Australian Politics Forum - Why David DuByne is so very wrong

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21541
Gender: male

Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong
Reply #105 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 12:11pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 6:26am:

1. Temperature graph. Shows the globe is warming. Booby says the data is rigged—no actual evidence of the rigging given.

You still haven't explained NOAA's hottest ever temperature is recorded as 62.45ºF way back in 1997, not 2016. You still dodge the question. You simply want to put more lipstick on the pig.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 6:26am:

2. Graphs of Arctic ice. Definite decrease in Arctic ice extent and even bigger decrease in ice volume.

And a lot of that with BIG uncertainties.

"We find large uncertainties in the total sea ice volume and trend. The mean total sea ice volume is 10 120 ±1280 km³ in October/November and 13 250 ±1860 km³ in February/March for the time period 2005–2007. Based on these uncertainties we obtain trends in sea ice volume of 1450 ±530 km³ a^-1 in October/November and −880 ±260 km³ a⁻¹ in February/March over the ICESat period (2003–2008). Our results indicate that, taking into account the uncertainties, the decline in sea ice volume in the Arctic between the ICESat (2003–2008) and CryoSat-2 (2010–2012) periods may have been less dramatic than reported in previous studies"

https://www.the-cryosphere.net/8/705/2014/tc-8-705-2014.pdf

oh look uncertainties. Something never mentioned by the "climate faithful".

An of course only back to 1979; except of course where they use 11,000 processors to somehow go back to 1954. GIGO Wink

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 6:26am:

3. Nearly all glaciers are retreating bar a few benefitting from increased precipitation that AGW brings.

Yeah. Glaciers doing what glaciers do best. Adavnce/retreat.

Of look. A benefit of AGW. Grin

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 6:26am:

4. There is 46% more CO2 in the atmosphere than there was in 1850. Isotopic analysis of the oxygen atoms in the CO2 molecules show they came from burning fossil fuels. There is a carbon cycle but we add CO2 on top of that.

3% woohoo. You can explain the constraints on CO2?

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 6:26am:

5. We have the spectroscopic evidence that H2O combined with CO2 block IR radiation from escaping to space. IR radiation is how a black body rids itself of heat imparted by radiation, in the case of the earth from sunlight.

Oh, oh back to the claim of earth being a black body.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 6:26am:

6. Sea level is rising from the melting of glaciers and ice sheets and thermal expansion of the oceans

How much? Given we have a complete unknown in Global Isostatic Adjustment in the mix; we have no way of knowing. Wink

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 6:26am:

None of this stuff is hard to understand. The message is pretty grim and many do not want to understand it and are ready to listen to deniers and frauds many of whom are paid by fossil fuel interests who want to keep selling fossil fuels. Many just decide it is too hard and decide to ignore it. That is not the way to deal with unpleasant facts.

But you still insist on trying to convince others it is "settled science". How can it be "settled science" when you can't quantify it?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Apr 27^th, 2018 at 12:20pm by lee »

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21541 Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #106 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 12:26pm Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 8:28am: This figure is from the BoM “State of the Climate 2016” report: Oh look A bell curve. Bell curves are used when something is normally distributed. Weather stations do not fit the criteria.
Back to top	IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #107 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:16pm A bell curve means that a value is normally distributed. Temperatures do not quite form bell curves, if you look at the distributions carefully.
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

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #108 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:18pm Oh dear, Lees thinks that it is weather stations that are normally distributed. Nope, the curves are the curves of temperatures and the temperatures are, at first glance, normally distributed.
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

Jovial Monk

Gold Member

Offline

Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male

Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong
Reply #109 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:22pm

Bobby. wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 12:02pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 7:36am:

We don’t have record cold events all over the world.

Yes we do - what about the bombogenesis?

That's just one of 1000s of record cold events that haven't just affected
one tiny town but entire continents.
You don't even listen to the evidence.

I have already explained that bombogenesis refers not to cold but to a rapid barometric pressure drop, like 960 to 940 in 24 hours in a storm centre. Bombogenesis was a term coined by NASA.

Those northeasters that hit New England started in the North Atlantic Ocean where temperatures were like 9°C warmer than normal. This was in the part of the Atlantic where the Gulf Stream flows—a fingerprint of a slowing Gulf Stream. That three northeasters hit New England was due to a stuck Jet Stream pattern. The strength of the north easters was due to the warm Atlantic.

The Beast from the East was cold Arctic air pushed out of the Arctic by warm air pushing in from Siberia. Looking at the cold events gives you a distorted version of reality.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:44pm 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

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21541
Gender: male

Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong
Reply #110 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:47pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:18pm:

Oh dear, Lees thinks that it is weather stations that are normally distributed. Nope, the curves are the curves of temperatures and the temperatures are, at first glance, normally distributed.

Wrong.

The weather stations are on various parts of the globe. They will therefore measure the local temperature. You could get a bell curve for a single weather station. After that it is more like necromancy.

You forget the role spatial diversity would have on the output.

