larue, the reference is surface temperature.
They are projecting changes (anomalies) in the surface temperature.
Not the temperature in the troposphere.
Are you really unable to understand this?
You're making skoob look clever in comparison.
Climate Change
- Thread starter Addict2sex
- Start date
They are projecting changes (anomalies) in the surface temperature.
Not the temperature in the troposphere.
Are you really unable to understand this?
You're making skoob look clever in comparison.
they are trying to predict the expected changes in temperature due to the greenhouse gas theory, not the greenhouse surface theory,
you blithering scientific know nothing
explain how an Atmospheric Gas CO2 manages to heat up the surface faster than the Atmosphere ?
be sure to explain how your morons theory obeys the laws of Thermodynamics , the Stephan Law and conservation of energy
The failed climate models are an attempt to predict future data via an attempt to code physics theory into a computer program.
Predictions which cant replicate the past -- the minimum requirement of any predictive model - fail
Predictions which do not agree with other models -- fail. There is no way these bozos got the physics theory right when the distribution of Predictions is such a mess
Predictions which do not agree with other confirmed satellite/ weather balloon observations-- fail.
hmm.....independent confirmation vs. failures on multiple levels...... hmm
You're making a corpse look clever in comparison.
Last edited:
Has the 'settled science" missed something ?
how will the loonie left tax changes in cloud cover % ?
will there be a parallel Ponzi scheme CCCP rebate ?
(CCCP = Climate Cloud Cover Program
not the CCCP - Climate Change and Carbon Plan, a strategic plan adopted by the Oregon Board of Forestry
and not the evil CCCP Союз Советских Социалистических Республик i.e. commie red, pinko, murderous bastards Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
oops, I digress
is evil humanity at fault for storing its computer data in the clouds?
the IPCC treats cloud cover & reflected solar radiation as a constant
specifying with precision it to a tenth of a W/ m 2 >>>> 101.9 W/m2
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-1-1.html (accessed 6 March 2012).
note the net absorbed is the energy imbalance which theoretically is the driver of the hysteria = 0.9 W/ m2
again defined precision to a tenth of a W/ m2
0.9 W/ m2 is miniscule fraction of all the other the energy flows in the earths Energy "Balance"
a miniscule fraction of values they cant get right ??? I do not think so
also note 396 w/m2 outward surface radiation is greater than the 341 w/m2 source incoming solar radiation ??
the law of conservation of energy says that energy is neither created nor destroyed.
the surface is radiating out more energy than the energy provided by the sun at the top of the atmosphere ??? I do not think so
and 396 w/m2 outward surface radiation is more than 2X the 161 w/m2 absorbed by the surface ???
and 333 w/m2 back radiation radiation is more than 2X the 161 w/m2 absorbed by the surface ???
what a bunch of bozos
and to be skeptical gets one labelled / cancelled as a denier ?
how will the loonie left tax changes in cloud cover % ?
will there be a parallel Ponzi scheme CCCP rebate ?
(CCCP = Climate Cloud Cover Program
not the CCCP - Climate Change and Carbon Plan, a strategic plan adopted by the Oregon Board of Forestry
and not the evil CCCP Союз Советских Социалистических Республик i.e. commie red, pinko, murderous bastards Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
oops, I digress
is evil humanity at fault for storing its computer data in the clouds?
the IPCC treats cloud cover & reflected solar radiation as a constant
specifying with precision it to a tenth of a W/ m 2 >>>> 101.9 W/m2
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-1-1.html (accessed 6 March 2012).
note the net absorbed is the energy imbalance which theoretically is the driver of the hysteria = 0.9 W/ m2
again defined precision to a tenth of a W/ m2
0.9 W/ m2 is miniscule fraction of all the other the energy flows in the earths Energy "Balance"
a miniscule fraction of values they cant get right ??? I do not think so
also note 396 w/m2 outward surface radiation is greater than the 341 w/m2 source incoming solar radiation ??
the law of conservation of energy says that energy is neither created nor destroyed.
the surface is radiating out more energy than the energy provided by the sun at the top of the atmosphere ??? I do not think so
and 396 w/m2 outward surface radiation is more than 2X the 161 w/m2 absorbed by the surface ???
and 333 w/m2 back radiation radiation is more than 2X the 161 w/m2 absorbed by the surface ???
what a bunch of bozos
and to be skeptical gets one labelled / cancelled as a denier ?
Last edited:
Wow, your ignorance combined with a stubborn refusal to accept facts is constantly shocking larue.
The IPCC is projecting changes in the climate due to increases in greenhouse gases and they are projecting and measuring those changes with global surface temperatures.
Go to the NASA page where they report the Global temperature and read the description of what they measure.
Global Surface Temperature | NASA Global Climate Change
Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. Current news and data streams about global warming and climate change from NASA.
You keep trying to compare apples to oranges by comparing projections for surface temperature with atmospheric, troposphere measurements.
what is wrong with you?
No, larue.
Its just too complicated for you to understand.
Give it a try, read this.
Clouds and Aerosols — IPCC
www.ipcc.ch
explain how an Atmospheric Gas CO2 manages to heat up the surface faster than the Atmosphere ?
be sure to explain how your morons theory obeys the laws of Thermodynamics , the Stephan Law and conservation of energy
here learn something
Last edited:
Again, larue, this is about you repeatedly comparing apples to oranges.
This is from the IPCC projections, note that they talk about surface temperatures, even noting its surface air temperatures.
Not the temperature in the troposphere.
Will you ever admit you are wrong, or will you keep denying this forever?
no it is about comparing anomalies
predicted changes in temperature vs observed changes in temperature
since you continue to dodge the question, your view is worthless
(actually your view has negative value..... you know... due to your long comical history of continuous deceit)
explain how an Atmospheric Gas CO2 manages to heat up the surface faster than the Atmosphere ?
be sure to explain how your morons theory obeys the laws of Thermodynamics , the Stephan Law and conservation of energy
no it is about comparing anomalies
predicted changes in temperature vs observed changes in temperature
if you had any scientific training you might have understood this.
its not my fault you dropped out of high school
Last edited:
The righties were making that propaganda about more people dying from the vaccines etc. The vaccines have those microchips that are going to track your every movement by the Deep State. So what is your point?
When we are seeing the scale of the unprecedented fires, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes etc., you guys come up with statements like it is just a cycle and not a big deal. The forest fires were deliberately started etc. etc........ Enough said!!
Its about comparing the changes in temperature on the surface of the planet where humans live instead of in the clouds, where your satellite reads temps.
I'm sure as your HVAC job you had before you retired 30 years ago, you'd be telling customers, that its really warm in their house and they really should take the temperature inside the stove for reference, its way better than using the thermostat.
You're comparing apples to oranges.
Surface temperatures to the temperature in the clouds.
Are you too stupid to understand this or just too dishonest to care?
Sooner or later Newfoundland will be hit as well by Karma in the
form of massive snow storm or tsunami. Drilling in deep water for
polluting oil and gas couldn't be less damaging to Earth's climate
than oil sands extraction.
the warmest winter ever ?
wrong, ask a geologist
best be sure of what is included or not included in your definition of "ever."
best be sure of what data source is the basis for a claimed new record
GOLDSTEIN: Feds scrapped 100 years of data on climate change
Canadians already suspicious of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s carbon tax are likely be even more suspicious given a report by Ottawa-based Blacklock’s…
torontosun.com
GOLDSTEIN: Feds scrapped 100 years of data on climate change
since all observed weather data from 1850 to 1949 were deemed unreliable due to limited number of weather stations , all you can claim is that
that is a damn sight short of 'ever'
BTW like so many states/ provinces the record hottest temperature observation for Ontario occurred in the 1930s
42.2 °C (108 °F) Iroquois Falls , 1935
Last edited:
continuously displaying your scientific ignorance is a strange strategy
you might want to re-evaluate
Global Surface Temperature Anomalies | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
The Merged Land and Ocean Surface Temperature data are presented as anomalies (departures from a long-term average) on a five-degree by five-degree global grid. The period of record is January 1880 through the most recent month.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_anomaly
there is a lot of comparisons done in science
ever heard of normalization ?
just look for a chart that has more than one line in it, all starting o the same point of the x-axis
you do know what an x-axis is ? , correct ?????
explain how an Atmospheric Gas CO2 manages to heat up the surface faster than the Atmosphere ?
be sure to explain how your morons theory obeys the laws of Thermodynamics , the Stephan Law and conservation of energy
Last edited:
Why not just as your mechanic?
At least you gave up on your troposphere chart.
But would you be man enough to admit you are wrong?
Spoke too soon.continuously displaying your scientific ignorance is a strange strategy
you might want to re-evaluate
.Global Surface Temperature Anomalies | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
The Merged Land and Ocean Surface Temperature data are presented as anomalies (departures from a long-term average) on a five-degree by five-degree global grid. The period of record is January 1880 through the most recent month.www.ncei.noaa.gov
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_anomaly
explain how an Atmospheric Gas CO2 manages to heat up the surface faster than the Atmosphere ?
be sure to explain how your morons theory obeys the laws of Thermodynamics , the Stephan Law and conservation of energy
View attachment 324923
Your link says there are different reports for global temp, from surface to troposphere.
What you link doesn't say is that they are the same and you can compare them as if they were the same.
One other question, larue.
Why does the satellite temperature in your chart stop in 2012 or so?
Why doesn't your chart use the last 10 years of satellite data?
