Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 11:29am PT
|
So you are saying that you can get a BA in the US without reading a single book or article? That is just sad.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 11:30am PT
|
^^^^^ Prove it Wrong or "bad" science, Phule!^^^^^^
What should I prove wrong? That those two people haven't linked to that site many times?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 11:38am PT
|
It is you that accused me of never reading a science paper or any lit of the sort in my life.
It is obvious from this thread that you haven't read any scientific paper or books about the climate or have you done that?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 11:43am PT
|
Why should I? That anthony watts thinks that the site is crap even though that it is obviously not on the side of the concensus says enough.
That it totaly missinterpret the nasa science is also enough.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 11:44am PT
|
Have you read a single scientific paper or book about the climate?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 11:55am PT
|
Yeah, those pesky graphs.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:08pm PT
|
^^Love how they measure starting from an extreme El Nino event, and temps are still up^^
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:17pm PT
|
I see you guys have been talking about the Nasa Saber instrumentation observations about the repellent effect of upper atmospheric CO2 and No. Didn't see a link to the Nasa announcement so here is one.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/
Yeah Ron, the chinese are laughing their asses off at american stupidity all the way to the bank.
Implications, surely you jest. Obviously those molecules behave in a more complex fashion than the CAGW fraudsters would portray them.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:19pm PT
|
and the implications on ACC are?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:29pm PT
|
You missed the part where 95% of the radiation from the storm was deflected back into space by the very same molecule CO2 and No that the CAGW folks claim overwhelmingly deflects radiation back to earth, Ron.
Werner seems to be well versed on the implications.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:31pm PT
|
Oh, my 95% of a surge was reflected back. That settles it. LOL
Maybe you missed this:
signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years
signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years
signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years
signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years
signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years
signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years
signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years
And the main stream scientists are in some kind of vast conspiracy obviously and are totally ignoring this.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:35pm PT
|
What a fool.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:35pm PT
|
OOps, just saw Ed's post. And of course he once again claims we, and all but contrary science, are unqualified to understand the science. Interesting, that is the same criteria they use in their peer review process-any paper contrary to their consensus is bounced in the peer review process as having errors in understanding the contorted twisted science of their "consensus".
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:36pm PT
|
Seems the Sun also doesnt follow CC "charts"
It is more that you once again show that you do not show much knowledge if any about the science of the climate.
The note at the end of the article show the size of the event compared to the energies involved daily in the atmoshpere.
"No one on Earth’s surface would have felt this impulse of heat. Mlynczak puts it into perspective: “Heat radiated by the solid body of the Earth is very large compared to the amount of heat being exchanged in the upper atmosphere. The daily average infrared radiation from the entire planet is 240 W/m2—enough to power NYC for 200,000 years.”"
So 20,000 times less energy than the infrared radiation.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2013 - 12:36pm PT
|
Again, Anderson, NASA never claims CO2 is a net cooler in our atmosphere.
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
net net net net net net
Repeated for the visually and/or mentally impaired.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!