Take a bell curve for a SH station add it to a bell curve for a NH station multiply by thousands and agitate to provide an output. A washing machine. rinse and repeat. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21541
Gender: male

Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong
Reply #111 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:50pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 1:22pm:

I have already explained that bombogenesis refers not to cold but to a rapid barometric pressure drop, like 960 to 940 in 24 hours in a storm centre. Bombogenesis was a term coined by NASA.

Those northeasters that hit New England started in the North Atlantic Ocean where temperatures were like 9°C warmer than normal. This was in the part of the Atlantic where the Gulf Stream flows—a fingerprint of a slowing Gulf Stream. That three northeasters hit New England was due to a stuck Jet Stream pattern. The strength of the north easters was due to the warm Atlantic.

The Beast from the East was cold Arctic air pushed out of the Arctic by warm air pushing in from Siberia. Looking at the cold events gives you a distorted version of reality.

So these events going back to the 1800's were caused by the Gulf Stream slowing each time and then speeding up not to cause it? Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21541
Gender: male

Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong
Reply #112 - Apr 27^th, 2018 at 7:49pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2018 at 7:13am:

Strip away the padding and the record of cold events is much less.

And that is all there is, local cold events.

No evidence of anything except some places were cold for a while. Since heat events are rigorously excluded by Dubyne there is no integrity to what he puts up.

Temperatures—increasing, ice decreasing. Sea levels rising. Glaciers retreating. That is the reality.

Hail is not a symptom of cooling. It is formed high in the atmosphere in massive thunderstorms. Dubyne incidentally mentions increased precipitation—where does the extra moisture come from that precipitates as rain, hail or snow? AGW, warmer oceans evaporating more into warmer air that can now carry 8% more moisture than it could in the 1800s.

Yeah Some places -
Here are some of the Ice Age Farmer’s warnings:

Folks in Ohio are not able to start planting.
Folks in Nebraska are not able to start planting.
Folks in Illinois are not able to start planting.
Folks in North Dakota are not able to start planting.
Folks in South Dakota are not able to start planting.
None of Iowa’s farmland is ready for planting

Source: Ice age farmer.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong
Reply #113 - Apr 29^th, 2018 at 10:37am

Grendel wrote on Apr 26^th, 2018 at 6:40pm:

LOL on another indirectly related issue... The Albedo Effect.
Monk as with all issues knows nothing and simply regurgitates verbatim articles and graphs and images, no matter how wrong he actually is.

I told you

MONK simply reproduces JUNK...

Post after post after post... seems he didn't even know what the Albedo Effect was and simply ignored that issue and went on his usual ad hom and lies.
Way to win an argument Monk guess you cant use your usual expletive ridden crap here eh. Cheesy

Oh and Monk simply saying WRONG, doesn't make you right or the other person wrong now does it. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong
Reply #114 - Apr 29^th, 2018 at 10:38am

Grendel wrote on Apr 29^th, 2018 at 10:37am:

Grendel wrote on Apr 26^th, 2018 at 6:40pm:

LOL on another indirectly related issue... The Albedo Effect.
Monk as with all issues knows nothing and simply regurgitates verbatim articles and graphs and images, no matter how wrong he actually is.

I told you

MONK simply reproduces JUNK...

Post after post after post... seems he didn't even know what the Albedo Effect was and simply ignored that issue and went on his usual ad hom and lies. Doing exactly what I said he does.
Way to win an argument Monk guess you cant use your usual expletive ridden crap here eh. Cheesy

Oh and Monk simply saying WRONG, doesn't make you right or the other person wrong now does it. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #115 - Apr 29^th, 2018 at 10:44am ahahahahahaha I have mentioned the albedo effect several times. It is why the Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet, Arctic Amplification. Bottom of the class for roach again.
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

The_Barnacle Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6205 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #116 - Apr 29^th, 2018 at 11:07am Grendel wrote on Apr 24^th, 2018 at 9:48am: Wow, what an admission.... so it's the SUN not CO2 that controls temperature here. Who'd a thunk it eh? So Grendel, given your statement above, can you please state which planet is the hottest in the solar system?
Back to top	« Last Edit: Apr 29^th, 2018 at 1:08pm by The_Barnacle » The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said. IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #117 - Apr 29^th, 2018 at 11:48am Uhh—is it Pluto? (diagram from the fourth IPCC report of 2007) Not just the sun but, but, but roach said it was! hehehe
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

The_Barnacle Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6205 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #118 - Apr 29^th, 2018 at 12:00pm Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 29^th, 2018 at 11:48am: Uhh—is it Pluto? I think this might be an interesting question for Bobby too Since he is so obsessed with the solar minimum maybe eh can tell us which planet is the hottest in the solar system
Back to top	The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said. IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21541 Gender:	Re: Why David DuByne is so very wrong Reply #119 - Apr 29^th, 2018 at 12:09pm Oh look; a question about atmospheric pressure and temperature.
Back to top	IP Logged