Forum

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

Pages: 1 2 3 4 ... 7
Send Topic Print
Lessons in AGW (Read 5811 times)
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #15 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:01pm
 
We won’t look at the details of the Manabe-Wetherald model they developed in 1968 when finally computers were powerful enough to run such models. I hope to cover the essentials of it tho.

Remember that scientific studies for the US Air Force and Navy had found that the surface emitted IR, enough IR that heat seeking missiles did not find their targets, bombs did not drop on the target. So by the end of the 1950s there was no longer any doubt that the mechanism of AGW existed. And Tyndall had found that water vapor, CO2 and CH4 were opaque to IR. This was in  1859.
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: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #16 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:05pm
 
Quote:
The main business of climatologists until the mid-20th century was the simple drudgery of compiling statistics. Knowledge of average and extreme temperatures and rainfall and the like was important to farmers, civil engineers, and others in their practical affairs — never mind guessing at explanations. But people could not resist trying to explain the numbers. A textbook would start off with the main factor, the way sunlight and thus warmth varies with latitude (perhaps with some calculations and charts). There would follow sections on the prevailing winds that brought rain, and how mountain ranges and ocean currents could affect the winds, and so forth. It was all soundly based on elementary physics.

It was a dry exercise, however, not so much a theory of climate as a static regional description
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: 19725
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #17 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:27pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 1:53pm:
Yes, the Zeller/Nikolov model used SIX parameters 



And how many for the new CMIP6? Most CMIP5's use more. Wink



Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:05pm:
It was all soundly based on elementary physics


And yet they still don't do clouds, amongst others, well.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #18 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:29pm
 
You are fixated on clouds, aren’t you? I think you will find understanding of clouds has increased markedly. Poor desperate lee.
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: 19725
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #19 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:34pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:29pm:
ou are fixated on clouds, aren’t you? I think you will find understanding of clouds has increased markedly.



Is that why they are still thought to be net positive? Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #20 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:40pm
 
Yes, they are net positive. Very good lee, next we can get onto 2 + 2 = ?
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: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #21 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:41pm
 
Quote:
The simplest and most widely accepted model of climate change was self-regulation, which meant that changes were only temporary excursions from some natural equilibrium. Through the first half of the 20th century, textbooks of climatology treated climate in a basically static fashion. The word "climate" itself was defined as the long-term average weather conditions, the stable point around which annual temperature and rainfall fluctuated.(5*) After all, in their records of reliable observations the meteorologists found only minor fluctuations from decade to decade. These records went back less than a century, but they supposed that one century was much like the next (aside from changes that took place over many thousands of years, like the ice ages, which were themselves seen as excursions from the very long-term average). Climatologists expanded this idea into a "doctrine," as one critic called it, "that the present causes of climatic instability are not competent to produce anything more than temporary variations, which disappear within a few years."(6) A leading climatologist put it straightforwardly in 1946: "We can safely accept the past performance as an adequate guide for the future."(7)      



<=>Climatologists
=>Solar variation
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: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #22 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:00pm
 
Quote:
The approach expressed a generally sound intuition about the nature of climate as a process governed by a complex set of interactions, all feeding back on one another. But romantic views that stability was guaranteed by the supra human, benevolent power of Nature gave a false confidence that every feature of our environment would stay within limits suitable for human civilization.



Feedback—an essential process and concept especially in meteorology and climatology and biological and physical scienc of course..

Feedback therefor is essential any understanding of climate, essential to any climate model devised.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:07pm 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: 19725
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #23 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:10pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:40pm:
Yes, they are net positive



Citation needed. Wink


Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:41pm:
The simplest and most widely accepted model of climate change was self-regulation, which meant that changes were only temporary excursions from some natural equilibrium.



So when has the earth ever been in equilibrium?

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 2:41pm:
These records went back less than a century, but they supposed that one century was much like the next (aside from changes that took place over many thousands of years, like the ice ages, which were themselves seen as excursions from the very long-term average).


And yet that has not been shown to be true.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #24 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:27pm
 
Those questions, lee the desperate, are from the very early days you see, it is not what scientists think now. Get 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
 
BigP
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1924
West Auckland
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #25 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:28pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 11:51am:
14 acres, nice!

I want 1400m2, 14 acres a bit too much for me!


I didn't particularly want that much land but when you are looking for a property in a certain area you have to take what's available ,
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #26 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:31pm
 
Very true.

If I get much more than I want I will plant it with native trees and bird and butterfly attracting trees, keep the  1500sqm for “orchard”, “vineyard” and house and garden.
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: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #27 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:38pm
 
Hardest part is finding a big block in an area where it doesn’t rain so bloody much!

Rain in Tassie is mainly spread fairly evenly through the year—no hot dry summers to ripen fruit. Can install polytunnels but still have humidity causing fungal infections.
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: 51473
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #28 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:39pm
 
Quote:
     

E
lementary Physics (19th century) 
      

"As a dam built across a river causes a local deepening of the stream, so our atmosphere, thrown as a barrier across the terrestrial rays, produces a local heightening of the temperature at the Earth's surface." Thus in 1862 John Tyndall described the key to climate change. He had discovered in his laboratory that certain gases, including water vapor and carbon dioxide ( CO2), are opaque to heat rays. He understood that such gases high in the air help keep our planet warm by interfering with escaping radiation.(9)      

This kind of intuitive physical reasoning had already appeared in the earliest speculations on how atmospheric composition could affect climate. It was in the 1820s that a French scientist, Joseph Fourier, first realized that the Earth's atmosphere retains heat radiation. He had asked himself a deceptively simple question: what determines the average temperature of a planet? Sunlight bathes the planet and warms it up while outgoing heat rays, now called infrared radiation, cool it down. In balance, what would be the temperature of a bare rock at the Earth's distance from the Sun? Fourier decided it must be very cold. That was a leap of intuition, for the physics known in his time lacked the tools to make a calculation. Yet he was right to believe that something keeps our planet warmer than a bare rock, and he realized that the something is our atmosphere.
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: 19725
Gender: male
Re: Lessons in AGW
Reply #29 - Apr 5th, 2021 at 4:46pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 5th, 2021 at 3:27pm:
Those questions, lee the desperate, are from the very early days you see, it is not what scientists think now. Get that?


You do understand the difference between thinking and proving? But the real reason you say that is because you can't refute.

Even your go to site SKS says -

"Although the cloud feedback is one of the largest remaining uncertainties in climate science, evidence is building that the net cloud feedback is likely positive, and unlikely to be strongly negative."

No refutation there. And notice the strange thought process involved. In one "likely positive" - In the other "unlikely strongly negative."  They can't even think of clouds as likely negative even a small bit. Wink

Earth Ice age; interglacial; Ice age; interglacial - definitely not in equilibrium. Wink


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 ... 7
Send Topic Print