Australian Politics Forum - Tired of stupid AGW denialism?

Jovial Monk

Gold Member

Offline

Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male

Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism?
Reply #120 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 12:50pm

No, if we want to rest AGW statistically we have only one alternative hypothesis:

H1: Temperatures are increasing

We formulate a null hypothesis we can test and accept or reject, for AGW it has to be:

H0: temperatures are steady.

Any graph of temperature over time, any graph of temperature v CO2 shows a strong increase with fluctuations around mean temperature. Natural variation has nothing going for it except over very short time periods. We can rule out natural variation particularly since we know the mechanism causing AGW.

We know we are putting all the extra GHGs in the atmosphere, both by burning fossil fuels and by cutting down/ruining carbon sinks.

Back to top

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism?
Reply #121 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 12:53pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 12:50pm:

No, if we want to rest AGW statistically we have only one alternative hypothesis:

H1: Temperatures are increasing

We formulate a null hypothesis we can test and accept or reject, for AGW it has to be:

H0: temperatures are steady.

Any graph of temperature over time, any graph of temperature v CO2 shows a strong increase with fluctuations around mean temperature. Natural variation has nothing going for it except over very short time periods. We can rule out natural variation particularly since we know the mechanism causing AGW.

What a doofus. Cheesy

Whoever claimed the earth's temperature was static? What an idiot. That would mean climate doesn't change. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #122 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 12:55pm That crap would have worked, maybe, 50 years ago. Now terrestrial and satellite spectrometry shows the greenhouse effect in action. Since WE put the extra GHGs into the atmosphere the heating is not natural.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism?
Reply #123 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 1:42pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 12:55pm:

That crap would have worked, maybe, 50 years ago. Now terrestrial and satellite spectrometry shows the greenhouse effect in action.

Since WE put the extra GHGs into the atmosphere the heating is not natural.

96% of CO2 is natural.

Do you have spectrometry readings from the early 20th century warming? What caused it? What caused any of the climate changes in the past?

William F. Buckley Jr.’s comment is apropos: “I won’t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.”

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #124 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 3:59pm 96% is natural says Lees. Really?
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism?
Reply #125 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 5:46pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 3:59pm:

96% is natural says Lees.

Really?

Anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 additions comprise (11,880 / 370,484) or 3.207% of all greenhouse gas concentrations, (ignoring water vapor).

Total combined anthropogenic greenhouse gases comprise (12,217 / 370,484) or 3.298% of all greenhouse gas concentrations, (ignoring water vapor).

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

EPA October 2000 data.

Edit: although I did see on SKS someone say that 7% is manmade.

Of course if you have other data you can provide it.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:09pm by lee »

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #126 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:05pm That is just quantities, does not include things like the carbon cycle. Can rephrase that and say we increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere by 40%. What if we increase it by another 20%?
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism?
Reply #127 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:13pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:05pm:

That is just quantities, does not include things like the carbon cycle.

Can rephrase that and say we increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere by 40%.

What if we increase it by another 20%?

40% - 400*1.4 = 560. You just managed to double the GHG's since the industrial revolution, apparently. 2º of warming since then. Yahoo. Wink

Now remember the logarithmic effect of CO2 on temperature.

Edit: what about the carbon cycle?

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 121939
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism?
Reply #128 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:18pm

lee wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:13pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:05pm:

That is just quantities, does not include things like the carbon cycle.

Can rephrase that and say we increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere by 40%.

What if we increase it by another 20%?

40% - 400*1.4 = 560. You just managed to double the GHG's since the industrial revolution, apparently. 2º of warming since then. Yahoo. Wink

Now remember the logarithmic effect of CO2 on temperature.

Edit: what about the carbon cycle?

Don't ask Jovial - he doesn't know.

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #129 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:45pm Listen who is talking, the poster of silly videos that he cannot discuss or defend. I do not believe the CO2/temperature is logarithmic
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21502 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #130 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:50pm Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 6:45pm: Listen who is talking, the poster of silly videos that he cannot discuss or defend. I do not believe the CO2/temperature is logarithmic So you are a denier then.
Back to top	IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #131 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 7:12pm What natural forcings can explain the warming, Lees? You ever going to answer that?
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21502
Gender: male

Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism?
Reply #132 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 7:23pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 7:12pm:

What natural forcings can explain the warming, Lees?

You ever going to answer that?

Natural forcings just are. They are not the unnatural forcings on which AGW relies.

You know IPCC AR5 Chapter 9 table 9.5. They can't even decide if clouds are a positive or negative feedback. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #133 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 7:23pm What forcings, Lees?
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21502 Gender:	Re: Tired of stupid AGW denialism? Reply #134 - Mar 24^th, 2017 at 7:27pm Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 7:23pm: What forcings, Lees? I told you - lee wrote on Mar 24^th, 2017 at 7:23pm: IPCC AR5 Chapter 9 table 9.5 You should really look them up and see what they claim. And of course the differences between models.
Back to top	IP Logged