Climate continues to change.

[Hal9000_]

The smooth arc of the increase in CO2 is not replicated in the up and downs in temperatures!

Get your eyes checked.

 

[lustatopia]

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/

This is an excellent graph that shows the temperatures are NOT tracking with CO2 emissions. While the temperatures are flopping around, CO2 is constantly, smoothly increasing each year by about 1ppm in the first half of the graft and 2ppm in the most recent years.

The smooth arc of the increase in CO2 is not replicated in the up and downs in temperatures!

According to the "settled science" each part per million of CO2 has the power to warm the climate slightly less than the part per million that came before it. Got that?

A doubling of CO2 will produce a 1.2c to 3c rise in temperature (depending on who you ask) then you gotta double it again to get another 1.2 to 3c rise in temperature.

That means that the most rapid and largest gains in temperature should have occurred in the early years of rising CO2 levels, yet this graphic clearly shows that when the CO2 had the most power to drive higher temperatures the temperatures were in free fall from 1880 to 1920. WTF?

Maybe you could hand wave that obvious falsification of the hypthesis away if once the rise in temperatures got going in 1920 it more closely tracked the CO2 curve

But NOOOOO. The temperature tops in 1947, then starts to decline again! WTF?

Meanwhile, CO2 levels are relentless marching ever higher as temperatures do a slow dip for like 50 goddamn years. The so-called mid-20th century cool period is the second falsification of the AGW theory, but who cares?

According to the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory temperatures should have risen by at least 1c by 1950 and ~2.5c by 2000.

By now we are talking religion, not science. The dolt who posted this graph is so clueless he imagines it looks scary and so is evidence we are all doomed. That's how scientifically illiterate we are today. If I was a fucking warmist I would be hiding this graphic.

The rises in temperature during the the 21st century are - in my opinion - likely to be partly due to human influences, but the natural non-human variability shown earlier in the data is twice the magnitude of whatever the human influence could be thus far.

Bottomline: This graph is a falsification of the Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis, at least in its "strong" version which says that CO2 levels are the controlling factor in the climate and that warming trend is a prelude to catastrophe. Quite the contrary is shown by this graph.

The data here show a high degree of natural climate variability not predicted by the AGW hypothesis. If the graphic had gone back to 900AD we would see that it was actually warmer in the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) than it is today! AGW theory has no explanation for why it was warmer in the past - at little more than half of today's CO2 levels - than today.

Total fail. We need a new theory of climate variability.
Today 12:01 AM
Conager

 

[Conager]

When I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

The graph was only stretched to display about one third of a tenth of a degree for each interval of a year plotted. Not one quarter of a tenth of a degree.

Mea culpa.

 

[Hal9000_]

 

[Conager]

This is an excellent graph that shows the temperatures are NOT tracking with CO2 emissions. While the temperatures are flopping around, CO2 is constantly, smoothly increasing each year by about 1ppm in the first half of the graft and 2ppm in the most recent years.

The smooth arc of the increase in CO2 is not replicated in the up and downs in temperatures!

According to the "settled science" each part per million of CO2 has the power to warm the climate slightly less than the part per million that came before it. Got that?

A doubling of CO2 will produce a 1.2c to 3c rise in temperature (depending on who you ask) then you gotta double it again to get another 1.2 to 3c rise in temperature.

That means that the most rapid and largest gains in temperature should have occurred in the early years of rising CO2 levels, yet this graphic clearly shows that when the CO2 had the most power to drive higher temperatures the temperatures were in free fall from 1880 to 1920. WTF?

Maybe you could hand wave that obvious falsification of the hypthesis away if once the rise in temperatures got going in 1920 it more closely tracked the CO2 curve

But NOOOOO. The temperature tops in 1947, then starts to decline again! WTF?

Meanwhile, CO2 levels are relentless marching ever higher as temperatures do a slow dip for like 50 goddamn years. The so-called mid-20th century cool period is the second falsification of the AGW theory, but who cares?

