How global warming science works -

buttershug · 01-21-2014, 10:01 PM

Who said it's simply like that?

But you don't seem to be able to explain why CO2 does not cause warming.
Why does it not?
How can it not?

VoxRat · 01-21-2014, 10:05 PM

:

And now we reach that special moment, where it becomes obvious you don't understand what CO2 does in the earth's atmosphere, or why the predictions for CO2 forced warming are what they are.

Which is pretty much how global warming science goes.

"Adding CO2 causes warming, it's basic physics"

No, it's not simple like that, and you are an idiot because you don't know this already.

You talking to me?

I thought I was on your lame self-censorship list.

F X · 01-21-2014, 10:05 PM

:

How can it not?

It's explained quite well in the American Meteorological Society's 1951 Compendium of Meteorology

Just adding CO2 doesn't change the climate because almost all the long-wave radiation that would be absorbed by CO2 is already absorbed by water vapor. That you don't know this, but want to argue climate science, now that is funny.

VoxRat · 01-21-2014, 10:12 PM

:

How can it not?

It's explained quite well in the American Meteorological Society's 1951 Compendium of Meteorology

Just adding CO2 doesn't change the climate because almost all the long-wave radiation that would be absorbed by CO2 is already absorbed by water vapor.

~~Schneibster~~ · 01-21-2014, 10:14 PM

1951

VoxRat · 01-21-2014, 10:23 PM

Infrared transmission spectra, from here.

Note the non-overlap of H2O and CO2.

~~Schneibster~~ · 01-21-2014, 10:24 PM

:

VoxRat · 01-21-2014, 10:36 PM

Good discussion of this issue here:

excerpt:

:

A related saturation fallacy, also popularized by Ångström, is that CO2 could have no influence on radiation balance because water vapor already absorbs all the IR that CO2 would absorb. Earth’s very moist, near-surface tropical atmosphere is nearly saturated in that sense, but the flaw in Ångström’s argument is that radiation in the portion of the spectrum affected by CO2 escapes to space from the cold, dry upper portions of the atmosphere, not from the warm, moist lower portions. Also, as displayed in the inset to figure 2, the individual water-vapor and CO2 spectral lines interleave but do not totally overlap. That structure limits the competition between CO2 and water vapor.

PerseusOmega9 · 01-21-2014, 11:26 PM

What do the rasters average to in each image

:

HOTTEST NOVEMBER EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE PLANET EARTH!

It means nothing. NOVEMBER WAS THE HOTTEST MONTH EVER!

SOURCE: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/mapping

buttershug · 01-21-2014, 11:43 PM

:

1951

The more important time aspect is that I have almost no doubt that he found this AFTER he started to believe what he does.
And that this is not the basis of his belief.

~~Schneibster~~ · 01-22-2014, 12:16 AM

:

The more important time aspect is that I have almost no doubt that he found this AFTER he started to believe what he does.
And that this is not the basis of his belief.

Quite true. More cherry-picking, of course. He does that a lot.

~~Schneibster~~ · 01-22-2014, 12:18 AM

:

Good discussion of this issue here:

excerpt:

:

A related saturation fallacy, also popularized by Ångström, is that CO2 could have no influence on radiation balance because water vapor already absorbs all the IR that CO2 would absorb. Earth’s very moist, near-surface tropical atmosphere is nearly saturated in that sense, but the flaw in Ångström’s argument is that radiation in the portion of the spectrum affected by CO2 escapes to space from the cold, dry upper portions of the atmosphere, not from the warm, moist lower portions. Also, as displayed in the inset to figure 2, the individual water-vapor and CO2 spectral lines interleave but do not totally overlap. That structure limits the competition between CO2 and water vapor.

The 4.5µm line is the biggie. That's where CO₂ does its most work.

~~Schneibster~~ · 01-22-2014, 12:20 AM

:

What do the rasters average to in each image

three-four hundred miles at the latitude of CA, more or less.

F X · 02-17-2014, 01:23 AM

:

The more important time aspect is that I have almost no doubt that he found this AFTER he started to believe what he does.

That's because you are a moron, who actually is doing what you are saying you think I do. You decide, come to a conclusion, before you do any research, then only look at evidence that supports your belief. It's fucking ironic as hell. Especially considering if you actually want to know if you are right, or wreong, I can prove it with ease.

:

And that this is not the basis of his belief.

You are of course, dead wrong. It cracks me up whenever I see anyone labeling me, or deciding, with no evidence, something and then believing they know the truth.

Priceless.

:

The prime indicator of global warming is, by deﬁnition, global
mean temperature.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/...6_4_044022.pdf

:

Using new state-of-the-art research on recent and projected changes in the Northeast’s regional climate, the study finds that without strong leadership and action, by late-century:

Northeast winters could warm by eight to 12 degrees Fahrenheit and summers by six to nearly 14 degrees.
The length of the region’s winter snow season could be cut in half.
The frequency of short-term droughts could increase significantly.
Sea-level could rise from eight inches to as much three feet.
Many Northeast cities can expect about 25 days per year over 100 degrees. (Currently, Northeast cities experience this type of heat only once or twice a year.)

http://www.enviroalternatives.com/globalwarming.html

KEY INDICATORS
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators

:

One way climate changes can be assessed is by measuring the frequency of events considered "extreme" (among the most rare of temperature, precipitation and storm intensity values). The Climate Extremes Index (CEI) value for the contiguous United States is an objective way to determine whether extreme events are on the rise.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/

The amplitude of the annual winter-summer temperature cycle is declining, primarily due to warmer winters (#22)
http://www.acccn.net/bio/book/trajco...e/broecker.htm

:

The substantial minimum in the Northern Hemisphere in the mid-1990s is due to intensification of the chlorine induced ozone decline by the Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption and by a series of unusually cold Arctic winters with reduced ozone transport and high polar ozone loss.

http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/c...ate-lo-rez.pdf

:

This page contains sample records for the topic global warming effects from Science.gov

http://www.science.gov/topicpages/g/...g+effects.html

:

https://www.sciencemag.org/content/310/5749/841
http://landshape.org/enm/greenhouse-...-and-the-ipcc/

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_...3s3-4-2-2.html

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/...5204/fulltext/
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v.../ngeo1733.html
http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~sal.../gla-tovs.html

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/09/

:

http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFile...4294972962.pdf

“It was so warm today across much of the country,” said a concerned anchor Brian Williams, “as you know, they’re calling it June-uary. It’s got a lot of people wondering whatever happened to winter?”

The piece ended with the pronouncement that the deck is stacked against the return of a traditional winter owing to “a world warming because of climate change.”

Despite adoption of “climate change” to replace “global warming,” the public takes notice when Midwestern wind chills hit 70 degrees below zero and the average nationwide temperature falls to a mere 15 degrees. The deep freeze puts denialists on the defensive.

The liberal website Slate insists “Winter Does Not Disprove Global Warming” and scolds snarky tweets from conservatives that have poked fun at the distinct lack of global warming over the past few weeks.

Slate’s conclusion rests on a supposed scientific consensus and cites a draft of the U.S. National Climate Assessment that predicts “heavy precipitation in winter storms” as proof that the cold snap is caused by global warming.

When the winter is warm, the denialists cite the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment of more than a decade ago, which predicted “Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...n-the-freezer/

:

It's cold where I am, today, so global warming must be wrong. Got it.

Of course, they fail to realize that the cold air came from somewhere, it wasn't created overhead. It came from the Arctic, and it was displaced south by warmer air. Anchorage, AK was enjoying balmy temps in the lower 40s yesterday, ffs.

Not sure why you think this is a problem with climate science, though,

Time Magazine blames the cold polar vortex on global warming

But not only does the cold spell not disprove climate change, it may well be that global warming could be making the occasional bout of extreme cold weather in the U.S. even more likely. Right now much of the U.S. is in the grip of a polar vortex, which is pretty much what it sounds like: a whirlwind of extremely cold, extremely dense air that forms near the poles. Usually the fast winds in the vortex—which can top 100 mph (161 k/h)—keep that cold air locked up in the Arctic. But when the winds weaken, the vortex can begin to wobble like a drunk on his fourth martini, and the Arctic air can escape and spill southward, bringing Arctic weather with it. In this case, nearly the entire polar vortex has tumbled southward, leading to record-breaking cold

Polar Vortex: Climate Change Could Be the Cause of Record Cold Weather | TIME.com

SCIENCE BITCHES!!

But wait, what is this?

In 1974, Time Magazine blamed the cold polar vortex on global cooling.

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world.

Another Ice Age? – TIME
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2...-polar-vortex/

That's fucked up. It's fucked up at a deep level. And you can't escape it by blaming TIME, they get this shit from climate scientists.

:

water vapor issue
http://maths.ucd.ie/met/msc/ClimSyn/heldsode00.pdf

Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/...W%3E2.0.CO%3B2

Robust Responses of the Hydrological Cycle to Global Warming
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI3990.1

POLAR VORTEX!!!

:

Water water everywhere

http://judithcurry.com/2011/09/24/wa...k-evaporation/

Just moving some stuff from a locked and dead topic.

buttershug · 02-17-2014, 01:47 AM

:

[You are of course, dead wrong. It cracks me up whenever I see anyone labeling me, or deciding, with no evidence, something and then believing they know the truth. c.

Fact: you started a thread with a bait and switch post.
It started with global warming then talked about only a part of the Earth.

I've seen you use bad logic in other threads.

I have not seen you give any kind of quality evidence of your position on anything.

I have given you opportunities to show me wrong.
You have not done so.

F X · 02-17-2014, 02:02 AM

:

I have not seen you give any kind of quality evidence of your position on anything.

Then you are far more of a moron that is first apparent.

eversbane · 02-17-2014, 02:28 AM

I found something that should alarm FX but instead makes him think more highly of his hypothesis:

:

I haven't seen anyone else talking about it

F X · 03-22-2014, 04:07 PM

:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-BbP...layer_embedded

The video is an excellent example of how and why "climate" science is just so fucked up these days.

Amount of old ice in Arctic, 1987-2013 - YouTube

The believer looks at that and sheds a tear, maybe feels sad or angry. Because they are not scientific nor knowledgeable about arctic sea ice.

I look at it and can clearly see the colors are used to display thickness of ice, not the absolute age. This is obvious when you see whites showing up in a few months period, over and over. Right near the shore where it was ice free in the summer.

This is actually what you would expect to see, since sea ice forms in shallow water, near the shores. Wind blows it and it stacks up into large clumps, which is how you get thick ice. It has little to do with age, and everything to do with the wind.

The people who made the video are either morons, or liars. I don't know which is worse.

Certainly the "old" ice near the center of the gyre might be multi-year ice, but there should be zero old ice at the areas that were ice free in summer, like the Bering sea, which obviously isn't the case.

VoxRat · 03-22-2014, 04:35 PM

:

I look at it and can clearly see the colors are used to display thickness of ice, not the absolute age. This is obvious when you see whites showing up in a few months period, over and over. Right near the shore where it was ice free in the summer.

If one wants to "be scientific" one can read about the actual data here.

VoxRat · 03-22-2014, 04:51 PM

:

Certainly the "old" ice near the center of the gyre might be multi-year ice, but there should be zero old ice at the areas that were ice free in summer, like the Bering sea, which obviously isn't the case.

At no point does the video show any ice of any age anywhere near the Bering Sea.

VoxRat · 03-22-2014, 10:08 PM

:

Certainly the "old" ice near the center of the gyre might be multi-year ice, but there should be zero old ice at the areas that were ice free in summer, like the Bering sea, which obviously isn't the case.

At no point does the video show any ice of any age anywhere near the Bering Sea.

Oops!
I take that back!
I was looking at with dim light.
It turns out it shows regular annual occurrences of the youngest ice on the Bering Sea.

But my point remains - and F_X's still fails: the video never shows any old ice on the Bering Sea.

Zeluvia · 03-23-2014, 03:36 PM

Weather and Climate Summit - Day 5, Jennifer Francis - YouTube

Here is a better video, with full context of the changes in the Arctic Sea ice and it's effect on Arctic Amplification with explanations, charts, maths, and science.

Of course, it is way longer than a minute.

F X · 04-03-2015, 10:11 AM

:

I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Could you explain?

Using a single month as evidence of global warming is not scientific. Nor is claiming "the coldest three month period in the northeast US, ever, shows global warming is happening"

:

I found something that should alarm FX but instead makes him think more highly of his hypothesis:

:

I haven't seen anyone else talking about it

It's now being discussed a lot.

A Senator even threw a snowball.

buttershug · 04-03-2015, 03:00 PM

:

I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Could you explain?

Using a single month as evidence of global warming is not scientific. Nor is claiming "the coldest three month period in the northeast US, ever, shows global warming is happening"

:

I found something that should alarm FX but instead makes him think more highly of his hypothesis:

:

I haven't seen anyone else talking about it

It's now being discussed a lot.

A Senator even threw a snowball.

Have you switched sides?
That senator was an idiot and is on the side you were on.

And a lot of the "Science" you posted was science the same way that pizza I ate last night is still pizza.

F X · 04-04-2015, 06:58 PM

I miss Voxrat already

01-21-2014, 10:23 PM	#2295587 / #31
VoxRat Senior Member : Mar 2008 : 46,746	Infrared transmission spectra, from here. Note the non-overlap of H2O and CO2. __________________ " I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance. And I won't say that often because I do have a bit of humility too. " - Dave Hawkins

04-04-2015, 06:58 PM	#2503813 / #50
F X Too hot to handle : May 2009 : In the real world : 11,190	I miss Voxrat already __________________ This page archived March 26 2022 by F X

X vBulletin 3.8.6 Debug Information
Page Generation 0.35869 seconds Memory Usage 4,564KB Queries Executed 70 (?)
More Information
Template Usage: (1)SHOWTHREAD (1)ad_footer_end (1)ad_footer_start (1)ad_header_end (1)ad_header_logo (1)ad_navbar_below (1)ad_showthread_beforeqr (1)ad_showthread_firstpost (1)ad_showthread_firstpost_sig (1)ad_showthread_firstpost_start (25)add_ignore_user_to_postbit (2)ame_container (2)ame_output (41)bbcode_quote (1)footer (1)forumjump (1)forumrules (1)gobutton (1)header (1)headinclude (6)mysmilies_imagebit (1)navbar (3)navbar_link (1)navbar_mini (1)navbar_noticebit (55)option (1)pagenav (1)pagenav_curpage (3)pagenav_pagelink (2)pagenav_pagelinkrel (25)postbit_legacy (25)postbit_onlinestatus (25)postbit_reputation (25)postbit_wrapper (1)spacer_close (1)spacer_open (13)tagbit (1)tagbit_wrapper (24)v3arcade_award_bit (4)v3arcade_postbit_userid_popup_menu (4)v3arcade_postbit_userid_trophy Phrase Groups Available: global inlinemod postbit posting reputationlevel showthread	Included Files: ./showthread.php ./global.php ./includes/init.php ./includes/class_core.php ./includes/config.php ./includes/functions.php ./includes/class_hook.php ./includes/functions_notice.php ./mobiquo/smartbanner.php ./mobiquo/smartbanner/head.inc.php ./includes/functions_bigthree.php ./includes/class_postbit.php ./includes/class_bbcode.php ./includes/functions_reputation.php ./includes/ame_bbcode.php ./amecache/ameinfo.php Hooks Called: init_startup cache_permissions fetch_threadinfo_query fetch_threadinfo fetch_foruminfo style_fetch cache_templates global_start parse_templates fetch_musername notices_check_start notices_noticebit global_setup_complete showthread_start showthread_getinfo forumjump showthread_post_start showthread_query_postids showthread_query bbcode_fetch_tags bbcode_create showthread_postbit_create postbit_factory postbit_display_start reputation_image bbcode_parse_start postbit_imicons fetch_userinfo_query fetch_userinfo bbcode_parse_complete_precache bbcode_parse_complete postbit_display_complete automediaembed_parse_bbcode_start automediaembed_parse_bbcode_match_start automediaembed_parse_bbcode_match_end automediaembed_parse_bbcode_end pagenav_page pagenav_complete tag_fetchbit tag_fetchbit_complete forumrules navbits navbits_complete showthread_complete
Messages:

01-21-2014, 10:14 PM	#2295578 / #30
~~Schneibster~~ Banned : Jan 2009 : Burpelson Air Force Base : 19,074	1951