Global Warming - running out of time to prevent ECONOMIC disaster

B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
Oh goodie .. BC is back again

1. Please explain the record coldness this year and how this proved that the Earth is getting warmer year on year? You have the links in my previous posts.
2. Please explain why even the UN is acknowledging that the warmth is over but they say it is only a stop-gap until warming returns?

Also, explain the recent corrections in the Hansen data? That dude has been manipulating data for years and has been caught many times but he still works for NASA. Must be the same type of ppl that killed all those astronauts because they refused to believe that foam could cause a problem <- real geniuses here
 
B

BCO

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
13,229
BandwidthAddict said:
Oh goodie .. BC is back again

1. Please explain the record coldness this year and how this proved that the Earth is getting warmer year on year? You have the links in my previous posts.
2. Please explain why even the UN is acknowledging that the warmth is over but they say it is only a stop-gap until warming returns?

Also, explain the recent corrections in the Hansen data? That dude has been manipulating data for years and has been caught many times but he still works for NASA. Must be the same type of ppl that killed all those astronauts because they refused to believe that foam could cause a problem <- real geniuses here
Click to expand...

Both of your first questions can be answered the same way, I'm going to bold my answer this time because you seem to be unable to understand this point despite the fact that I've tried on multiple occasions to explain (*sigh* this is just like the PD section). Here goes:

There is a difference between long term climate change and short term weather variability. So if mean temperatures for the last few years are cooler that does NOT mean that there is not a continuing warming trend that's been going on for the last few decades and will continue to go on.

Please, stop pointing to short term weather variability and using it to try and explain away long term climate change.

Regarding your question about "Hansen's data", here's a quote from your own Climate Audit:

In its land surface temperature calculations, NASA GISS is little more than a distributor for NOAA GHCN.
Click to expand...

So maybe point a finger at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and not Hansen? Finally for a good overview of the whole situation, look here. (Yes my favourite, RealClimate).
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
Check out these CO2 levels:

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

CO2: 2008 > 2007 > 2006
Temp: 2007 > 2008?

You cannot have global warming due to CO2 if the world gets cooler when CO2 still increases. A CONTRADICTION CANNOT OCCUR IN REALITY! Explain that?

And while you are at it, check out this site (http://www.climateaudit.org/ - I am sure you know of it) where he puts the science spears into the realclimate and noaa and Hansen nutjobs. You see, science is about the numbers, not the consensus .. Hansen et al knows this which is why they massage the numbers to fit their concept. This is called fraud!

BTW .. where in the models that are the cornerstone of climate change does it show the current cooling?
 
B

BCO

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
13,229
BandwidthAddict said:
Check out these CO2 levels:

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

CO2: 2008 > 2007 > 2006
Temp: 2007 > 2008?

You cannot have global warming due to CO2 if the world gets cooler when CO2 still increases. A CONTRADICTION CANNOT OCCUR IN REALITY! Explain that?

And while you are at it, check out this site (http://www.climateaudit.org/ - I am sure you know of it) where he puts the science spears into the realclimate and noaa and Hansen nutjobs. You see, science is about the numbers, not the consensus .. Hansen et al knows this which is why they massage the numbers to fit their concept. This is called fraud!

BTW .. where in the models that are the cornerstone of climate change does it show the current cooling?
Click to expand...

*Smashes head against brick wall again*

Do you even read what I post? I bolded some stuff for you the last time, perhaps I should enlarge the text a bit as well.

There is a difference between long term climate change and short term weather variability. If mean temperatures for the last few years are cooler, that does NOT mean that there is not a continuing warming trend that's been going on for the last few decades and will continue to go on.

Please read this, and try to understand it before you keep repeating yourself over and over about how short term weather figures somehow refute long term climate trends.
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
Sorry .. I don't understand. Please explain this to me

1. IPCC claims that global warming is being caused by CO2, only by CO2, and that increases in CO2 causes increases in global temperature
2. In 2008, the CO2 levels are higher than 2007 but the temperature is less than 2007 (by a large degree)

How can that contradiction occur? What is causing the cooling that is overriding CO2?

And answer me this: If the data shows that the planet can cool when CO2 increases, then is the original idea of CO2 causing global warming false? (IE is IPCC wrong?) If not, then WHY not?

Also take note that this is not a day, or a week, but an entire year and it is global, not just related to some areas.

BTW, screaming at me will not change the data :)
 
B

BCO

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
13,229
There are many many variables that can affect weather and climate over the short term (what with the whole atmosphere being a fairly complex system and all). Weather, by its very nature is something that changes. Sometimes it's hot, sometimes it's cold. Not every summer day is the same temperature.

"An entire year" is short term. The fact remains that the trend for longer periods (7, 8 or 10 myears) indicates warming. This year may be cooler than last year - that's short term, it doesn't negate the long term warming trend.

There are plenty of very good scientific explanations for the queries you have raised.

Try this for starters. (Problem is, I don't think you're honestly looking for answers to the questions you raised).

These graphs are also very informative re. short term vs long term temps:

http://www.realclimate.org/images/hadcru-8yr.jpg

http://www.realclimate.org/images/giss-7yr.jpg

http://www.realclimate.org/images/giss-15yr.jpg
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
Interesting. Thanks for the links.

I do have some concerns. We should discount the GISS data since that has recently be shown to have QA issues and that we don't know how many, or what errors exist in that data. So the last two graphs are not relevant.

The hadcru-8year is interesting because the trend after the year 2000 shows a downward temperature deviation slope.

BTW, what does 0 represent? Do we know what the perfect temperature for Earth should be? What is this temperature and why?

Because it looks like the temperature was going down in the 80s and some of the 90s (- deviation) but in the late 90s shows an upward trend that seems to be reversing itself in the last 5 years.

How does this graph show a global warming threat?

Edit: The last 5 years of the hadcrut graph show that the y-o-y temperature deviation is going down (cooling) even though CO2 levels are increasing.
 
Last edited:
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
BTW, you have not answered my questions on the relation of CO2 and temperature.

Is there something you want to avoid?
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
I thought I would add this one to the mix since the graphs conveniently start after the 70s:

Time Magazine - "Another Ice Age?" Jun 24, 1974:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html

I love this paragraph:

Telltale signs are everywhere —from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other convincing data.
Click to expand...

And then this one tickles my funny bone:

all agree that vastly more information is needed about the major influences on the earth's climate. Indeed, it is to gain such knowledge that 38 ships and 13 aircraft, carrying scientists from almost 70 nations, are now assembling in the Atlantic and elsewhere for a massive 100-day study of the effects of the tropical seas and atmosphere on worldwide weather. The study itself is only part of an international scientific effort known acronymically as GARP (for Global Atmospheric Research Program).
Click to expand...

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

BTW, why do the graphs only start after the 70s?
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
hellhound604 said:
none as blind as those that don't want to see ......
Click to expand...

I'm not sure who you are pulling for but I assume that you are a pro-"humans are causing the destruction of the world by global warming through production of CO2"

If I am wrong, sorry for that.

But if I am not wrong, then how about you answer the questions?
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
Oh lookie.

It seems BC et al have gone quiet again. I guess they can't handle facts, only pseudo-science.

Fact 1:
IPCC claims that CO2, and only CO2, causes global warming. CO2 is pumped out by man thus man is responsible for global warming.

Fact 2:
Every temperature source except for NOAA and GISS is showing that the world is cooling, not warming.

Fact 3:
This year, in particular, has been very cold - globally

Fact 4:
Science is about observation, not consensus. Only in politics do we have consensus. Science has proofs, no concensus required.

So here is an observation -

CO2 levels are rising. According to this site (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/) 2008 > 2007 for CO2 levels
But temperatures for 2008 are less for 2007 (see various items in previous posts)

How can the temperatures be lower when CO2 is rising if CO2 causes global warming?

The only explanation is that CO2 does not cause global warming.

Thus the whole IPCC report has been invalidated by reality.

Thus cap and trade schemes, which are very dangerous for the economy, especially our economy, must not be implemented.

If you don't mind being poor, hungry and without hope, then support cap and trade. I like having food on the table, I like being able to afford to put food on the table and I like to have food in the store at a price I can afford. Cap and trade will change that. See what effect the Eskom blackouts have/are having on our economy and multiply that a few times as we have to shut down coal power stations country wide.

Fact 5:
The people screaming the loudest about AGW (man-made global warming) are also the people benefitting from it:

  • Politicians - political power through cap and trade schemes and new tax potential, also great for defeating honest politicians that cannot take part in AGW scaremongering as they refuse to lie
  • Lobbyists - cap and trade, power brokering similar to what unions do
  • Media - scaremongering sells airtime
  • Dishonest climate scientists - finally people care about them, they get money and fame where before they got bupkiss - before AGW, who actually cared about climate research?
  • People who believe because they want AGW to be true, or they fear it to be true. People who hate/envy success. People that believe humans must suffer and/or be wiped out (their reason for their belief is not important). People who support evil men/women in power. Stupid/easily conned people. People that fear the success of man will wipe man out, so man must return to the stone age.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top