Australian Politics Forum - UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #105 - Feb 26^th, 2013 at 3:33am

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 25^th, 2013 at 8:04am:

MOTR wrote on Feb 25^th, 2013 at 4:16am:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 24^th, 2013 at 10:21pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 24^th, 2013 at 9:32pm:

Do you understand how the greenhouse effect works, progs? Why are you asking me about short wave radiation?

You still haven't answered my question, do you accept that heat accumulating in the oceans will eventually warm the atmosphere.

Perhaps this is why you want to talk about short wave radiation?

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/arctic-sea-ice-min-volume-co...

avoid if you must

Annoying, isn't it, progs. Next time rather than beating about the bush how about you state your position and then have a go at justifying it.

Firstly, if you are just asking about the direct effects of CO2, or the green-house gas induced warming of the oceans, then it's silly to be talking about short wave radiation. It is long wave radiation, not short wave radiation, that is trapped and reflected back to the earth by green-house gasses. What it does do is warm the surface layer, or the cool skin layer of the ocean. It's called the cool skin layer because it is the interface where ocean heat is lost to the ocean, and is therefore cooler than the water immediately below it.

Warming the top of the cool skin layer reduces the heat gradient of the interface. The warmer the top of the cool skin layer the slower the rate at which heat is lost to the atmosphere through conduction. This allows the oceans to slowly warm.

However, if you want to include the indirect effects of CO2, we can start talking about short wave radiation. As we all well know the Arctic minimum has shrunk considerably since 1998.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/arctic-sea-ice-min-volume-co...

This means that more of the short wave radiation coming directly from the sun is hitting our oceans during the Northern summer.

Not annoying. You want to avoid and dont answer, thats up to you.

If you are going to go with more short wave raditation hitting the ocean because of ice melt, then you would have to take global sea ice extent. The south canceling out the north.

I guess you went to the trouble of checking whether the gain in the south is cancelled out by the loss of ice extent in the north, before you used this as an argument.

How about you stop pushing your political agenda, progs, and start debating honestly.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation. Reply #106 - Feb 27^th, 2013 at 2:02am Come on, progs. Did you actually think through your own argument. Or are you just posting things that might make you sound like you know what you are on about.
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #107 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 5:02pm

Quote:

Ultimately the only statement the Australian article attributes to Pachauri on this subject is that "global average temperatures had plateaued at record levels and that the halt did not disprove global warming."

Again note that the story is paraphrasing Pachauri rather than quoting him directly. Had he said that global surface air temperatures have plateaued and that this doesn't disprove global warming, he would be 100% correct. Though it's also worth noting that over the past 17 years, the global surface temperature trend is approximately 0.10 ± 0.13°C per decade, which is most likely positive (warming).

More importantly, over the past 17 years the planet has accumulated the equivalent energy to detonating 3.7 Hiroshima atomic bombs per second, every second. It takes a fundamental misundertanding of the global climate to deny that immense amount of global warming.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1889

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #108 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 6:24pm

MOTR wrote on Feb 26^th, 2013 at 3:33am:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 25^th, 2013 at 8:04am:

MOTR wrote on Feb 25^th, 2013 at 4:16am:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 24^th, 2013 at 10:21pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 24^th, 2013 at 9:32pm:

Do you understand how the greenhouse effect works, progs? Why are you asking me about short wave radiation?

You still haven't answered my question, do you accept that heat accumulating in the oceans will eventually warm the atmosphere.

Perhaps this is why you want to talk about short wave radiation?

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/arctic-sea-ice-min-volume-co...

avoid if you must

Annoying, isn't it, progs. Next time rather than beating about the bush how about you state your position and then have a go at justifying it.

Firstly, if you are just asking about the direct effects of CO2, or the green-house gas induced warming of the oceans, then it's silly to be talking about short wave radiation. It is long wave radiation, not short wave radiation, that is trapped and reflected back to the earth by green-house gasses. What it does do is warm the surface layer, or the cool skin layer of the ocean. It's called the cool skin layer because it is the interface where ocean heat is lost to the ocean, and is therefore cooler than the water immediately below it.

Warming the top of the cool skin layer reduces the heat gradient of the interface. The warmer the top of the cool skin layer the slower the rate at which heat is lost to the atmosphere through conduction. This allows the oceans to slowly warm.

However, if you want to include the indirect effects of CO2, we can start talking about short wave radiation. As we all well know the Arctic minimum has shrunk considerably since 1998.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/arctic-sea-ice-min-volume-co...

This means that more of the short wave radiation coming directly from the sun is hitting our oceans during the Northern summer.

Not annoying. You want to avoid and dont answer, thats up to you.

If you are going to go with more short wave raditation hitting the ocean because of ice melt, then you would have to take global sea ice extent. The south canceling out the north.

I guess you went to the trouble of checking whether the gain in the south is cancelled out by the loss of ice extent in the north, before you used this as an argument.

How about you stop pushing your political agenda, progs, and start debating honestly.

http://jameswight.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/sea-ice-extent-at-minimum-months.g...

Still running are we, progs.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 39970 Gender:	Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation. Reply #109 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 6:32pm What a great example of what my complaint is. Two Threads....one after the other, now....on exactly the same Topic!
Back to top	IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #110 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 7:07pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 6:32pm:

What a great example of what my complaint is. Two Threads....one after the other, now....on exactly the same Topic!

