rabbitoh08 wrote on May 6
th, 2015 at 1:00pm:
Soren wrote on May 6
th, 2015 at 10:08am:
John_Taverner wrote on May 5
th, 2015 at 5:31pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 5
th, 2015 at 3:28pm:
lee wrote on May 5
th, 2015 at 2:35pm:
Nice graph. Now notice the difference in time lines
1. 1997 to present;
and
2. 1980 to presumably present.
Can you see the correlation between 1997 to present on the 1980 to present?
You mean you prefer shorter timescales? I thought you guys wanted to go back millenia?
It's called cherry picking. This is how it works. First you select a year with a higher temperature as a starting point. Second, you select a dataset with a high error variation. Third, you pick a period that is far too short to mean anything.
Denialists say the darndest things.
Where is the evidence that human generated Co2 is responsible for whatever is happening to the climate and that there would be no change without human CO2??
It is not just anthropogenic CO2 that is the cause - other anthropogenic gasses are also contributing to the warming.
And the evidence for this is that the radiance spectra of energy re-emitted by these molecules has been measured over time and it has been show that the amount of energy being re-emitted by these molecules is increasing as the concentration of the gasses increases:
Measurements of the Radiative Surface Forcing of Climate
W.F.J. Evans, North West Research Associates, Bellevue, WA; and E. Puckrin
The earth's climate system is warmed by 35 C due to the emission of downward infrared radiation by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (surface radiative forcing) or by the absorption of upward infrared radiation (radiative trapping). Increases in this emission/absorption are the driving force behind global warming. Climate models predict that the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere has altered the radiative energy balance at the earth's surface by several percent by increasing the greenhouse radiation from the atmosphere. With measurements at high spectral resolution, this increase can be quantitatively attributed to each of several anthropogenic gases. Radiance spectra of the greenhouse radiation from the atmosphere have been measured at ground level from several Canadian sites using FTIR spectroscopy at high resolution. The forcing radiative fluxes from CFC11, CFC12, CCl4, HNO3, O3, N2O, CH4, CO and CO2 have been quantitatively determined over a range of seasons. The contributions from stratospheric ozone and tropospheric ozone are separated by our measurement techniques. A comparison between our measurements of surface forcing emission and measurements of radiative trapping absorption from the IMG satellite instrument shows reasonable agreement. The experimental fluxes are simulated well by the FASCOD3 radiation code. This code has been used to calculate the model predicted increase in surface radiative forcing since 1850 to be 2.55 W/m2. In comparison, an ensemble summary of our measurements indicates that an energy flux imbalance of 3.5 W/m2 has been created by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases since 1850. This experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming.https://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006/techprogram/paper_100737.htm Well, where is the evidence that anthropogenic greenhouse gases cause climate change (and where is the evidence of abnormal climate change)? That article from 2006 concludes:
4. CONCLUSIONS
Measurements of the downward radiative flux have been made for several important greenhouse gases. At mid-latitudes in summer as compared to winter, our measurements show that the downward surface flux from H2O has doubled to 200 W/m2. The water increase causes a reduction of the fluxes from the other greenhouse gases. These measurements show that the greenhouse effect from trace gases in the atmosphere is real and adds significantly to the radiative burden of the atmosphere. The greenhouse radiation has increased by approximately 3.52 W/m2 since pre-industrial times.
This compares favorably with a modeled prediction of 2.55 W/m2.
Measurements such as these can provide a means by which to verify the predictions made by global warming models (Puckrin et al; 2004).
They got their data from 1986 and 990:
The data is based on models by Dickinson and Cicerone (1986) and those which are included in the IPCC report (IPCC, 1990). Although there are extensive model calculations of radiative forcing in the literature, there are few experimental measurements of the greenhouse radiation which is responsible for global warming. In what follows, measurements of the surface greenhouse radiation are described and compared with the modelled estimates of radiative forcing.
This forcing caper didn't quite work out. What a pity that these models and speculations and measurements could not predict the pause in warming. SO what value can you put on all their other predictions, also unfuifilled so far?
Forum
Pages: 
Abbott and Liberal Party were correct. AGW BS (Read 30412 times)
