Since you're ineligible to decide on the paper's merits (since it's a matter of public record that you won't understand it) and you won't let me do it, I guess you might as well save your money.
Battle of the global warming alarmists - Basketcase vs. Frankfooter
- Thread starter Moviefan-2
- Start date
- Status
Bull. Now, you're just conjuring up fairy tales from your own little world of make-believe.
The answer?
no.
The changes in our star are very, very slow compared to our timescale. Its only kooks like Corbyn who predict ice ages right now, nobody is predicting changes in sunspots or solar output to have nearly the effect on our climate as CO2 at present.
http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/
And yes, I keep posting that chart as it is a good representation of the forcings on our climate.
As for the argument that .2 of a watt isn't much, bear in mind that's the measured difference from only 22ppm in CO2 and even that has to be amplified by the land mass of the planet to understand how much more energy that puts into the climate.
Are you calling the authors of that study liars?
Do you have any evidence to show that their claim they measured the greenhouse effect of CO2 directly is wrong?
Meanwhile, Venezuela is feeling the effects of climate change through loss of hyrdo power.
70% of their electricity comes from one hydro site and they were suffering from a couple of years of drought before El Nino hit.
Now they are close to having to shut down about 25% of their countries electricity, as water levels at the dam that powers most of the country are at record lows.
https://www.e-wisdom.com/news/worsening-electricity-shortage-in-venezuela-is-raising-new-questions/
Last edited:
If one thing more than any other is used to justify proposals that the world must spend tens of trillions of dollars on combating global warming, it is the belief that we face a disastrous rise in sea levels. The Antarctic and Greenland ice caps will melt, we are told, warming oceans will expand, and the result will be catastrophe.
Although the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) only predicts a sea level rise of 59cm (17 inches) by 2100, Al Gore in his Oscar-winning film An Inconvenient Truth went much further, talking of 20 feet, and showing computer graphics of cities such as Shanghai and San Francisco half under water. We all know the graphic showing central London in similar plight. As for tiny island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu, as Prince Charles likes to tell us and the Archbishop of Canterbury was again parroting last week, they are due to vanish.
But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.
The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
Although the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) only predicts a sea level rise of 59cm (17 inches) by 2100, Al Gore in his Oscar-winning film An Inconvenient Truth went much further, talking of 20 feet, and showing computer graphics of cities such as Shanghai and San Francisco half under water. We all know the graphic showing central London in similar plight. As for tiny island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu, as Prince Charles likes to tell us and the Archbishop of Canterbury was again parroting last week, they are due to vanish.
But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.
The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
Are you going to send Morner off to the island the Star talks about?
Are you going to get him to tell the people who already had to move that they are wrong?
He's just another kook who is denying the real evidence that seas are rising.
Except they are not all based on computer models. The study I posted above in Nature measured the effect directly. So you are wrong.
Since you KNOW this--you replied to posts pointing it out--you are lying. Dishonest in the extreme.
Clearly you intend to go on spamming us with your bogus computer model claim with endless cut and pastes even though you know the claim is false.
if you bothered to read the article he spend years working in the field.
what is happening in the Solomon islands is beach erosion that has nothing to do with climate change
When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown.
Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has if anything dropped in recent decades. The only evidence the scaremongers can cite is based on the fact that extracting groundwater for pineapple growing has allowed seawater to seep in to replace it. Meanwhile, Venice has been sinking rather than the Adriatic rising, says Dr Mörner.
One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC's favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a "corrective factor" of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they "needed to show a trend".
When I spoke to Dr Mörner last week, he expressed his continuing dismay at how the IPCC has fed the scare on this crucial issue. When asked to act as an "expert reviewer" on the IPCC's last two reports, he was "astonished to find that not one of their 22 contributing authors on sea levels was a sea level specialist: not one". Yet the results of all this "deliberate ignorance" and reliance on rigged computer models have become the most powerful single driver of the entire warmist hysteria.
i clicked "view post" and typical of fuji resort to more defamation and personal attacks.
This is what you say every time I call you out for posting nonsense. You have ignored the facts (ie, the Nature article that directly observed AGW). You have repeatedly ignored the facts on multiple threads.
Pointing out that you do so may upset you but it's also the truth. There's an easy solution though: stop ignoring the facts and start debating the issues.
Morner is a kook whose work is shoddy.
There was a legit study that debunked all his nonsense, available here:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818105000780
More about why he is wrong here:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?p=2&t=58&&n=1153
And here:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/dec/02/spectator-sea-level-claims
The evidence that seas are rising?
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sea-level-rise-swallows-5-whole-pacific-islands/
http://www.livescience.com/51990-sea-level-rise-unknowns.html
Why do you fall for such nonsense?
did frankfooter read the article?
But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.
The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".
But if there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years." If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm". And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by
Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.
The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".
S
**Sophie**
The truth about skeptical science;
"Skeptical Science is a climate alarmist website created by a self-employed cartoonist, John Cook (who apparently pretends to be a Nazi). It is moderated by zealots who ruthlessly censor any and all form of dissent from their alarmist position. This way they can pretend to win arguments, when in reality they have all been refuted. The abuse and censorship does not pertain to simply any dissenting commentator there but to highly credentialed and respected climate scientists as well; Dr. Pielke Sr. has unsuccessfully attempted to engage in discussions there only to be childishly taunted and censored, while Dr. Michaels has been dishonestly quoted and smeared. The irony of the site's oxymoronic name "Skeptical Science" is that the site is not skeptical of even the most extreme alarmist positions."
John Cook (KOOK lol) is now desperately trying to cover up his background that he was employed as a cartoonist for over a decade with no prior employment history in academia or climate science.
Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can reveal what his website originally said,
"I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist" - John Cook, Skeptical Science"
http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html?m=1
"Skeptical Science is a climate alarmist website created by a self-employed cartoonist, John Cook (who apparently pretends to be a Nazi). It is moderated by zealots who ruthlessly censor any and all form of dissent from their alarmist position. This way they can pretend to win arguments, when in reality they have all been refuted. The abuse and censorship does not pertain to simply any dissenting commentator there but to highly credentialed and respected climate scientists as well; Dr. Pielke Sr. has unsuccessfully attempted to engage in discussions there only to be childishly taunted and censored, while Dr. Michaels has been dishonestly quoted and smeared. The irony of the site's oxymoronic name "Skeptical Science" is that the site is not skeptical of even the most extreme alarmist positions."
John Cook (KOOK lol) is now desperately trying to cover up his background that he was employed as a cartoonist for over a decade with no prior employment history in academia or climate science.
Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can reveal what his website originally said,
"I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist" - John Cook, Skeptical Science"
http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html?m=1
don't you just love the beauty of silence from the climate alarmists about skeptical science owned and operated by a cartoonist with no science background?
I read the article, the science is shoddy.
His findings are not supported by any other legit paper and there are major flaws in his method.
Did you read the criticisms?
Do you have any responses?
Morner is an embarrassment to the INQUA, who are pointedly stating that Morner doesn't represent them or their views any more.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Nils-Axel-Morner-wrong-about-sea-level-rise.html
But even more entertaining is that Morner thinks he has paranormal powers, the power to divine water.
http://www.monbiot.com/2011/12/04/the-spectators-spectacular-blunder/
Canada-man, you have an amazing paranormal ability to find kooks.
Congrats.
Did you study science at Fuji's School of Make Believe? :biggrin1:
No, I'm not disputing the results they reported that show energy increases that are "solely" due to CO2. What I'm saying is those results don't confirm the AGW hypothesis.
The debate is about the supposed amplification of the temperature that the AGW proponents say comes from water vapour in the atmosphere. The paper that Fuji cited separated out water vapour and clouds and only reported on CO2 alone.
As far as the AGW hypothesis goes, it doesn't matter whether the results cited in the paper are right or wrong. The effect of CO2 alone is too small to worry about.
Wow, you really nailed him, eh?
A cartoonist.
Wow.
I do love how you accuse him of covering up his background as a cartoonist, and yet use his publicly posted bio on Skeptical Science to prove it.
Talk about lame.
Though this does raise a good point.
Scientists aren't supposed to advocate, they do research. Skeptical science isn't really advocation, its just a source, but its close enough that its probably better that a non-scientist run it.
Its a major issue, while Exxon can spend millions on lobbyists, climatologists spend nothing on lobbyists or advertising.
And what's next in this accusation?
Are you going to claim that AGW is a conspiracy run by cartoonists all over the globe, in order to rake in the big bucks of political cartoons?
Is that your complaint about Cook running Skeptical Science?
If you accept the results you have to accept that they prove AGW, through proof that CO2 causes the heating we call the greenhouse effect.
That was the finding of the paper.
- Status