Angry

This thread was meant to be about the misrepresentation of climate scientists in the Australian media.

The other thread is a specific example of this misrepresentation.

They have certainly converged, but they are two separate issues.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39970
Gender: male

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #111 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 7:13pm

MOTR wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 7:07pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 6:32pm:

What a great example of what my complaint is. Two Threads....one after the other, now....on exactly the same Topic!

Angry

This thread was meant to be about the misrepresentation of climate scientists in the Australian media.

The other thread is a specific example of this misrepresentation.

They have certainly converged, but they are two separate issues.

No matter the Thread Title.......it ALWAYS converges into the same Posters saying exactly the same thing on exactly the same topic.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #112 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 7:22pm

News Limited has a sorry history of misrepresenting what the scientists are actually saying. In the other thread, Rabbitoh has done a tremendous job of clearly pointing out how the UN's Climate Chief has been reported as saying something he clearly hasn't.

Unfortunately, there are many other instances, including the one on sea level rises. I'll be sure to post other examples in this thread as they arise.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #113 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 7:40pm

MOTR wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 7:22pm:

News Limited has a sorry history of misrepresenting what the scientists are actually saying. In the other thread, Rabbitoh has done a tremendous job of clearly pointing out how the UN's Climate Chief has been reported as saying something he clearly hasn't.

Unfortunately, there are many other instances, including the one on sea level rises. I'll be sure to post other examples in this thread as they arise.

supporting rabbit-food does not help your credibility either. Rabbit-droppings is - unbelievably - saying that 17 years ot NOT getting warmer is actually warming. Now I know climate hysterics have hijacked many methodologies already but it is going to be a bit hard to hijack basic mathematics and infer that no increase in temperature is actually an increase in temperature!!

MOTR this is why we sceptics have so much fun mocking your nonsensical, illogical and at times pathological approach to climate. you are now effectively said that warming is warming, cooling is warming and no change is also warming. if you want to support the rabbit-hole approach to mathematics - which an average 10yo could dispute - then you are wasting your time on hear debating. no one is going to take you seriously. For a short while you actually accepted that there had been a 17 year pause in warming - just as IPCC, NASA and the MET admitted. now you are backto denying it. What possible reason is left to not simply dismiss you as just a bloody idiot?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #114 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 8:15pm

90% of global warming occurs in our oceans. A pause in air surface temperatures is not the same thing as a pause in global warming. We are talking about two separate things. I have never accepted that there has been a pause in global warming. The physics tell me otherwise. I accept that global surface air temperatures have plateaued over a 17 year peroid, but this doesn't disprove global warming.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 8:31pm by MOTR »

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #115 - Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 8:37pm

A clear case of misrepresentation.

The story.

The apology.

Quote:

A report in the Australian on Tuesday (Sea rise ‘not linked to warming’, page 1) said a paper by JM Gregory with a contribution from John Church had “found no link to global warming and no increase in the rate of glacier melt over the past 100 years”. In fact, the paper found the effect of anthropogenic global warming on the rate of sea level rise would have been greater in the 20th century but for volcanic activity. It found that in the past two decades the rate of sea level rise had been larger than in the 20th century.

I'm sure it's the misleading story that will be remembered by most.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #116 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:33am

MOTR wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 8:15pm:

90% of global warming occurs in our oceans. A pause in air surface temperatures is not the same thing as a pause in global warming. We are talking about two separate things. I have never accepted that there has been a pause in global warming. The physics tell me otherwise. I accept that global surface air temperatures have plateaued over a 17 year peroid, but this doesn't disprove global warming.

thank you. no one said it did disprove GW. What it does do is question many of the underlying assumptions which the models are based on. It has been long understood that a 17year pause braeks theose assumptions and boundary conditions.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation.
Reply #117 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 7:36am

MOTR wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2013 at 8:37pm:

A clear case of misrepresentation.

The story.

http://www.readfearn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/lloydp1.jpg

The apology.

Quote:

A report in the Australian on Tuesday (Sea rise ‘not linked to warming’, page 1) said a paper by JM Gregory with a contribution from John Church had “found no link to global warming and no increase in the rate of glacier melt over the past 100 years”. In fact, the paper found the effect of anthropogenic global warming on the rate of sea level rise would have been greater in the 20th century but for volcanic activity. It found that in the past two decades the rate of sea level rise had been larger than in the 20th century.

I'm sure it's the misleading story that will be remembered by most.

to be fair in a similar incident the MET said that the journos interpretation of their own data was wrong when he said there had been a 16 year pause in warming. then, after a couple weeks admitted that he was right. there is a definite problem with some organizations in allowing obvious interpretations of their results. the article referred to was not completely accurate but nor was it inaccurate either. The report finds a strong disconnect between GW and sea level rises.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: UN Climate Chief critical of misrepresentation. Reply #118 - Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 10:08am No it doesn't, Longy. The paper does not find a disconnect or any such thing between warming oceans and sea level rises. Have you looked at the paper yet, Longy?
Back to top	« Last Edit: Mar 3^rd, 2013 at 10:14am by MOTR » Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged