Oh yes I do
There you go
Natural climate variation at work
Nothing we can do about that
That does not refute the fact the South pole has been frozen for the last 15 million years
https://skepticalscience.com/LIG1-0706.html ?????
You have quoted this website twice before and both times he/she, used a long winded irrational rebuke with lots of sciency sounding words, but no real facts,
The first was about infrared saturation & broad banding. he did not address the issue and was factually incorrect on key points
the second was about the logarithmic relationship between energy absorbed and concentration. He actually confirmed the logarithmic relationship and then rambled on about stored energy in a pipeline in the atmosphere. Infrared radiation moving a the the speed of light does not get stored. Yikes!
The other odd thing is this (propaganda site) website constantly pops up first in searches on Climate related issues. That costs big bucks
Here is the key messages you should take from your little quote
.
here he is saying history is an analog for his scenario. That is an odd way to express his backtesting
he describes what type of data is required. He wants global data
Sadly he does not have global data so he is going to use
local sea level indicators instead ?? So
he is introducing a measurement error into his estimate but will still determine uncertainties
and then boasts he has 95 % confidence in his
estimate
95% confidence in the analysis of an experimental data set obtained from actual observations is pretty darn good.
It can be extremely difficult to achieve 95% if there is a known experimental error introduced
But he does not know the magnitude of error he has introduced by substituting local data for global data
And we know local data (2019 US surface temp down, while global temps are up as per NOAA) aint the same as global data
Assume a 10% error
How can he have 95% confidence?
Assume a 1% error
Now he has a bit more wiggle room, but local sea level data within 1% of global sea level data. Nope, not a chance, sea levels vary significantly around the globe presently and he is attempting to use historical data sets
In addition how long have sea levels in the antarctic been accurately measured 50 years? ie his local sea level data set
Antarctica is a big area. The breath of measurements could not have been large before satellites
And to top it off it the result is an estimate
95% statistical confidence in an future guess (estimate) obtained after introducing a potential measure error and not having the data he wants . Yikes! That's a ballsy claim. That would not pass any peer review, except in climate science
Al Gore had an estimate, did he not claimed the ice caps would have been melted by 2014?
Lets stick to facts rather than guesswork
After all if your going to purposely scare the living shit out of children, you need more than guesswork
Not according to the BBC
https://www.sciencefocus.com/planet-earth/how-long-has-antarctica-been-frozen/
So who is idiotic and typically ill-informed again?
Studies now say ??????
That's a catchy little propaganda saying that we have been force fed for 20+ years on this subject
Again it is someones estimate about what he postulates might happen in the future
Lots of guessing and estimating in this climate science business
So instead of guessing and estimates, how about you mull over some facts
Esperanza is 1840 miles from the south pole.
Edmonton alberta is 1400 miles from the North Pole
The temperature record for esperanza is only 57 years.
It is January in the Antarctic. Some melting occurs in January, just as there is freezing and ice accumulation in July
The antarctic has been frozen for the last 15 million years
The medieval warm period & the Roman warm period were just as warm as the present
The average US surface temp for the year 1999 was lower than the average US surface temp in 2012 & 2016
Again
The antarctic has been frozen for the last 15 million years. A period which includes the medieval warm period & the Roman warm period
