 is 3.7 watts per square metre (W/m2). The purpose is to show how small these CO2-caused changes are compared to total downwelling radiation.

The changes in downwelling radiation from the increase in CO2 are trivially small, lost in the noise …

LINK

 

[westwall]

I believe they will eventually discover that the planet’s climate is driven by how the ocean circulates heat and the resulting effect that has on the planet’s unique landmass configuration.

No, it's governed by the Sun. Ocean currents will merely create local climates, not global.

 

[westwall]

Disagree all you want. The ocean drives the climate of the planet, not the atmosphere. Heat from the atmosphere is lost to space. Heat in the ocean is stored.

The Sun drives it. The ocean currents merely concentrate things locally.

 

[ding]

No, it's governed by the Sun. Ocean currents will merely create local climates, not global.

Lots of papers on the physical evidence for ocean currents causing abrupt glaciation and abrupt deglaciation.

The sun shines just the same during periods of glaciation and deglaciation.

 

[westwall]

Lots of papers on the physical evidence for ocean currents causing abrupt glaciation and abrupt deglaciation.

The sun shines just the same during periods of glaciation and deglaciation.

Just as many showing volcanic eruptions as the cause. It's extraordinarily difficult to raise temperature in ANY medium.

It is however relatively easy to lower the temperature of the planet by tossing enough crap into the atmosphere to cause reduced solar energy to the ground, Krakatoa, Tambora, and a few others all witnessed global cooling after their relatively minor eruptions (in the overall pantheon of volcanic eruptions).

 

[ding]

Just as many showing volcanic eruptions as the cause. It's extraordinarily difficult to raise temperature in ANY medium.

It is however relatively easy to lower the temperature of the planet by tossing enough crap into the atmosphere to cause reduced solar energy to the ground, Krakatoa, Tambora, and a few others all witnessed global cooling after their relatively minor eruptions (in the overall pantheon of volcanic eruptions).

We’ve had over 30 glacial/interglacial cycles over the past 3 million years. Regularly occurring cycles are not caused by volcanic eruptions. This is a systematic condition that is related to our current landmass configuration. The planet is geologically configured for colder temperatures because of how the polar regions are uniquely configured. All it takes for glaciation to occur in the northern hemisphere is to disrupt heat flow from the Atlantic. It’s well understood.

 

[westwall]

We’ve had over 30 glacial/interglacial cycles over the past 3 million years. Regularly occurring cycles are not caused by volcanic eruptions. This is a systematic condition that is related to our current landmass configuration. The planet is geologically configured for colder temperatures because of how the polar regions are uniquely configured. All it takes for glaciation to occur in the northern hemisphere is to disrupt heat flow from the Atlantic. It’s well understood.

Or reduce the amount of solar radiation arriving into the oceans, which is what warms them in the first place.

All currents do is move around the heat that already exists.

 

[Donald H]

After reading through the comments on this discussion, it's becoming clear that denialists' faith against AGW is mostly based on their faith that only the god can cause climate change.

There's no possibility of changing their minds on that!

 

[westwall]

After reading through the comments on this discussion, it's becoming clear that denialists' faith against AGW is mostly based on their faith that only the god can cause climate change.

There's no possibility of changing their minds on that!

The only thing that is obvious is that there is no empirical data that supports the failed theory of AGW.

So run along little cultist.

 

[ding]

Or reduce the amount of solar radiation arriving into the oceans, which is what warms them in the first place.

All currents do is move around the heat that already exists.

The sun is remarkably constant. I suspect the biggest role it plays is in wind currents which plays a role in ocean currents but the main driver is temperature related density differences.