490 replies to this topic

[Rogerdodger]

And here's how Climate Charlatans look to the open minded:



The only way that real climate change could happen is if it ever quit changing!
Who denies climate change? It has been happening since day one.

Deny this: Here's real climate change evidence as found in geological formations earth wide:
Evidence of temperature change, floods, droughts, extinctions, earthquakes, fires, volcanoes from long before man ever drilled for that natural, organic, solar energy called crude oil and coal.

Real science always messes up dogma.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 12 September 2015 - 03:14 PM.

[diogenes227]

The Pause That Failed To Pause

From the link:

The climate science sphere has been wrapped up in a major debate for the past several years: over the global warming “pause.” But now, a growing body of research has some scientists saying that the case may, in fact, be closed. They’re arguing that the pause never existed.

The notion of a global warming pause, or “climate hiatus,” suggests that the rising of global surface temperatures has significantly slowed or even stopped during the past 15 years. The idea, which experts believe cropped up sometime in 2013, has been seized upon by many climate skeptics, but also has managed to cause unexpected controversy within the scientific community. Since then, a flurry of scientific studies have emerged attempting to explain why such a pause might be occurring, pointing to natural climatic factors such as volcanic eruptions or changes in oceanic patterns.

But in the past few months, a handful of scientists have taken a different approach by asking not why the hiatus is occurring, but whether it’s occurring at all. And two new studies, released within days of each other, are adding to the evidence that the pause may not exist.

A new statistical approach. One of the studies, published Thursday in the journal Climatic Change, introduces a new statistical method designed specifically to help tackle the hiatus problem.

To figure out whether the pause exists, scientists have to compare two data sets: global temperatures from the past 15 years vs. all the decades leading up to that point. Naturally, the data set from the supposed hiatus period is much smaller — so small, in fact, that it would be hard to get accurate results using most classical statistical methods, says Bala Rajaratnam, the study’s lead author and an assistant professor of statistics and Earth system science at Stanford University.

“We had to develop a new method which takes into account the idea that the sample size during the hiatus is really not very large,” Rajaratnam says. Using the new method, the scientists tackled four hypotheses related to the idea of a hiatus: first, that warming stopped entirely in the past 15 years; second, that the rate of warming just slowed down; third, that there has been a change in average global temperature in the past 15 years; and fourth, that there was a difference in the year-to-year temperature changes between the two data sets.

Including all four hypotheses was a way to make sure all the bases were covered, says Noah Diffenbaugh, an associate professor of Earth system science at Stanford University and the study’s senior author. The supposed climate hiatus has been defined in a variety of ways within both the general public and the scientific community, and each of the hypotheses represents a slightly different definition. In each case, Diffenbaugh says, he and his colleagues were able to conclude “with high statistical confidence” that a pause was not occurring.

[salsabob]

Deny this: Here's real climate change evidence as found in geological formations earth wide:
Evidence of temperature change, floods, droughts, extinctions, earthquakes, fires, volcanoes from long before man ever drilled for that natural, organic, solar energy called crude oil and coal

This is one of the more bizarre arguments of deniers.

Nearly all historic changes in climate are related to changes in atmospheric gases of CO2 and CH4. Even the 100K orbit-induced cycles (we should be cooling now) has the warming oceans unable to hold as much CO2 providing a positive feedback loop for further warming.

What rational people look at is long-term changes versus abrupt changes in CO2 and warming. When there has been abrupt change, there has been dire consequences for life on the planet including mass extinctions. Humans today are emitting prodigious quantities of CO2, at a rate faster than even the most destructive climate changes in earth's past. And the dinosaurs were smarter, they didn't build their biggest cities in coastal flood plains.

Only the amygdala-dominated can find solace in past climate changes.

[salsabob]

The Pause That Failed To Pause

From the link:

You're going to blow a few folks' amygdala with that!

[brucekeller]

What a surprise. Climate change people didn't like the data, so they analyzed it in a way biased towards the result they wanted. Haven't seen this before.

[Rogerdodger]

Nearly all historic changes in climate are related to changes in atmospheric gases of CO2 and CH4.

Yes but is it Cause or Effect?
Warm air will hold more CO2 than cooler climate periods.
Hot tea will hold many times more sugar than cold tea.
But does the sugar make the tea hot?
PS: Water vapor has a zillion times more effect as a greenhouse gas than the minuscule amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Cold or hot, either way we must raise taxes to save the world from something.

1970 – Is Mankind Manufacturing a New Ice Age for Itself? (L.A. Times, January 15, 1970)
1970 – New Ice Age May Descend On Man (Sumter Daily Item, January 26, 1970)
1970 – Pollution Prospect A Chilling One (Owosso Argus-Press, January 26, 1970)
1970 – Pollution’s 2-way ‘Freeze’ On Society (Middlesboro Daily News, January 28, 1970)
1970 – Cold Facts About Pollution (The Southeast Missourian, January 29, 1970)
1970 – Pollution Could Cause Ice Age, Agency Reports (St. Petersburg Times, March 4, 1970)
1970 – Pollution Called Ice Age Threat (St. Petersburg Times, June 26, 1970)
1970 – Dirt Will .Bring New Ice Age (The Sydney Morning Herald, October 19, 1970)
1971 – Ice Age Refugee Dies Underground (The Montreal Gazette, Febuary 17, 1971)
1971 – U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming (The Washington Post, July 9, 1971)
1971 – Ice Age Around the Corner (Chicago Tribune, July 10, 1971)
1971 – New Ice Age Coming – It’s Already Getting Colder (L.A. Times, October 24, 1971)
1971 – Another Ice Age? Pollution Blocking Sunlight (The Day, November 1, 1971)
1971 – Air Pollution Could Bring An Ice Age (Harlan Daily Enterprise, November 4, 1971)
1972 – Air pollution may cause ice age (Free-Lance Star, February 3, 1972)
1972 – Scientist Says New ice Age Coming (The Ledger, February 13, 1972)
1972 – Scientist predicts new ice age (Free-Lance Star, September 11, 1972)
1972 – British expert on Climate Change says Says New Ice Age Creeping Over Northern Hemisphere (Lewiston Evening Journal, September 11, 1972)
1972 – Climate Seen Cooling For Return Of Ice Age (Portsmouth Times, ‎September 11, 1972‎)
1972 – New Ice Age Slipping Over North (Press-Courier, September 11, 1972)
1972 – Ice Age Begins A New Assault In North (The Age, September 12, 1972)
1972 – Weather To Get Colder (Montreal Gazette, ‎September 12, 1972‎)
1972 – British climate expert predicts new Ice Age (The Christian Science Monitor, September 23, 1972)
1972 – Scientist Sees Chilling Signs of New Ice Age (L.A. Times, September 24, 1972)
1972 – Science: Another Ice Age? (Time Magazine, November 13, 1972)
1973 – The Ice Age Cometh (The Saturday Review, March 24, 1973)
1973 – Weather-watchers think another ice age may be on the way (The Christian Science Monitor, December 11, 1973)
1974 – New evidence indicates ice age here (Eugene Register-Guard, May 29, 1974)
1974 – Another Ice Age? (Time Magazine, June 24, 1974)
1974 – 2 Scientists Think ‘Little’ Ice Age Near (The Hartford Courant, August 11, 1974)
1974 – Ice Age, worse food crisis seen (The Chicago Tribune, October 30, 1974)
1974 – Believes Pollution Could Bring On Ice Age (Ludington Daily News, December 4, 1974)
1974 – Pollution Could Spur Ice Age, Nasa Says (Beaver Country Times, ‎December 4, 1974‎)
1974 – Air Pollution May Trigger Ice Age, Scientists Feel (The Telegraph, ‎December 5, 1974‎)
1974 – More Air Pollution Could Trigger Ice Age Disaster (Daily Sentinel – ‎December 5, 1974‎)
1974 – Scientists Fear Smog Could Cause Ice Age (Milwaukee Journal, December 5, 1974)
1975 – Climate Changes Called Ominous (The New York Times, January 19, 1975)
1975 – Climate Change: Chilling Possibilities (Science News, March 1, 1975)
1975 – B-r-r-r-r: New Ice Age on way soon? (The Chicago Tribune, March 2, 1975)
1975 – Cooling Trends Arouse Fear That New Ice Age Coming (Eugene Register-Guard, ‎March 2, 1975‎)
1975 – Is Another Ice Age Due? Arctic Ice Expands In Last Decade (Youngstown Vindicator – ‎March 2, 1975‎)
1975 – Is Earth Headed For Another Ice Age? (Reading Eagle, March 2, 1975)

It looks like the science of global freezing was settled in 1975...then the sun got active again for the next 3+ decades and Al Gore was born!
PS: Al Gore and I both got our degrees in Climatology from the same university.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 17 September 2015 - 02:42 PM.

[salsabob]

Nearly all historic changes in climate are related to changes in atmospheric gases of CO2 and CH4.

Yes but is it Cause or Effect?

It can be both. CO2 released into the atm holds heat and warms the oceans. Warmer oceans release more CO2 into the atm. This is call a "positive feedback loop." This is not rocket science; your cerebral lobes could handle it easily if you can just get your amygdala to set them free.

Warm air will hold more CO2 than cooler climate periods.
Hot tea will hold many times more sugar than cold tea.
But does the sugar make the tea hot?

You're conflating physical processes and getting pretty confused. Sugar is not a gas; CO2 is, and it will gas off at a greater rate as the liquid it is dissolved in. Yes, a warmer atmosphere holds more CO2 and more CO2 in the atm will trap heat - they are not mutually exclusive and if fact provide a positive feedback loop.

PS: Water vapor has a zillion times more effect as a greenhouse gas than the minuscule amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere.

The global water cycle takes care of that - there is no more or less water since gravitational effects eventually stablized the earth's total water. That is not true of rapid and enormous atmospheric CO2 additions from burning fossil fuels. It's pretty simple mass balancing taught in 8th grade physics.

Cold or hot, either way we must raise taxes to save the world from something.

And exactly what taxes have been raised?

The Big Freeze - yadda, yadda, yadda

Yes, Roger, solar radiance would indicate that the earth should be cooling; it's not. The question is why do you let your amygdala cause you to ignore what that means?

[brucekeller]

Ever heard of carbon tax?

[Rogerdodger]

Ever heard of carbon tax?

Ever heard of the billions of taxpayer money disappearing in fraudulent GREEN schemes (Solyndra, etc)?

But you are correct.
There are no cycles in nature.
Climate change only began recently.
There are no solar variations.
Sugar is not a gas and there is very little tea in the atmosphere.
No adjustments have ever been made in current or historic climate data.
Computer models have proven to be flawless.
Consensus says the earth is flat.
Imprison the deniers again.
Well said.
Brilliant.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 17 September 2015 - 09:22 PM.

[Rogerdodger]

The insignificance of CO2 as a driver of temperature:


The factual record of CO₂ and temperature in the geological history of the earth:


Obviously, there is no apparent linkage, so why is CO₂ suddenly the climate control knob when there were years with higher CO₂ and lower temperatures?
Scientifically curious minds can see stacks of evidence of another politically motivated science scandal.

Human progress: The amount of people, life expectancy and global personal GDP. These “hockey sticks” show that, since the advent of fossil fuels, the human condition has improved immensely.


There is no apparent linkage, so why is CO₂ suddenly the climate control knob when there were years with higher CO₂ and lower temperatures?

LINK