According to the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory temperatures should have risen by at least 1c by 1950 and ~2.5c by 2000.

By now we are talking religion, not science. The dolt who posted this graph is so clueless he imagines it looks scary and so is evidence we are all doomed. That's how scientifically illiterate we are today. If I was a fucking warmist I would be hiding this graphic.

The rises in temperature during the the 21st century are - in my opinion - likely to be partly due to human influences, but the natural non-human variability shown earlier in the data is twice the magnitude of whatever the human influence could be thus far.

Bottomline: This graph is a falsification of the Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis, at least in its "strong" version which says that CO2 levels are the controlling factor in the climate and that warming trend is a prelude to catastrophe. Quite the contrary is shown by this graph.

The data here show a high degree of natural climate variability not predicted by the AGW hypothesis. If the graphic had gone back to 900AD we would see that it was actually warmer in the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) than it is today! AGW theory has no explanation for why it was warmer in the past - at little more than half of today's CO2 levels - than today.

Total fail. We need a new theory of climate variability.
Today 12:01 AM
Conager

I'm not sure what that graph actually shows at all. Before I got bogged down in the minutiae of the cartoon-like transmogrification* of the data points plotted I was going to point out that:

Weather is not climate.

Localized weather for this one chosen spot is not climate.

Weather for one particular moment in a given day when a peak or trough is recorded is certainly not climate.

A given location over a multi-year span is not static in the materials adjacent to that spot that might trap heat or provide evaporative cooling.

What is the accuracy of the instruments, versus the specificity reported?

What was the barometric pressure at that moment of that day in that location?

What was the temperature of reasonably proximate locations of higher or lower barometric pressure at that point in time on that day?

. . .the premise of the graph is silly, and we have no idea how many other locations were examined and discarded to produce this faith promoting miracle location.

*I repeat myself for emphasis

 

[phrodeau]

Average global temperature now is definitely warmer than the Medieval Warm Period. Not sure where you’re finding your climate research. Cereal boxes, maybe?

 

[Conager]

You should ask Laurel to change you back to Turd Ferguson because that wildly self-assured, shoot-from-the hip character is much more like how you behave on the board then the cold logic of hal. I haven't seen you post anything logical, ever.

 

[lustatopia]

Average global temperature now is definitely warmer than the Medieval Warm Period. Not sure where you’re finding your climate research. Cereal boxes, maybe?

Why yes, yes it was warmer in 1000AD. It is well documented history. Yes, I know in the Hockey Stick Gospel of St. Mann there is no mention of the MWP. But I am infidel.

Lots of evidence it was warmer in the MWP:

For example, Irish monks had a pretty good wine industry going on. Yeah, Irish wine, go figure. Not so big today. Those Irish traded their wine with the Vikings for snow seal pelts and cheese from Greenland. Greenland produced cheese. See where this is going?

Those Vikings dairy farmers in Greenland buried their dead in their churchyards along the Western coast. Places that today are permafrost down to 8 feet. You can't dig a grave in permafrost with an iron age shovel. You'd need a really big back hoe. Those Viking are still buried there in their Graveyard.

Meanwhile at the other end of the planet paleontologists have unearthed the remains of Elephant seal colonies in Antarctica dated from about 1000AD.

There are no Elephant seal colonies in Antarctica today. It's too cold.

So, yeah, it was lot warmer in 1000 AD than today. Actually it was even warmer during the Roman and Minoan Warm periods.

See, the interglacial we are in (Holocene) is supposed to be almost over. It's already started to cool these last, say, 2000 years or so.

The top of the Holocene happened more than 5,000 years ago. Most interglacials don't last more than 10 or 12k. Our interglacial is already over 12k old.

Something else they probably don't teach in AGW bible class is that we are in the middle of a big fucking multi-million year long ice age made up of short interglacials popping up now and then between deadly long glacial periods. The glacial periods last for >150k and the interglacials last ~12k. So it is pretty cool that we showed up just in time to postpone the next glaciation, huh?

