Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2014 - 05:53pm PT
|
The basics of the science are settled.
Convincing the likes of Sketch or The Chief? Not so much.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2014 - 05:54pm PT
|
Surely there are Cliff Notes to these papers? My bad, I just remembered
there would have to be some big words, like 'data', and such.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2014 - 06:04pm PT
|
LOL, love it when Sketch says global warming has stopped.
Did the IPCC say global warming has stopped?
LOL!
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2014 - 06:23pm PT
|
The IPCC report says nothing of the kind Sketch. The planet is still having an unabated large net influx of heat.
You should lay out why you think the oceans are not warming. That will be a hoot.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2014 - 06:30pm PT
|
The heat content of the oceans is increasing much faster than the surface atmosphere due to the masses involved.
Notice the slope of the red area, vs the slope of the top line?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 10, 2014 - 06:49pm PT
|
Typical rhetoric from Sketch.
He fancies himself smart, but in actuality he's just a smart ass.
You mean "the science" hasn't already proven itself out?
What about all that talk about "the science has been settled"? Is that a lie?
You see, someone who has a semblance of wits would be able to pick up on the difference between the science being settled, and it being proven out to the folks who drive around in the clown car.
But go ahead, Sketch, play your little game. It really is a little one.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 10, 2014 - 07:28pm PT
|
This is funny coming from someone unable to accept the hiatus in warming.
What makes you think you know better than the IPCC?
Sketch, can you find a quote from the IPCC that states the warming has stopped? You should have it at your fingertips, considering your response.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2014 - 10:50pm PT
|
TTFN,Does mean you are gay?NTTTIAWWT.
Edit; What?[in advance]I mean you called me a Nazi.
And have I ever told you how many names I have been called.....trulyLOL.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 12:48am PT
|
Hot off the presses, here's The Economist's take on the "pause"
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21598610-slowdown-rising-temperatures-over-past-15-years-goes-being
Skeptics and mainstreams can each take something away.
Here's the lead paragraph, you can click the link for more if you're interested:
Who pressed the pause button?
The slowdown in rising temperatures over the past 15 years goes from being unexplained to overexplained
BETWEEN 1998 and 2013, the Earth’s surface temperature rose at a rate of 0.04°C a decade, far slower than the 0.18°C increase in the 1990s. Meanwhile, emissions of carbon dioxide (which would be expected to push temperatures up) rose uninterruptedly. This pause in warming has raised doubts in the public mind about climate change. A few sceptics say flatly that global warming has stopped. Others argue that scientists’ understanding of the climate is so flawed that their judgments about it cannot be accepted with any confidence. A convincing explanation of the pause therefore matters both to a proper understanding of the climate and to the credibility of climate science—and papers published over the past few weeks do their best to provide one. Indeed, they do almost too good a job. If all were correct, the pause would now be explained twice over.
But notwithstanding the provocative introduction, the article concludes with a sort of mealy-mouthed "this is just a pause and we're gonna get it big time if we don't change our evil ways" conclusion. (As I've noted before, The Economist is a prtty mainstream publication and it broadly adopts the "consensus view," even when, as here, the author seems to sense that there's something fishy going on.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 01:25am PT
|
Definitely "not nice" professor. I've sat through your class here for what seems like years now and according to you my understanding is more microscopic than when the classes started.
I debated you on specifics of a paper a few weeks back and in the end your only differentiation was semantics over the interpretation of what error means in science versus common language.
Back to absolute global temperature change measurements of the 20th century , can you even define that, put it into context of that experienced in historic times, or even further into the past over the last few millions of years of this glacial age? What is heat; is it the effects on matter from solar and extra solar radiations, radiation from terrestrial atomic disassociation,release of absorbed radiation by GHG's, kinetic energy, friction from pressure or possible gravitational effects-how can it all be quantified in one handy measurement, is there an optimum temperature and state of the earthly biosphere that your preferred mitigation methods can deliver?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 01:45am PT
|
Are you giving me a failing grade professor? This aint going to look good for my GPA. Oh well, can i enroll in your spring time offwidth class?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 02:01am PT
|
And to make matters worse, they don't know when to shut their yappers and listen.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 11, 2014 - 02:55am PT
|
Also this very recent IPCC note:
 The Chief
The second paper by Yu Kosaka and Shang-Ping Xie states that the “current hiatus is part of natural climate variability, tied specifically to a La-Niña-like decadal cooling. Although similar decadal hiatus events may occur in the future, the multi-decadal warming trend is very likely to continue.”
IPCC
That is where we are headed? Says who?
The Chief
Although similar decadal hiatus events may occur in the future, the multi-decadal warming trend is very likely to continue.”
Who said this?
As Sketch says, "It doesn't take much."
|
|
Spitzer
climber
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 10:34am PT
|
Science can not routinely forecast the weather for next month. But according to EDh etal, science can forecast the climate in 50-100 years.
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 11:14am PT
|
Phiiiiiiiiiiiiiing! Right over your head, again EDH.
You still don't get it all due to your sceintism ego.
That is because gov't "policy" dictates their lives, not science. When the gov't policy begins to take money out of their hard earned pay/wallets in order to attempt to control something that is NOT 100% proven as certain by science, the public gets pissed. Especially when those monetary actions that the public has absolutely NO say in, is based on science that has yet to prove that CC can be mitigated via the means that the Gov't has and is planning on implementing. Without the people's majority consent.
CAGW is the joke of this Century. And more people globally are starting to LOL all day long when AGW is mentioned.
Irony Chef. voice of the Amerikan anti-'sceintism' movement
Anti Science hear us roar
Sketch is on board
that makes four.
Chef, what's the magic spell that you anti=scientist's use to make a helicopter fly? amazing what one can do when one overcomes ego.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 11:43am PT
|
What's important is how well we understand the forcings that impact the climate.
"We" will never understand the "forcings" that impact the climate, because "we," as you use it, includes you. People who have spent their lives studying global climate dynamics have a pretty good handle on it and we continue to increase our understanding.
The biggest difference between science and religion is that in science the errors are identified and corrected (e.g. http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/errata/cmip5errata.html);. Not covered up, distorted, and twisted to fit an agenda.
I know, it is hard for morans to understand that, which is why you will never understand science. Life is so much easier when you have "absolute truths" spoon fed to you by your favorite websites or religious authority.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 12:38pm PT
|
However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of forcing trend in causing the hiatus, because of uncertainty in the magnitude of the volcanic forcing trend and low confidence in the aerosol forcing trend.
ahhahahahahhahaaaaaaa!!!!!
Massive cover-up!
Chuff just blew the lid off the whole climate change cabal!
Those sneaky bastards, clearly identifying their low confidence in quantifying certain aspects of a complicated system.
What next? I bet those underhanded bastards start studying it in even more detail to better understand it. Corruption!!!!
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 01:37pm PT
|
LOL, Sketch whines when a cartoon gets posted twice.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2014 - 01:46pm PT
|
Apparently, this is very upsetting to you.
Not upset. Actually, I find it quite entertaining when a dipshit posts a direct quote several times without providing a link to the source and then says "I don't know why they concluded"
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!