Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 10881 - 10900 of total 25944 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Aug 5, 2013 - 09:49am PT
The IPCC 2007 Climate Forecast for this Century:
CO2 (the most important gas) has risen from 280 ppm to 379 since pre-industrial times and its growth seems to be accelerating. Whether it does or not is the basis for 7 assumptions about future temperatures.
Temperature increase. For the next 2 decades, 0.2 deg. C (0.4 F) temperature rise per decade, slightly higher later in most models. The models are all different and respond differently to different assumptions. For the end of this century, IPCC provides 7 best estimates (for 7 assumptions) ranging from 0.6 - 4.0 C (1.1-7.2 F). Warming is likely to lie in the range 2-4.5 deg. C (3.6-8.1 F), with a most likely value of about 3 deg. C (5.4 F). Since the 1800s the temperature has risen 0.76 deg.C (1.4 F). The warming is to be greater on land, in high northern latitudes.
Sea level rise. For 6 sets of assumptions, the mid-points are about 0.3 meters ( 1 ft.) Since 1850 sea level has risen about 200 mm (9 in.), a little less than 2 mm/yr. More recently the rate appears to be 3.1 mm/yr, now measured by altimetry satellites. (However, we learned on 22 June 2007 that the data were manipulated to achieve this!!). In a 2009-published study, the authors used GPS measurement to correct for local vertical movement of the Earth at key tide gages, finding a "global rate of geocentric sea level rise of 1.61 ▒ 0.19mm/yr over the past century" with no acceleration.
Other attributes. Ocean acidity should rise with reduced ph units of 0.14 to 0.35; hurricanes become more intense, perhaps less numerous; heat waves and heavy precipitation more frequent; less sea ice and snow cover; higher westerly winds in mid-latitudes; more precipitation in high latitudes, less in sub-tropics inland areas.



read more at: http://www.climatecooling.org/
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Aug 5, 2013 - 10:06am PT
The IPCC Projections do not Comport with Reality
CO2 has usually been associated with temperature rise throughout the history of the Earth. It is indeed a greenhouse gas but it operates on a logarithmic function. The Earth's natural processes also contribute, and remove, copious amounts of CO2. Since plants first appeared on the Earth, they have converted nearly all available CO2 to oxygen, fossil fuels, and other longterm removals from the atmosphere. Today less than 4/100 of 1% (379 ppm) of our atmosphere is CO2. This pales in comparison with other periods in Earth's history. Common IPCC scenarios rely on an increasing supply of fossil fuels, yet we know that this is not possible and that production will soon peak (if not already) while prices will continue to rise. It is absolutely unrealistic to think CO2 emissions will rise for the duration of this century.
The projected temperature rise is unrealistic, given that the USA and global temperatures have risen by only 1 deg F (.5 C) in 100 years (revised, NOAA, 1 May 2007 ), (or 150 years using the full instrumented data set) during the height of industrial expansion. Even if all this rise is correct, and is attributable to human causes, it is a trivial amount in the natural variation of the Earth, and to suggest the rise would accelerate 5 fold (IPCC best estimate) in this century is incredible. Even after the release of the new data set and procedures by NOAA on May 1, which addressed some of the urban heat island issues and dropped the warming 44% (below IPCC 2007), significant other urban heat island issues still remain. There are also issues of calibration as measurement protocols have changed, issues about the design and placement of the temperature stations, and even the strongly held view by many skeptics that this is a natural rise as the Earth recovers from the Little Ice Age (circa 1500-1900).
Sea level rise may have increased recently, but other studies have consistently shown no increase. Even if there is an increase, it is in the order of 1 mm per year on top of the 1-2 mm per year that has been happening for the last century, this additional amount is 4 inches (10 cm) over the century. This is not trivial if you are in a low-lying region wrestling with land subsidence, but it is barely more than what would be coming anyway.
The other forecasts, such as for hurricanes, rainfall, and snow cover, are not significantly different than under natural variability, and will advance more slowly than the decadal oscillations. In particular, if ocean acidity were a problem for shell formation, it would have shown up already in areas where there are naturally high levels of CO2. It has not. Further, the lead hurricane expert for IPCC, Chris Landsea, resigned over the misrepresentation of data by IPCC
Dr. Christ

