Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 26461 - 26480 of total 28535 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded a$#hat Sheep
Oct 21, 2014 - 09:15am PT
GO CANADA!






raymond phule

climber
Oct 21, 2014 - 09:21am PT

Its all in who processes the data Ray. Take NCDC , GISS, and yourself for example. They and you are on a mission to find and broadcast manmade warming. With this overriding bias truth is twisted to fit the agenda.

So you believe that an organization like NOAA don't do anything to fake the output data for their satellites? You are so naive.

I am not certain though have your misrepresentations fit into this conspiracy stuff. I used the data found on the Spencer's own webpage to show that what you wrote were incorrect.

To me it seems like you used your own bias to came up with a "truth" that fit your agenda even though it clearly were wrong.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 21, 2014 - 09:24am PT

EDIT: in another unequivicol sign of cooling, and exposure of CC industry lies, the great lakes water levels are back near normal and the surface temperatures are way, way down going into winter. Good time to invest in shipyards building ice breakers?

Do you know that it exist a world outside north America?
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 21, 2014 - 09:24am PT
This is why you are enttitlement queens. You fail at demonstrating and justifying your opinion, yet you expect respect for your opinion.

You demand respect simply because it is your entitlement. You don't need to earn it.

Small wonder welfare rates run higher in the Red States.... entitlement runs in your blood!
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 21, 2014 - 09:33am PT
Chief, you are a one man army, a veritable wreckingball plowing through the army of deception and lies of CAGW. Have you considered accepting Koch Bros. funding?
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 21, 2014 - 10:04am PT
pretty weak stuff Rick, relying on the school yard bully to press your point.

You can't even go toe to toe with me let alone anyone else. Go read some more papers Rick then come back and impress us with your parroting skills.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 21, 2014 - 11:36am PT
One small locale on a large planet, you say Ray? Well Phule, that would be fine accept record levels of Antarctic ice, a rising amount of Arctic ice, a rising trend in NH snow cover and duration, mountain glacier advance in parts of Asia , New Zealand, Europe, cooling southern oceans, six out of the last seven winters severe in large parts of the NH, etc etc, says otherwise. Where exactly is this record missing heat going fool? There are now claims it is not settling in the deep seas. All this gives credence to the global temp indices of UAH, RSS, while not supporting NCDC, GISS, etc. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but the body earth puts the lie to data manipulation. Expect another severe winter and deep ice on navigable NH lakes.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 21, 2014 - 11:50am PT
I'd say you can't make this stuff up, but rick finds a way:

in another unequivicol sign of cooling, and exposure of CC industry lies, the great lakes water levels are back near normal


so, rick, how does the level of the Great Lakes correlate with global warming?

It looks like the levels are higher during periods of rapid increase of global mean temperature...

Credit: Ed Hartouni
http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/dashboard/GLWLD.html

Maybe you could download the data and do an analysis... oh, you can't, never mind.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 21, 2014 - 12:01pm PT
Impressive post. So many errors and bad logic in a paragraph.

"a rising amount of Arctic ice"

Not really, the extent were slightly lower this year compared to last year.

"a rising trend in NH snow cover and duration"

This really doesn't became more true if you say it many times. The duration is definitely shorter.

"mountain glacier advance in parts of Asia , New Zealand, Europe, cooling southern oceans, six out of the last seven winters severe in large parts of the NH, etc etc, says otherwise"

To unclear to say much about. The general trend is the opposite.

"There are now claims it is not settling in the deep seas."

Yes, some research say that the ocean below 2000 m is not warming but the level between 0-2000 m is.

"All this gives credence to the global temp indices of UAH, RSS, while not supporting NCDC, GISS, etc."

Sure, this year so far is only in the top 3 hottest according to UAH. That is really chilly.

"You can fool some of the people some of the time, but the body earth puts the lie to data manipulation. Expect another severe winter and deep ice on navigable NH lakes."

Lets see whats happens this time. You prediction of the arctic sea ice failed with a large margin.

