Forum

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

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 ... 45
Send Topic Print
Ice watch (Read 21418 times)
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #390 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 11:37am
 
lee wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 11:24am:
Emma wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 12:59am:
You don't know anything about the natural variation Grendel, any more than I do. We haven't been around that long.


Exactly. So how come AGW is supposedly definitely human caused?


...

Quote:
The climatic impact of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is usually quantified in terms of radiative forcing1, calculated as the difference between estimates of the Earth’s radiation field from pre-industrial and present-day concentrations of these gases. Radiative transfer models calculate that the increase in CO2 since 1750 corresponds to a global annual-mean radiative forcing at the tropopause of 1.82 ± 0.19 W m−2 (ref. 2). However, despite widespread scientific discussion and modelling of the climate impacts of well-mixed greenhouse gases, there is little direct observational evidence of the radiative impact of increasing atmospheric CO2. Here we present observationally based evidence of clear-sky CO2 surface radiative forcing that is directly attributable to the increase, between 2000 and 2010, of 22 parts per million atmospheric CO2. The time series of this forcing at the two locations—the Southern Great Plains and the North Slope of Alaska—are derived from Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer spectra3 together with ancillary measurements and thoroughly corroborated radiative transfer calculations4. The time series both show statistically significant trends of 0.2 W m−2 per decade (with respective uncertainties of ±0.06 W m−2 per decade and ±0.07 W m−2 per decade) and have seasonal ranges of 0.1–0.2 W m−2. This is approximately ten per cent of the trend in downwelling longwave radiation5, 6, 7. These results confirm theoretical predictions of the atmospheric greenhouse effect due to anthropogenic emissions, and provide empirical evidence of how rising CO2 levels, mediated by temporal variations due to photosynthesis and respiration, are affecting the surface energy balance.


http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v519/n7543/full/nature14240.html

Also Harries, etc.
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
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #391 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 1:51pm
 
Emma wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 12:59am:
Natural variation is irrelevant in this discussion really.

Wrong...  natural variation has a great deal to do with the discussion.


People keep trying to drag it in as a form of denial no doubt, but this is about HUMAN impacts.

You don't know anything about the natural variation Grendel, any more than I do. We haven't been around that long.

How would you know?  In fact I know a great deal about it thanks.  It would seem from your comments so far YOU don't.


We DO know however, that things aren't right, here in this best of all possible worlds, and we are currently just beginning the scramble up the slippery slope of filth we have caused.

Really, things aren't right?  LOL
I think you need re-education.



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


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #392 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 1:54pm
 
Still avoiding questions and facts I see Monk...  hardly helpful for your credibility. Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21753
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #393 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 2:55pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 11:37am:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v519/n7543/full/nature14240.html


" Our results suggest that climate biases could be responsible for a considerable fraction of the large uncertainties in ESM simulations of land carbon fluxes and pools, amounting to about 40% of the range reported for ESMs. We conclude that climate bias-induced uncertainties must be decreased to make accurate coupled atmosphere-carbon cycle projections."

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/12/1/014004/meta

Published 5 January 2017Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 11:37am:
The time series of this forcing at the two locations—the Southern Great Plains and the North Slope of Alaska


Use two sites and homogenise for the world. Wink

"Specifically, the longwave radiation received at the surface is estimated to be significantly larger, by between 10 and 17 Wm−2, than earlier model-based estimates. Moreover, the latest satellite observations of global precipitation indicate that more precipitation is generated than previously thought. This additional precipitation is sustained by more energy leaving the surface by evaporation — that is, in the form of latent heat flux — and thereby offsets much of the increase in longwave flux to the surface."

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n10/abs/ngeo1580.html

Figure 2-
...

Such uncertainties.
0.6w/m2 +-17w/m2? Oh Dear.


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


Australian Politics

Posts: 21753
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #394 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 3:30pm
 
"Robust scientific evidence shows the sun angle controls water vapour content of the atmosphere, the main component of back radiation, as it cycles annually. Water vapour content measured as the ratio of the number of water molecules to CO2 molecules varies from 1:1 near the Poles to 97:1 in the Tropics. The effect of back radiation on Earth’s atmosphere is up to 200 times larger than that of CO2 and works in the opposite direction. Thus, if CO2 has any effect on atmospheric temperature and climate change we show it is negligible."

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0958305X17722790

Oh dear. Water vapour.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #395 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:04pm
 
...


...
Back to top
« Last Edit: Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:21pm by Jovial Monk »  

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
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #396 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:20pm
 
For someone who supports AGW and denies Gore, you sure sound a lot like him Monk.

...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #397 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:23pm
 
Maybe you prefer Flim Flannery....

...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #398 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:33pm
 
...

...

...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21753
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #399 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 5:50pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:04pm:


FeldmanGrowingRF - probably Marty at his best. Wink

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:04pm:
https://skepticalscience.com/images/harries_radiation.gif



You have to hope he got his H2O window right. Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #400 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 5:56pm
 
...


...
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: 21753
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #401 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 5:59pm
 
I hope you get well soon. Is it anorexia causing you to make yourself regurgitate?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Ice watch
Reply #402 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 9:35pm
 



Emma wrote:You don't know anything about the natural variation Grendel, any more than I do. We haven't been around that long.



Exactly. So how come AGW is supposedly definitely human caused? [/quote]

How come?

It stands to reason.
Smiley
Back to top
 

live every day
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21753
Gender: male
Re: Ice watch
Reply #403 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 9:47pm
 
Emma wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 9:35pm:
Emma wrote:You don't know anything about the natural variation Grendel, any more than I do. We haven't been around that long.



Exactly. So how come AGW is supposedly definitely human caused?


Quote:
How come?

It stands to reason.
Smiley

An assumption. Just try to build on it.

Seen BoM?

...
Back to top
« Last Edit: Aug 2nd, 2017 at 10:08pm by lee »  
 
IP Logged
 
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Ice watch
Reply #404 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 10:10pm
 
I do so enjoy all these lines and colours and graphs and things.

Surely that last one suggests significant heating above normal since around 1980, whilst showing cooling anomalies prior to that.

Should this be telling me something else? Pls advise.
Back to top
 

live every day
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 ... 45
Send Topic Print