32,000 scientists dissent from global-warming “consensus”

[Bob_the_lost]

It's like saying the emergency blankets you get given after marathons are useless as they're too thin to keep heat in. Completely missing the point.

 

[WouldBe]

C02 in the oceans/water/ice cannot be disregarded, nor can the C02 from the earth/mud/sea-bed be ignored.

Your right it can't.

But climatologists claim that the increase in global temp is due to atmospheric CO2.

But also how would CO2 in the oceans etc affect global air temperatures?

 

[tangentlama]

You must be reading different journals to me. What is it that 'climatologists' are claiming again?
Please provide links.

 

[free spirit]

I've shown above that there is no correlation between T and CO2 at 400 year, 10,000 year and 550 million year time scales. As matters stand at the present time, T and CO2 are moving in opposite direction, T is falling while CO2 continues to rise.

Correlation does not prove causation, but the absence of any correlation whatsoever is fatal to the "90% certainty" claim of a CO2-Temperature cause and effect relationship. If such a relationship really did exist it would produce a correlation.

If you have evidence to the contrary please post it here. Thanks.

I must have missed the point when everyone decided that atmospheric CO2 concentration was the only thing that affected the global average temperatures.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

There's nearly 30 pages detailing the latest understanding of aerosol impacts mostly based on studies completed since the 2001 report, so I'm fucked if I'm going to try and explain it here - read the report.

Anthropogenic aerosol emissions are believed to have counteracted the global-warming effect of greenhouse gases over the past century. However, the magnitude of this cooling effect is highly uncertain. In their Perspective, Anderson et al. argue that the magnitude and uncertainty of aerosol forcing may be larger than is usually considered in models. This would have important implications for the total climate forcing by anthropogenic emissions, and hence for predicting future global warming.

Climate Forcing by Aerosols--a Hazy Picture
Theodore L. Anderson, Robert J. Charlson, Stephen E. Schwartz, Reto Knutti, Olivier Boucher, Henning Rodhe, Jost Heintzenberg Science 16 May 2003:
Vol. 300. no. 5622, pp. 1103 - 1104

The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assesses the skill of climate models by their ability to reproduce warming over the twentieth century, but in doing so may give a false sense of their predictive capability.

...

The estimated forcing for the several components combined — 1.6 W m-2 over the industrial period — is nearly the same as that from CO2 emissions alone, because some of the warming effects of greenhouse gases are being cancelled out by the cooling effects of anthropogenic aerosols. Cooling, or negative forcing, occurs primarily through direct effects such as scattering of light in cloud-free air and indirect effects such as enhanced reflection of light by clouds. These aerosol forcings are much less certain than the greenhouse-gas forcings, and hence the total forcing is likewise quite uncertain. The new report estimates total anthropogenic forcing to be 0.6 to 2.4 W m-2 (5–95% confidence range). This factor of four range greatly limits the ability to evaluate the skill of climate models in reproducing past temperature changes and to infer climate sensitivity from observed change because a given temperature increase might result from a large forcing and low climate sensitivity or alternatively from a small forcing and high climate sensitivity.

Quantifying climate change — too rosy a picture?

Stephen E. Schwartz1, Robert J. Charlson2 & Henning Rodhe3: Nature Reports Climate Change
Published online: 27 June 2007

 

[Crispy]

The heat is not 'stored' in the CO2, it's stored in the atmosphere, the oceans and the upper crust.

 

[tangentlama]

I must have missed the point when everyone decided that atmospheric CO2 concentration was the only thing that affected the global average temperatures.

You too, eh?!
We must be feeling remarkably similar right now

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

You too, eh?!
We must be feeling remarkably similar right now

Post 233

21-06-2008, 16:18
Signal 11 Signal 11 is offline
Poll!

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Midlands
Posts: 680

Quote:
Originally Posted by World Scientists Warning to Humanity
Increasing levels of gases in the atmosphere from human activities, including carbon dioxide released from fossil fuel burning and from deforestation, may alter climate on a global scale. Predictions of global warming are still uncertain -- with projected effects ranging from tolerable to very severe -- but the potential risks are very great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfish View Post
the globe stopped warming about 10 years ago

We have been through this several times before, for example here.

Q

uote:
Originally Posted by bigfish View Post
the now comprehensively discredited hockey stick study.

We have been through this several times before, for example here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfish View Post
Nor have you enlightened us on how it is possible for you to believe that carbon dioxide drives Earth's climate

We have been through this several times before, for example here.
Reply With Quote

 

[tangentlama]

But you haven't shown that.

The graph shows that there is no correlation between T and CO2 over the whole of geological time. However, if you choose not to see that, then there isn't much I can do about it.

Your graph doesn't show that over the glacial/interglacial cycles, there is a correlation between CO2 and temperature throughout the whole of geological time, or even over the last 10,000 or 400 years (or maybe even just try looking at the late Pleistocene!) DOES IT!

A couple of hundred years worth of data isn't that much interest when compared to the WHOLE of geological time. Take one or two epochs and study those. Use Pleistocene and Holocene since they're the most recent.

How about this:

http:// biocab.org/Holocene.html

So no correlation between T and CO2 over 400 years, 10,000 years and the whole of geological time. Now if you somehow still feel that a correlation does exist between T and CO2, please post a graph showing it here. Thanks.

Hang on

You've just jumped from 400 years, to 10,000 years, and then to the whole of geological time. Do you have something against the Pleistocene? Is there a reason you're avoiding looking at CO2 and temperature throughout say, the late Pleistocene glacial/interglacial periods ?

And who is BIOCAB when they're at home? They're not on my academic journal list.

 

[Crispy]

For those who don't yet get it, here's a simple diagram I just made. Note that there are loads of other processes going on that I haven't included, however, this is the gist of it. Not to frickin scale!

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

For those who don't yet get it, here's a simple diagram I just made. Note that there are loads of other processes going on that I haven't included, however, this is the gist of it. Not to frickin scale!

Is this the definitive picture of global warming?

 

[Crispy]

Is this the definitive picture of global warming?

I do believe they're using it on the front cover of the next IPCC report

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I do believe they're using it on the front cover of the next IPCC report

And that's why the world is being led astray.....

 

[bigfish]

or equivalent thereof.

That article ignores the effects of other greenhouse gasses.

Methane is measured and accounted for in the article, so too is the change in tropospheric temperature by solar irradiance. The reason other greenhouse gases have not been considered by Dr Nahle is because they are not present in the atmosphere in sufficient quantity to have a significant effect.

 

[tangentlama]

Methane is measured and accounted for in the article, so too is the change in tropospheric temperature by solar irradiance. The reason other greenhouse gases have not been considered by Dr Nahle is because they are not present in the atmosphere in sufficient quantity to have a significant effect.

Isn't Dr. Nahle a Doctor of Biology?

 

[bigfish]

Ah.

I see.

The poster ... has now decided that Arrhenius was wrong...

No you don't see.

Arrhenius' formula is applied by Dr Nahle to obtain a value which is compatible with the heat stored value obtained from applying his own algorithm.

 

[bigfish]

Isn't Dr. Nahle a Doctor of Biology?

Yes, that's right, Dr Nahle is a Doctor of Biology... and our two resident climate "experts" -- "Dr" laptop and "Dr" Gunther -- are Doctors of Epidemiology and Pagenology respectively. So your point is what exactly?

Out of interest, what are you a Doctor of?

 

[david dissadent]

Graphs without scale eh?

 

[tangentlama]

Yes, that's right, Dr Nahle is a Doctor of Biology... and our two resident climate "experts" -- "Dr" laptop and "Dr" Gunther -- are Doctors of Epidemiology and Pagenology respectively. So your point is what exactly?

Out of interest, what are you a Doctor of?

I'm not presenting my own data.

Who has peer reviewed Dr. 'Biology' Nahle's work on climate?

I notice that amongst his 'four most prominent degrees', the top three in his list are:
Antibiotic Therapy (U. N. A. M. and I. M. S. S., Mexico, DF).
Certificate on Toxicology and Biomedicine (Baden, Germany).
Graduated on Clinical Radiology of Head and Neck (Hospital Nova, Monterrey, N. L.; Mexico).

Also he states that: "My profession demands that I investigate biological problems and find feasible solutions to them. My education and my practice assist me to attain this goal. Particularly, I have a Biologist degree and thirty one years of research experience, fourteen of which were combined with the cathedra of Biology."

 

[Signal 11]

Yes, that's right, Dr Nahle is a Doctor of Biology... So your point is what exactly?

The obvious point is that climate science is not his field so his opinion does not outweigh the experts in that field.

and our two resident climate "experts" -- "Dr" laptop and "Dr" Gunther

...both agree with the experts and so whether they themselves have expertise is not at issue.

 

[laptop]

Out of interest, what are you a Doctor of?

If you're going to play that game, then you're going to play it.

Please list all your relevant qualifications and professional experience before posting a single word more.

 

[editor]

If you're going to play that game, then you're going to play it.

Please list all your relevant qualifications and professional experience before posting a single word more.

*popcorn
*deckchair
*beer

 

[rioted]

Out of interest, what are you a Doctor of?

My Doctorate is in Mining Engineering. I KNOW you haven't got a clue.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Please list all your relevant qualifications and professional experience before posting a single word more.

Or else what?

 

[editor]

Or else what?

Or else Bigfish will look a little foolish, I guess.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

My qualifications for entering this debate?

I can read, and have a brain.

 

[bigfish]

If you're going to play that game, then you're going to play it.

Please list all your relevant qualifications and professional experience before posting a single word more.

LOL! So tell us laptop, what parts of the climate system do epidemiologists specialize in, then?

 

[laptop]

Bigfish is the one pissing around with usernames putting ' "Dr" ' in front of them.

Bigfish is the one demanding to know posters' qualifications.

So, Marlin, you first.

If you're going to play that game, then you're going to play it.

Please list all your relevant qualifications and professional experience before posting a single word more.

 

[tangentlama]

My qualifications for entering this debate?

I can read, and have a brain.

Super. Read this, http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/help/HA102274781033.aspx and then you too can make climate charts!

As with Dr. 'Biology' Nahle, you might find these particularly useful:

Change the scale of the horizontal axis
Because the horizontal axis of a scatter chart is a value axis, more scaling options are available.

Use a logarithmic scale on the horizontal axis
You can turn the horizontal axis into a logarithmic scale.

 

[tangentlama]

LOL! So tell us laptop, what parts of the climate system do epidemiologists specialize in, then?

I wasn't aware that laptop was presenting an own paper on climate. Unless you know different.