Mountain climber
State of Mine
Aug 5, 2013 - 11:12am PT
I built a fence, a deck, a climbing wall, and some other things around the house. I know for a fact someone who builds for a living could have done a better job and in less time. But I enjoyed the process and learned some things along the way. I also ask the honest opinion of every builder who sees my work so I can make potential improvements on my next project. It must suck to live in a world where your weak little ego can't handle being set straight by experts.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 5, 2013 - 11:52am PT
I also ask the honest opinion of every builder who sees my work so I can make potential improvements on my next project. It must suck to live in a world where your weak little ego can't handle being set straight by experts.

Must REALLY suck to have to seek the APPROVAL of others in all ones daily affairs. Now we know the truth about ya DRCHRISTYOUNGn.

BTW, EXPERTS are not infallible. There is always someone bigger & badder around the block to topple the 'EXPERT'.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:08pm PT
Blue blocker - Compare if you will the recent arguments of Ed and Rick. Eds one above concisely, rationally and with detail deconstructs Ricks notions and his ability or lack there of and he rebuts in much the same manner. It is an argument which invites the same from Rick. It practically begs for a challenge by presenting clear and concise observation and explanation which is a requirement of any civil debate.

Rick could chose to equally rationalize his position and the flaws in Ed's as well but he dosn't, which leaves us to speculate - quite reasonably I might add- that he can't.

Instead he pontificates, speculates, opines all with some fairly over the top hyperbole and as we all know a very poor personal grasp on the technicalities of the subject. It emphasizes grandiose rhetoric and assertion with no invitation to challenge. It avoids the vulnerability of challenge and is by definition intellectually cowardly. This is fact. No one can dispute this despite all the spectacular flourishing of technical language that Rick engages in. He is a charletan and an impostor whenever he claims his ability to parse the science. There is no logical reason at this point for anyone to waste time on his personal assertions of science.

His default - which is the only rational default of 99.9% of us - is to rely on expert opinion. We only ask him to defend his choice of expert opinion which requires an examination of his processes of judgement and reasoning which as I have pointed out before he literally refuses to do.

So once again, What exactly did you find outstanding about Ricks long winded same old especially when compared to that of Ed's?



Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:09pm PT
Ed i dont think anyone questions your abilities, just the allegiance.
dirtbag

climber
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:14pm PT
^^^^only tin foil hat idiots do, rong^^^^^
dirtbag

climber
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:17pm PT
Your idea of a credible source is a John birch society opinion piece.


Hahahahahahaha.


I'm laughing at you.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:28pm PT
One gigantic problem Ed and others-you guys have absolutely no observationally verifiable validation of how all your microscopic bits of theoretical minutia fit into and interact in the tremendously complicated dynamic whole. No amount of jiggering with the models, scaring the public, fudging the data, or circle jerk reinforcement in the CAGW community can make up for this. The climate doesn't care nor conform to the phony science.

Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:29pm PT
There is always someone bigger & badder around the block to bully the 'EXPERT'.

Fixed it for you Chuff.



Ron if you question Eds Allegience, then why don't you articulate a few questions to examine that idea? Personally I think its a great idea as it would hopefully reveal motivation on Eds part. As I said before for all I know Ed ( or whoever I was talking about at the time) is actually a secret eco terrorist or maybe an Al quida plant.

However, you should realize that if you embark on such a line of questioning you invite the same toward yourself. I just thought I'd articulate that point in case your spidey senses don't kick in properly this morning.

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:30pm PT
talking about those who actually understand the science

Like everything else ED, the science must be correct prior to understanding it.

Science is a dynamic concept. Not static. You make the science of Climate Change out to be completely static and in one direction. Yours.

BRUCE:

Like this "Expert" that you and the others here are "Bullying"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Curry

Precisely Bruce. Precisely.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:31pm PT
The climate does react and "care" about man's activities.


http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/03/new-hockey-stick-graph-...
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/03/new-hockey-stick-graph-scarier
Credit: monolith

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:37pm PT
Mono- you would be well served to find graphs with other authors. Those guys are the Weiner's of the weather world. Everybody snickers and laughs about the public spectacle of them being caught with their pants down, so to speak
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 5, 2013 - 12:40pm PT
You had better start posting them, cuz you are going to keep seeing these every time you blame the sun or something.
Cragar

Trad climber
MSLA - MT
Aug 5, 2013 - 02:25pm PT
One gigantic problem Ed and others-you guys have absolutely no observationally verifiable validation of how all your microscopic bits of theoretical minutia fit into and interact in the tremendously complicated dynamic whole.

certainly not true, starting with the successful explanation, in 1896, of the temperature of the surface of the Earth.

We can go on from there if you wish... how would you like to start? I'd suggest starting with the highlights of climate science...

While it is complicated and dynamic, it is accessible via scientific observation and explainable with theory, including the fundamental theory which is entirely relevant to the explanations. That's what all those climate scientists have been doing for so long.

Your characterization seems to imply that the "microscopic bits of theoretical minutia" aren't relevant... but your gaff above is not about some side issue, you've completely misunderstood thermodynamics and have implied that all of electrodynamics and quantum mechanics are incorrect because applying them to this problem comes up with the "wrong" answer...

...unfortunately, the answer is what it is, rick, and it is supported by the observations. It is really such a simple thing, CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are responsible for the planet's temperatures. Increase the concentration and increase the temperature. It really is that simple.

Thanks Ed. You remind me of someone who can 'get' the climbing in the Meadows with all the patience and correct deliberate moves you have made in this thread. Although, I don't know of any 60+ pitch route in the Meadows ;^)
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Aug 5, 2013 - 02:57pm PT
Ed, you know damn well i'm not challenging all of the basis of the current understanding of thermodynamics,electrodynamics, or quantum mechanics, just the characterizations ascribed to the mythical molecule.I may have incorrectly characterized from memory the gist of it, but there are physicists and mathematicians reevaluating this.The climate sensitivity to CO2 is steadily trending downward in reevaluations-that you cannot deny and have even stated so in the recent past. I think there is a new paper in Nature to this effect-something about reconstruction of past climate sensitivity to doubling of CO2, from empirical evidence, leads to a climate sensitivity of 0.8 C. Look it up.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Aug 5, 2013 - 03:00pm PT
I pledge allegiance
to the model
of the climate change of America
and to the republicans
who stand against it
one nation, without god
Somewhat divisible
With pollution and carbon credits for all.

Amen.

DMT

(allegiance, sheesh!)
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 5, 2013 - 03:19pm PT
Rick may be referring to the paper discussed here:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-single-study-syndrome-nic-lewis-edition.html

Rick's the one who needs to say what paper he is referring to if he wants a response.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Aug 5, 2013 - 03:24pm PT
BRUCE:

Like this "Expert" that you and the others here are "Bullying"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Curry

Precisely Bruce. Precisely.


I'm bullying her? Sorry old sport but I reserve all my scorn and ridicule for you. I have no business bullying or even criticizing Judith Curry as it is well outside of my expertise. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that she is getting a rough ride from some of her peers but if her opinions are correct they will be proven correct as is provided for in the processes of her community. Until that occurs I would hope she has a skin thick enough to match her intellectual courage .... unlike some on this thread.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 5, 2013 - 03:41pm PT
^^^^^^^^^^^^^RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT. Nice come back! Not!^^^^^^^^^^^


BADDDA BIING!
Messages 10881 - 10900 of total 25944 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews