No, I said CO2 is driving warming of the planet.
Absolute not !!!!
You repeatedly claimed CO2 is the control knob for climate
El Nino is a cyclical current event that raises the temperature of the planet temporarily, typically over 1 year or so, it isn't warming the planet.
You can not prove that empirically
You have two inputs El Nino & CO2 (hundreds in reality) and one output temperature
You can not separate the impacts of the two on a global scale
No
I am not arguing against multiple forces acting to impact climate. Pay attention will you !!!!!
What is wrong with you?
But I will accept your withdrawing from this claim as another admission you were wrong.
Oh I will admit if I am wrong, but I am not.
You conversely will never admit to anything despite so many examples I have lost count. Countless others have said the same about you
Once again you forget you need virtue before you can try virtue signalling
I approximated based on looking at the charts of global temperatures.
You guessed & your guess made a stronger case for Natural Variability than for CO2
what a dope !!!
The IPCC has stated they expect about 0.2ºC warming per decade through CO2, though that may now look to be conservative.
Conservative??????
their models have consistently overshot reality & they have a long long list of failed predictions
No if there is an adjustment required it is towards a much lower sensitivity
And for El Nino, I just looked at the chart and used the bump as a guess. Its just a guess for this debate, but feel free to do some actual research and find the real numbers.
"Used the bump as a guess", well that should get you some consideration for a nobel prize"
I can just see the Headlines "FrankFooter guesses , proves his theory wrong and is awarded the Noble Prize..... Greata is non too pleased to come in second"
Sorry science requires a lot more rigour than "I just looked at the chart and used the bump as a guess."
but feel free to do some actual research and find the real numbers.
I do not need to do anything
You are the one incorrectly claiming CO2 is the control knob for the climate, All I need to do is sit back , watch you make an absolute fool of your self trying to argue scientific concepts.
It is really not to hard to point out flawed logic
That is how science works. It weeds out & dismissed flawed logic. If it is allowed to operate ex politics
If you propose a hypothesis and claim it to be true, then it has to sand up against any and all challenges.
That's the way science works
That is also why only a fool would claim "Co2 is the control knob for Climate" or " The science is settled"
El Nino has a large effect on global climate, but yes, its cyclical.
Oh so now you want to introduce a new factor, "cyclicality" of El Nino ???
Well if your going to do that then you need to introduce the periodicity of a whole shit load of other factors such as:
1. changes in the jet stream,
2. solar activity ,
3. the Milankovitch cycles ,
4. convection forces
5. radiative transfer across the variable temperature gradient of the troposphere
6. the logarithmic changes in absorption by c02 as concentration increases and the exponential decrease in absorption across a decreasing tempature gradiant of the troposphere
7. Cloud formation
8 Water Vapour concentration (The big dog of greenhouse gases)
9. The impact of turbulence on air and water flows
Etc Etc
None of which are properly (if at all) incorporated into computer climate models
In science you just can not introduce unspecified cyclicality of one input "as needed" , but exclude all others
But back to your statement
El Nino has a large effect on global climate, but yes, its cyclical.
How much of an effect? you said large so then it is significant
But again how much?
Your first guess showed it to be 1.5 times greater than the impact of Co2 over a ten year cycle
??? Is there something wrong with your suddenly evolving theory of global warning?
Remember you took the absolute , no doubt about it , the science is settled stand that "Co2 is the control knob for climate" and we can control climate by controlling the Co2 knob
No, El Nino doesn't raise the planet's temperature permanently, it bumps the temperature up temporarily for a year or so.
Explain the physics behind that statement. something a lot more in depth than your grade six level bicycle/ hill analogy
Just like when you ride down a hill it boosts your speed but that speed is lost through drag on a plane and then possibly lowered when you go back up the next hill (or La Nina).
I wondered when you would introduce La Nina another Naturally occurring driver of Climate
Three down, hundreds more natural variable effects to come
[The grade six level explanation seems to have worked as you now appear to understand that two forces can act on one body.
#1. No the grade six level explanation does not work as climate is a lot more complex that that
2. There is a whole lot more than two forces acting on numerous bodies in the climate, many interacting in highly unpredictable manners hence the term chaotic
And no, El Nino is not responsible for climate change, its just a cycle much like winter and summer.
There is no scientific basis for either of the two inaccurate conclusions in that statement
El Nino's do not have a regular periodicity like winter of summer.
Sure, the climate will likely return to a norm in a few thousand to a few hundred thousands of years, depending on whether we drive it to a thermal maximum or not.
What part of "Climate is a chaotic multivariate nonlinear system" do you not understand?
You can not define an equilibrium of a chaotic system
Unless we do drastic change and keep climate change to 1.5ºC or so.
Scare mongering about a subject your clearly do not understand
What do you think is the better option?
Thermal maximum or cheap gas?
Oh Boy that's scary!
too bad for you I am not a child
What do you think is the better option
Using propaganda to support puedo science, dangerous distributive policies and to scare the living hell out of children
or
allowing constructive scientific debate to arrive at the truth
Such strong and continued efforts to shut down the opposition are a pretty serious red flag that "Climate Change" science is not rock solid and most definitely not settled
If your right , there would be no need to shut anyone down
But alas you clearly are not right and the propaganda effort continues
1) El Nino doesn't drive climate change, its a cycle like winter and summer.
You showed it to be responsible for 1.5 X the warming of Co2 over a ten year period???????
But that was just a guess
2) Yes, scientists can easily separate the differences, it may be hard for you to understand but its not for them.
That is just not true. absolutely not on a global scale in a chaotic system
They can guess, but look where that got you guessing
This is just too funny
You really think you're doing well in this debate?
oh boy, now that is also very funny !! Stop it , it hurts when I laugh like this
Watching you argue scientific issues is like watching a turtle who has flipped over onto his back
Kinda funny for a while, but then it just becomes cruel
I am not permitted to say what you really are