One thing I really doesn't get is how you often don't trust noaa or nasa but when the write something that fit into you world view you seem to believe them. Why?
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 21, 2014 - 12:05pm PT
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 21, 2014 - 12:23pm PT
One odd thing about liking UAH and RSS is that even the UAH folks no longer trust RSS. Spencer and Christy suggest RSS applies a model-based correction that has become increasingly inaccurate in compensating for satellite problems affecting their estimates of lower-troposphere temperature -- which gives the RSS series its very noticeable cool bias.

Exactly because of that cool bias, this least accurate of the main temperature indexes has become the denialist favorite. That's all been mentioned here before, but I'll repeat in case anyone wants to forget or ignore it again. Quoting Roy Spencer, with added emphasis to the last sentence because Roy's tongue-in-cheek advice is what his least-bright followers are now doing:

Over the last ten years or so there has been a growing inconsistency between the UAH and Remote Sensing Systems versions of the global average lower tropospheric temperature anomalies. Since I sometimes get the question why there is this discrepancy, I decided it was time to address it.
....
As can be seen, in the last 10 years or so the RSS temperatures have been cooling relative to the UAH temperatures (or UAH warming relative to RSS…same thing). The discrepancy is pretty substantial…since 1998, the divergence is over 50% of the long-term temperature trends seen in both datasets.
....
Anyway, my UAH cohort and boss John Christy, who does the detailed matching between satellites, is pretty convinced that the RSS data is undergoing spurious cooling because RSS is still using the old NOAA-15 satellite which has a decaying orbit, to which they are then applying a diurnal cycle drift correction based upon a climate model, which does not quite match reality. We have not used NOAA-15 for trend information in years…we use the NASA Aqua AMSU, since that satellite carries extra fuel to maintain a precise orbit.

But, until the discrepancy is resolved to everyone’s satisfaction, those of you who REALLY REALLY need the global temperature record to show as little warming as possible might want to consider jumping ship, and switch from the UAH to RSS dataset.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 21, 2014 - 01:24pm PT
Minimum Arctic sea ice extent and area were down slightly this year compared with last, still relatively high for the 2007-2014 period but lower than any satellite observations before 2007.



Sea ice volume was above 2013, but again well below any prior to 2007. So far it's a two-year recovery.



Will Arctic sea ice recovery continue for long? I don't think many scientists believe that; while year-to-year variations show a strong weather signal, the Arctic climate trend is still warming. As evidenced by the huge integrators -- Greenland ice sheet and lesser ice caps, permafrost, glaciers, the Canadian ice shelves. Along with multi-decade observational trends like you get from either graph above.

For non-scientists who see a talking point in this two-year "recovery" ... think that works for surface temperatures too? Because it looks like they've taken off with steep warming if we cherry pick a short scale.

Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Oct 22, 2014 - 12:13pm PT
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/10/21/what-can-we-do-about-climate-change/

http://theconversation.com/limiting-global-warming-to-2-c-the-philosophy-and-the-science-32074
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 22, 2014 - 12:25pm PT
Regarding Malemute's second link, there's a characteristically good discussion of this conversation at And Then There's Physics, on whether 2 degrees by 2036 is plausible. Discussion stays mainly on science, with KarSteN contributing an interesting summary about recent trends:

Neely III et al were testing whether increased Asian anthropogenic aerosol emissions have contributed to the observed increase in stratospheric background aerosol. Turns out they didn’t. The increased stratospheric background aerosol is therefore down to recent moderate volcanic eruptions such as Nabro in 2011 and other earlier ones. Definitely a small (and non-negligible) negative forcing.

Most research on anthropogenic tropospheric (Asian) aerosols suggest that (1) their increase was partly counterbalanced by decreasing emissions elsewhere, and that (2) the high Black Carbon fraction led to less surface cooling as it otherwise would have if only sulphate aerosols were involved. So no detectable anthropogenic aerosol forcing in the last decade. Some warming contribution in the 1990’s though (global brightening), after the massive aerosol cooling contribution in the 1960’s and 1970’s (global dimming).

The temperature slow-down is almost entirely due to ENSO, flavoured with a bit of solar and volcanic cooling contribution. The distinct Warm Arctic Cold Continent pattern (WACCy) in NH winter led to an additional detectable temporary cooling contribution in the last 5 years. Whether it’s down to the Arctic sea ice retreat or pure coincidence, we don’t know yet. I am with Cohen et al 2014 who argue for a strong sea ice feedback.


Later in the comments ATTP offers this view about how society will react when things get bad.

In the coming decades we will start seeing a move from “it’s not happening or is not dangerous” to “if only climate scientists had been more trustworthy”. It will always be someone else’s fault.
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded a$#hat Sheep
Oct 22, 2014 - 12:54pm PT
The temperature slow-down is almost entirely due to ENSO, flavoured with a bit of solar and volcanic cooling contribution. The distinct Warm Arctic Cold Continent pattern (WACCy) in NH winter led to an additional detectable temporary cooling contribution in the last 5 years. Whether it’s down to the Arctic sea ice retreat or pure coincidence, we don’t know yet. I am with Cohen et al 2014 who argue for a strong sea ice feedback.

Ah, so now the latest reason, #49, for the 16 years of "COOLING" is due to Natural variability/forcing. Appears that Nature is indeed far more powerful than what you AGWist first thought.

Isn't that IRONIC.


Still nothing from you CHILOE nor EDH that "verifies" what Caused the big Warming trend from 1910-1945.

That could NOT have been due to the same exact forcing as the latest reason for the past 16 years of COOLING now, "COULD" it?

Nah.. no way. Cus if it was indeed "Verifid" as such, it would seriously put one bigazz hole in your AGW theory. Wouldn't it now.
wilbeer

Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Oct 22, 2014 - 01:03pm PT
So that means warming has stopped.RIGHT.

As if there were no warming at all.

Yep,the deniers say warming is OVER,JUST LIKE IN 1945.

Totally disproving AGW.

LOL.
Credit: wilbeer

NVL
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 22, 2014 - 01:36pm PT
More from KarSteN at ATTP, on the implications from two kinds of aerosols that tend to have opposite effects (sulfates--> cooling, black carbon--> warming) and yet also tend to rise or fall together.

Overestimation over remote areas is an issue for all aerosol species to some extent. You often find the combination of either high (neg) sulphate (scattering aerosols) and high (pos) BC (absorbing aerosols) forcing or low (neg) sulphate and (pos) BC forcing. The end result is similar. A bit of a scaling issue if you like. If you happen to only publish the high BC forcing, you can’t infer the total forcing. The same applies if you publish a very high sulphate forcing (what many people did before the BC hype).

Bottomline: IPCC AR5 current central (aerosol) forcing estimate should be fairly robust.
I tend to think that the uncertainty range could be reduced quite substantially though (except for the aerosol forcing – i.e. it’s temporal variability – over the course of the 20th century).
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Oct 22, 2014 - 01:45pm PT
Nah.. no way. Cus if it was indeed "Verifid" as such, it would seriously put one bigazz hole in your AGW theory. Wouldn't it now.

the only "bigazz hole" is the one where your brain should be... you're not going to get much from me until you describe what "evidence" is from your point of view, until then the discussion is futile as you can just say "nope, that's not it!"

try describing "evidence"

turns out that those papers I cited up above have the answer in their abstracts... you apparently missed that. I also posted papers that you could get at online, but you apparently didn't look at them, even if you did, no amount of lip-moving will help you to understand them.

but just for shits and giggles, let's hear your definition of "evidence" and then for "scientific evidence"

still nothing from you on this point, though you seem to be demanding the "evidence" no one knows what you're asking for (not even you)
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 22, 2014 - 02:04pm PT
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Oct 22, 2014 - 02:06pm PT
A good article that discusses continued ocean warming, and whether or not ocean temps are a good short term indicator. The comments include the Nature article authors.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/10/ocean-heat-storage-a-particularly-lousy-policy-target/#more-17608
Messages 26461 - 26480 of total 28535 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 Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews