Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
Senator - there is no warming. (Read 10607 times)
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #15 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 6:08pm
 
Ok lets talk lies.

Are man made CO2 emissions the primary driver behind global warming?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #16 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 6:17pm
 
muso wrote on Jun 25th, 2009 at 5:52pm:
Psst Soren - These sites you cut and paste from LIE

- and the fact that I pointed this out before and you chose to ignore it is a reflection of your integrity.


Psst Muso -  only quoted you (and a report in The Oz of Plimer's talk at the Sydney Institute). The list is not from me.

Tsk, tsk, Muso, interpreting data...  Must do better....
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1404
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #17 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 7:01pm
 
muso wrote on Jun 25th, 2009 at 5:52pm:
That list is a good mixture, ranging from the lunatic fringe to genuine workers in the field.

Many of these scientists are not actually confusionalists. Their remarks have been taken out of context.

For example: Sami Solanki


I've posted this before, but you continue to spew this nonsense:

A misleading account of my views was published in the Toronto National Post in March, 2007 (and is to be found at different places on the web). In contrast to what is written there I am not a denier of global warming produced by an increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases. Already at present the overwhelming source of global warming is due to manmade greenhouse gases and their influence will continue to grow in the future as their concentration increases. The same newspaper already misquoted other scientists on this topic. See, for example, the home page of Nigel Weiss of Cambridge University http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/now/

http://www.mps.mpg.de/homes/solanki/nonsci.html

David Bromwich is another such example just scanning that list.

Psst Soren - These sites you cut and paste from LIE

- and the fact that I pointed this out before and you chose to ignore it is a reflection of your integrity.


It's a pity you didn't read further Muso as he goes on to say this:

"On the other hand, since the Sun is by far the largest supplier of energy to the Earth's surface, any change in the radiative output of the Sun also affects the energy balance of the Earth's surface and atmosphere, so that at some level it influences our climate, too. But how strongly does the Sun vary and to what extent does it influence the Earth's climate? It is important to find a firm answer to these questions in order to estimate the solar contribution into the global warming and in particular to determine its weight relative to that of the man-made greenhouse gases."

Sound's like he's saying there's room for questions regarding AGW to me! I would also point out his area of research is Solar and heliospheric physics, in particular solar magnetism Sun-Earth relations and physics of the solar atmosphere. So the effect of greenhouse gases and non solar aspects of climatology are not his field it would seem. So how much of the statement supporting AGW merely paying lipservice to the orhtodoxy I wonder?


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #18 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 7:16pm
 
LOL You're taking what he says way out of context.

What he says is an introduction to the work that he has carried out in determining just how much effect the sun has had. The work carried out by his researchers has answered many questions, particularly in the extrapolation of solar irradiance back in time.

Sami Solanki is a very respected lead researcher with the Max Planck Institute. If anybody knows about Solar Irradiance, it's him.  He's correct in saying that the output of the sun is important. Of course it is, but with solar irradiance being pretty close to constant for the last 50-60 years or so, you wouldn't expect that to cause the trend that we have observed.

By the way, CO2 does have a lag effect - the worse is yet to come.

What he said on his home website, as quoted in my last posting speaks volumes.

Sami Solanki is not a confusionalist - take it from me.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #19 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 7:25pm
 
Grendel wrote on Jun 25th, 2009 at 6:08pm:
Ok lets talk lies.

Are man made CO2 emissions the primary driver behind global warming?


Which period in time are you referring to, Grendel? I gave you a nice link with coloured pictures that explains the whole thing in simple form.  Try reading it again. If you don't understand it, get your grandkids to explain it to you. It will be more important to them than it is to you anyway.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #20 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 7:36pm
 
Soren wrote on Jun 25th, 2009 at 6:17pm:
muso wrote on Jun 25th, 2009 at 5:52pm:
Psst Soren - These sites you cut and paste from LIE

- and the fact that I pointed this out before and you chose to ignore it is a reflection of your integrity.


Psst Muso -  only quoted you (and a report in The Oz of Plimer's talk at the Sydney Institute). The list is not from me.

Tsk, tsk, Muso, interpreting data...  Must do better....


Plimer lies too. He's  just regurgitating earler twaddle, regardless of the fact that an apology was sent to Sami Solanki and others over misrepresenting them. I mentioned Sami Solanki several months ago in the same context. Déjà vu.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1404
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #21 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 7:42pm
 
muso wrote on Jun 25th, 2009 at 7:16pm:
LOL You're taking what he says way out of context.

What he says is an introduction to the work that he has carried out in determining just how much effect the sun has had. The work carried out by his researchers has answered many questions, particularly in the extrapolation of solar irradiance back in time.

Sami Solanki is a very respected lead researcher with the Max Planck Institute. If anybody knows about Solar Irradiance, it's him.  He's correct in saying that the output of the sun is important. Of course it is, but with solar irradiance being pretty close to constant for the last 50-60 years or so, you wouldn't expect that to cause the trend that we have observed.

By the way, CO2 does have a lag effect - the worse is yet to come.

What he said on his home website, as quoted in my last posting speaks volumes.

Sami Solanki is not a confusionalist - take it from me.


Well this might add some more 'context':

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=15385

PRESS RELEASE
Date Released: Thursday, October 28, 2004
Source: Max Planck Institute



An international team of scientists has reconstructed the Sun's activity over the last 11 millennia and forecasts decreased activity within a few decades.

The activity of the Sun over the last 11,400 years, i.e., back to the end of the last ice age on Earth, has now for the first time been reconstructed quantitatively by an international group of researchers led by Sami K. Solanki from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research (Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany). The scientists have analyzed the radioactive isotopes in trees that lived thousands of years ago. As the scientists from Germany, Finland, and Switzerland report in the current issue of the science journal "Nature" from October 28, one needs to go back over 8,000 years in order to find a time when the Sun was, on average, as active as in the last 60 years. Based on a statistical study of earlier periods of increased solar activity, the researchers predict that the current level of high solar activity will probably continue only for a few more decades.

The research team had already in 2003 found evidence that the Sun is more active now than in the previous 1000 years. A new data set has allowed them to extend the length of the studied period of time to 11,400 years, so that the whole length of time since the last ice age could be covered. This study showed that the current episode of high solar activity since about the year 1940 is unique within the last 8000 years. This means that the Sun has produced more sunspots, but also more flares and eruptions, which eject huge gas clouds into space, than in the past. The origin and energy source of all these phenomena is the Sun's magnetic field.

Because the brightness of the Sun varies slightly with solar activity, the new reconstruction indicates also that the Sun shines somewhat brighter today than in the 8,000 years before. Whether this effect could have provided a significant contribution to the global warming of the Earth during the last century is an open question. The researchers around Sami K. Solanki stress the fact that solar activity has remained on a roughly constant (high) level since about 1980 - apart from the variations due to the 11-year cycle - while the global temperature has experienced a strong further increase during that time. On the other hand, the rather similar trends of solar activity and terrestrial temperature during the last centuries (with the notable exception of the last 20 years) indicates that the relation between the Sun and climate remains a challenge for further research.







Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #22 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 8:04pm
 
That might actually be based on the original newspaper report that misquoted Solanki.

The year (2004) would be about right. Let me look into it further.

I've already posted graphs of Solar irradiance from PMOD on a previous thread, and a graph from the Max Planck institute that correlated temperature with solar irradiance. It might even be from Solanki  himself.  It clearly shows the huge departure from the correlation since about 1958.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #23 - Jun 25th, 2009 at 9:07pm
 
Ok lets talk lies.

Are man made CO2 emissions the primary driver behind global warming?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #24 - Jun 26th, 2009 at 9:07am
 
Grendel wrote on Jun 25th, 2009 at 9:07pm:
Ok lets talk lies.

Are man made CO2 emissions the primary driver behind global warming?



Look back. You already asked this question and I asked you to clarify it. Ok - Against my better judgement, I'll try to explain how it works.

Taking a totally simplistic view,  the earth is warmed, for all practical purposes, entirely by solar radiation, so if the temperature is going up or down, the sun is a reasonable place to seek the cause.

However, it's just a tad more complicated than that. The best way to detect changes in the output of the sun as opposed to changes in the radiation reaching the earth's surface through clouds, smoke, dust, or pollution, is by to take readings from space.

According to PMOD at the World Radiation Center (as I explained earlier),  there has been no increase in solar irradiance since at least 1978, when satellite observations began. This means that for the last thirty years, while the temperature has been rising fastest, the sun has not changed significantly - ok there have slight bumps during sunspot activity, but these don't contribute much to the overall picture.

Ok, you say, what about before 1978? Well there has been work done reconstructing the solar irradiance record over the last century, before satellites were available. The Max Planck Institute (sound familiar?), where this work is being done, demonstrated there has been no increase in solar irradiance since around 1940. The reconstruction does show an increase in the first part of the 20th century, which coincides with the warming from around 1900 until the 1940s. It's not enough to explain all the warming from those years, but it is responsible for a large portion.

The graph I have attached based on Meehl et al. (2004) shows the contributions, both positive and negative to the mean global temperatures over the years. The red curve shows the solar influence, and a large part of that data comes from the work of Sami Solanki and his team at the MPI.

As you can see, the main contributor to global warming since 1900 has been greenhouse gases, with CO2 providing approximately 94% of the contribution. This in itself would have led to a to a temperature increase of about 0.7 degrees C. However, it has been partially offset by volcanic activity and the effects of aerosols.  As you can see, ozone depletion has had a slight positive effect (It could have been much worse if we hadn't taken action in 1987).

The Solar contribution between about 1958 and today has fluctuated slightly, but there is no net increase during that period.

I hope that has answered your question.

Incidentally, prior to about 1960, the greenhouse gas contribution was pretty well in the noise. (Look at the graph) It has only been since then that greenhouse gas levels have increased substantially (about 30% in the case of CO2)
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jun 26th, 2009 at 9:14am by muso »  

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #25 - Jun 26th, 2009 at 9:17am
 
Nope.

Try again.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
skippy
Ex Member


Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #26 - Jun 26th, 2009 at 9:40am
 
Oh muso ,as is evident facts and figures just confuse the confusionists.
Now repeat after me, the earth is flat, global warming is not true, repeat this at least one hundred times a day and if pain persists see your doctor.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #27 - Jun 26th, 2009 at 9:45am
 
Grendel wrote on Jun 26th, 2009 at 9:17am:
Nope.

Try again.


I don't suppose you're going to have the decency to tell me why I didn't answer your question either.

Maybe I should just give up. That's probably what you'd prefer.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #28 - Jun 26th, 2009 at 7:49pm
 
Ok lets talk lies.

Are man made CO2 emissions the primary driver behind global warming? Ok lets talk lies.


Note for those with difficulties...  this question is about specific things...  MAN MADE CO2
and
THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF GLOBALWARMING

IT'S NOT ABOUT DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE HAPPENS DUE TO WARMING AND COOLING.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Senator - there is no warming.
Reply #29 - Jun 29th, 2009 at 9:06pm
 
Still no proof I see...  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

The number of skeptics is swelling everywhere.
By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL

Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation.

If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming.

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)

The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon.

Credit for Australia's own era of renewed enlightenment goes to Dr. Ian Plimer, a well-known Australian geologist. Earlier this year he published "Heaven and Earth," a damning critique of the "evidence" underpinning man-made global warming. The book is already in its fifth printing. So compelling is it that Paul Sheehan, a noted Australian columnist -- and ardent global warming believer -- in April humbly pronounced it "an evidence-based attack on conformity and orthodoxy, including my own, and a reminder to respect informed dissent and beware of ideology subverting evidence." Australian polls have shown a sharp uptick in public skepticism; the press is back to questioning scientific dogma; blogs are having a field day.

The rise in skepticism also came as Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, elected like Mr. Obama on promises to combat global warming, was attempting his own emissions-reduction scheme. His administration was forced to delay the implementation of the program until at least 2011, just to get the legislation through Australia's House. The Senate was not so easily swayed.

Mr. Fielding, a crucial vote on the bill, was so alarmed by the renewed science debate that he made a fact-finding trip to the U.S., attending the Heartland Institute's annual conference for climate skeptics. He also visited with Joseph Aldy, Mr. Obama's special assistant on energy and the environment, where he challenged the Obama team to address his doubts. They apparently didn't.

pt1.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print