Be happy and live for it, man! Life is good. The Planet is not dying.

I got more too, but probably you need to go self-flagellate now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jws_vMzn0jE

 

[phrodeau]

Ah, YouTube, not cereal boxes. I stand corrected. This should be your speed, then.

https://youtu.be/AD16nCsvjqs

 

[Conager]

Ah, YouTube, not cereal boxes. I stand corrected. This should be your speed, then.

This^ is you at your very best. Snarky, with a vague, smug intimation that you possess special knowledge

 

[trysail]

Worldwide evidence of the Medieval Warm Period:

http://pages.science-skeptical.de/MWP/MedievalWarmPeriod.html

​

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

Why yes, yes it was warmer in 1000AD. It is well documented history. Yes, I know in the Hockey Stick Gospel of St. Mann there is no mention of the MWP. But I am infidel.

Lots of evidence it was warmer in the MWP:

For example, Irish monks had a pretty good wine industry going on. Yeah, Irish wine, go figure. Not so big today. Those Irish traded their wine with the Vikings for snow seal pelts and cheese from Greenland. Greenland produced cheese. See where this is going?

Those Vikings dairy farmers in Greenland buried their dead in their churchyards along the Western coast. Places that today are permafrost down to 8 feet. You can't dig a grave in permafrost with an iron age shovel. You'd need a really big back hoe. Those Viking are still buried there in their Graveyard.

Meanwhile at the other end of the planet paleontologists have unearthed the remains of Elephant seal colonies in Antarctica dated from about 1000AD.

There are no Elephant seal colonies in Antarctica today. It's too cold.

So, yeah, it was lot warmer in 1000 AD than today. Actually it was even warmer during the Roman and Minoan Warm periods.

See, the interglacial we are in (Holocene) is supposed to be almost over. It's already started to cool these last, say, 2000 years or so.

The top of the Holocene happened more than 5,000 years ago. Most interglacials don't last more than 10 or 12k. Our interglacial is already over 12k old.

Something else they probably don't teach in AGW bible class is that we are in the middle of a big fucking multi-million year long ice age made up of short interglacials popping up now and then between deadly long glacial periods. The glacial periods last for >150k and the interglacials last ~12k. So it is pretty cool that we showed up just in time to postpone the next glaciation, huh?

Be happy and live for it, man! Life is good. The Planet is not dying.

I got more too, but probably you need to go self-flagellate now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jws_vMzn0jE

Well that's just a butt ton of stupid right there.

 

[trysail]

It's a fucking miracle.


NPR just effectively admitted that their advocacy (a/k/a "reporting" [ha, ha] ) of the "Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming" CONJECTURE for the last 20 YEARS has been wrong.


NPR has FINALLY admitted that the historic global temperature record is a fucking mess and is completely inaccurate and unreliable.

NPR Admits That The Historic Global Temperature Record Is Inaccurate And Is NOT RELIABLE

"...In order to know how ocean temperature is changing today, scientists rely on more than a century's worth of temperature data gathered by sailors who used buckets to gather samples of water.

It's the best information available about how hot the oceans were before the middle of the 20th century, but it's full of errors and biases..."

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/19/7507...re-the-oceans-the-answer-begins-with-a-bucket​

​

It's UN-GODDAMNED-BELIEVABLE. I never thought I'd live to see the day that NPR came clean.


Do you think they'll spend the next year broadcasting a daily barrage of announcements that they've misled the public and its audience? Do you expect they'll provide a daily public service announcement that their reporting (a/k/a "advocacy") for the last 20 YEARS has been wrong?


​

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

It's a fucking miracle.


NPR just effectively admitted that their advocacy (a/k/a "reporting" [ha, ha] ) of the "Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming" CONJECTURE for the last 20 YEARS has been wrong.


NPR has FINALLY admitted that the historic global temperature record is a fucking mess and is completely inaccurate and unreliable.

NPR Admits That The Historic Global Temperature Record Is Inaccurate And Is NOT RELIABLE

"...In order to know how ocean temperature is changing today, scientists rely on more than a century's worth of temperature data gathered by sailors who used buckets to gather samples of water.

It's the best information available about how hot the oceans were before the middle of the 20th century, but it's full of errors and biases..."

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/19/7507...re-the-oceans-the-answer-begins-with-a-bucket​

​

It's UN-GODDAMNED-BELIEVABLE. I never thought I'd live to see the day that NPR came clean.


Do you think they'll spend the next year broadcasting a daily barrage of announcements that they've misled the public and its audience? Do you expect they'll provide a daily public service announcement that their reporting (a/k/a "advocacy") for the last 20 YEARS has been wrong?


​

Yeah you should probably read the whole thing

 

[phrodeau]

Worldwide evidence of the Medieval Warm Period:

http://pages.science-skeptical.de/MWP/MedievalWarmPeriod.html

​

It’s warmer now than it was then, Professor Irrelevant.

 

[trysail]

The Historic Global Temperature Record Is A Fucking Mess And Is Completely Inaccurate And Unreliable

NPR Admits That The Historic Global Temperature Record Is Inaccurate And Is NOT RELIABLE

"...scientists rely on more than a century's worth of temperature data gathered by sailors who used buckets to gather samples of water...

...different countries used buckets made of different materials, in different sizes, on different lengths of rope — all things that could change a temperature reading. For example, the water in a midsize canvas bucket can lose up to 0.5 degree Celsius over the course of just a couple of minutes.

"Half a degree doesn't sound like a big deal, right? However, if you look at the whole global warming, it's only, like, 1 degree," Chan explains. "Every 0.1 degree matters a lot."..."

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/19/7507...re-the-oceans-the-answer-begins-with-a-bucket​

​

It's a fucking joke.

They don't have a goddamned clue whether oceanic sea-surface temperatures are warmer or colder today than they were 75 years ago.


Settled science, my ass.




​

 

[lustatopia]

Worldwide evidence of the Medieval Warm Period:

http://pages.science-skeptical.de/MWP/MedievalWarmPeriod.html

​

That's a very interesting link, Trysail.

 

[phrodeau]

^^^^^Professor Irrelevant’s student, Zero Credibility.

 

[Conager]

^^^^^Professor Irrelevant’s student, Zero Credibility.

"Zero credibility" would be you. You decided you would look smart hosting a thread on a topic you are only as well versed as the latest, breathless apocalyptic reportage of a "study" by someone that understands it about as well as you do. You don't read the extracts much less the actual study and you pretend that you have.

'"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

The guy you just said has zero credibility just did exactly that. You proffered no counterpoint, and could not possibly even express in as simple terms what it is that you believe you know. I have never seen you distill anything down in a way that demonstrates familiarity with the wide range of inputs that one needs to consider in this field, much less a mastery.

You are a poser.

 

[FukLuk]

Haven't the past 4-5 Julys been the hottest Julys ever - globally?

 

[suurfer]

Haven't the past 4-5 Julys been the hottest Julys ever - globally?

In the Southern hemisphere July falls in Winter, dumbass.
And no, it wasn't over there.

 

[FukLuk]

In the Southern hemisphere July falls in Winter, dumbass.
And no, it wasn't over there.

July is a static thing, dipshit. Like Halloween, it doesn't change. You're really, really fucking stupid.

 

[von_Bismarck]

I'm a poser.

Yes, yes you are, Queef Quavin.

 

[trysail]

You just got definitive proof that climatology didn't/doesn't have the foggiest fucking idea in hell what global temperatures were as recently as 40 years ago.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41...u8EKXNbmFPUg**D&tracking_referrer=www.npr.org​

This "Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change" crap is the biggest goddamn scam in the history of the universe.







​

 

[lustatopia]

Haven't the past 4-5 Julys been the hottest Julys ever - globally?

"He who controls the past controls the present, and he who controls the present controls the future”.