The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » "A theory based on a guess . . . that is now a known falsehood" (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Those who no longer wish to be confused by the facts can stop reading now.

David Alexander, an Australian climate c......e facts:

Quote:
I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a skeptic. Watching this issue unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying. This issue is tearing society apart, making fools out of our politicians.


In a nutshell:

Quote:
This is the core idea of every official climate model: For each bit of warming due to carbon dioxide, they claim it ends up causing three bits of warming due to the extra moist air. The climate models amplify the carbon dioxide warming by a factor of three — so two-thirds of their projected warming is due to extra moist air (and other factors); only one-third is due to extra carbon dioxide.

That’s the core of the issue. All the disagreements and misunderstandings spring from this. The alarmist case is based on this guess about moisture in the atmosphere, and there is simply no evidence for the amplification that is at the core of their alarmism.

Weather balloons had been measuring the atmosphere since the 1960s, many thousands of them every year. The climate models all predict that as the planet warms, a hot spot of moist air will develop over the tropics about 10 kilometres up, as the layer of moist air expands upwards into the cool dry air above. During the warming of the late 1970s, ’80s and ’90s, the weather balloons found no hot spot. None at all. Not even a small one. This evidence proves that the climate models are fundamentally flawed, that they greatly overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide.

This evidence first became clear around the mid-1990s.

At this point, official “climate science” stopped being a science. In science, empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are in love with the theory. If theory and evidence disagree, real scientists scrap the theory. But official climate science ignored the crucial weather balloon evidence, and other subsequent evidence that backs it up, and instead clung to their carbon dioxide theory — that just happens to keep them in well-paying jobs with lavish research grants, and gives great political power to their government masters.

There are now several independent pieces of evidence showing that the earth responds to the warming due to extra carbon dioxide by dampening the warming. Every long-lived natural system behaves this way, counteracting any disturbance. Otherwise the system would be unstable. The climate system is no exception, and now we can prove it.

But the alarmists say the exact opposite, that the climate system amplifies any warming due to extra carbon dioxide, and is potentially unstable. It is no surprise that their predictions of planetary temperature made in 1988 to the U.S. Congress, and again in 1990, 1995, and 2001, have all proved much higher than reality.

They keep lowering the temperature increases they expect, from 0.30C per decade in 1990, to 0.20C per decade in 2001, and now 0.15C per decade — yet they have the gall to tell us “it’s worse than expected.” These people are not scientists. They overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide, selectively deny evidence, and now they conceal the truth.

One way they conceal is in the way they measure temperature.

The official thermometers are often located in the warm exhaust of air conditioning outlets, over hot tarmac at airports where they get blasts of hot air from jet engines, at waste-water plants where they get warmth from decomposing sewage, or in hot cities choked with cars and buildings. Global warming is measured in 10ths of a degree, so any extra heating nudge is important. In the United States, nearly 90% of official thermometers surveyed by volunteers violate official siting requirements that they not be too close to an artificial heating source.

Global temperature is also measured by satellites, which measure nearly the whole planet 24/7 without bias. The satellites say the hottest recent year was 1998, and that since 2001 the global temperature has levelled off. Why does official science track only the surface thermometer results and not mention the satellite results?

The Earth has been in a warming trend since the depth of the Little Ice Age around 1680. Human emissions of carbon dioxide were negligible before 1850 and have nearly all come after the Second World War, so human carbon dioxide cannot possibly have caused the trend. Within the trend, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation causes alternating global warming and cooling for 25 to 30 years at a go in each direction. We have just finished a warming phase, so expect mild global cooling for the next two decades.

We are now at an extraordinary juncture. Official climate science, which is funded and directed entirely by government, promotes a theory that is based on a guess about moist air that is now a known falsehood. Governments gleefully accept their advice, because the only ways to curb emissions are to impose taxes and extend government control over all energy use. And to curb emissions on a world scale might even lead to world government — how exciting for the political class!

Even if we stopped emitting all carbon dioxide tomorrow, completely shut up shop and went back to the Stone Age, according to the official government climate models it would be cooler in 2050 by about 0.015 degrees. But their models exaggerate 10-fold — in fact our sacrifices would make the planet in 2050 a mere 0.0015 degrees cooler!

Finally, to those who still believe the planet is in danger from our carbon dioxide emissions: Sorry, but you’ve been had. Yes, carbon dioxide is a cause of global warming, but it’s so minor it’s not worth doing much about.


Woland
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2011-05-17 18:40, Woland wrote:
Those who no longer wish to be confused by the facts can stop reading now.

David Alexander, an Australian climate c......e facts:

His name, according to the article anyway, is David EVANS not ALEXANDER. So ...

"Who is 'Rocket Scientist' David Evans?"

http://www.desmogblog.com/who-is-rocket-......id-evans
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Thanks for correcting my slip of the typewriter, balducci.
Andrew Zuber
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles, CA
2653 Posts

Profile of Andrew Zuber
Okay, so how are we supposed to react to this? Keep buying Hummers? Stand on our roof tops with cans of hair spray? Can we stop worrying about the environment now or something? Anyone who was ever flown in Los Angeles, as I have done hundreds of times, will tell you that air quality is a major health issue. When I read stuff like this and the author starts going on about the politics of the issue, it's hard not to imagine that he has an agenda that isn't purely scientific.
"I'm sorry - if you were right, I would agree with you." -Robin Williams, Awakenings
Payne
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle
4572 Posts

Profile of Payne
Without evidence and peer reviewed articles to back up his claims Mr. Evans opinions are just that. Opinions. One is free to their own beliefs but not their own facts. If he feels that the science is somehow wrong he needs to supply facts and figures in support of his hypothesis. Not just opinion or belief.

Odd a "Rocket Scientist" wouldn't already know this.

You can find any number of Climate Denialist making simular claims. Odd though that none of them seem to have any viable evidence to support these beliefs.
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1191 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2011-05-17 19:13, Andrew Zuber wrote:
Okay, so how are we supposed to react to this? Keep buying Hummers? Stand on our roof tops with cans of hair spray? Can we stop worrying about the environment now or something? Anyone who was ever flown in Los Angeles, as I have done hundreds of times, will tell you that air quality is a MAJOR health issue. When I read stuff like this and the author starts going on about the politics of the issue, it's hard not to imagine that he has an agenda that isn't purely scientific.


Anyone who's lived in Los Angeles for any length of time will tell you that air quality is vastly better now than it was in decades past.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
And whatever happened to those London "pea soup" fogs that we see in the old movies?
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27123 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Step back and look at the effect. The net effect.

Then look at the method.

Breathtaking IMHO.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4816 Posts

Profile of gdw
Quote:
On 2011-05-17 21:07, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Step back and look at the effect. The net effect.

Then look at the method.

Breathtaking IMHO.


Everyone knows method doesn't matter.
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27123 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
It's righteous, illiterate, Luddite, self loathing and ... both green and sustainable.
Welcome back to the early middle ages.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Do you support this Evans guy, Woland?
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27123 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
But this time with high tech so the neighbor's kids can keep a watch for regressive use of technology and resources.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4816 Posts

Profile of gdw
I'm still quite skeptical about global warming/climate change/whatever it will be called in a few years, but found it to be really irrelevant to whether we should be "cleaning up." There are plenty of other reasons to, including our health, as well as plenty of economical reasons.
Even more when your doing things that ACTUALLY help rather than all the crap that's being pushed by people too quick to jump on things that aren't really better, or even worse, which then get pushed on the govt, and become regulation, and we all have ugly harsh lights filled with poison.

Or we get everyone jumping on being against something like nuclear, leading to more coal, which means actually MORE people dying. Hell, wind power seems to have lead to more deaths than nuclear.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/02/......rous.php

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-......html?m=1
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27123 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
That was the reason Crichton wrote State of Fear.

Anyway, folks are more about bandwagons, being right and ... sustainable so who cares about that silly book?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5018 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2011-05-17 19:35, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-05-17 19:13, Andrew Zuber wrote:
Okay, so how are we supposed to react to this? Keep buying Hummers? Stand on our roof tops with cans of hair spray? Can we stop worrying about the environment now or something? Anyone who was ever flown in Los Angeles, as I have done hundreds of times, will tell you that air quality is a MAJOR health issue. When I read stuff like this and the author starts going on about the politics of the issue, it's hard not to imagine that he has an agenda that isn't purely scientific.


Anyone who's lived in Los Angeles for any length of time will tell you that air quality is vastly better now than it was in decades past.

You think that was just the natural course of events, or because of human action curbing car and other emissions?
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1191 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2011-05-18 00:03, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-05-17 19:35, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-05-17 19:13, Andrew Zuber wrote:
Okay, so how are we supposed to react to this? Keep buying Hummers? Stand on our roof tops with cans of hair spray? Can we stop worrying about the environment now or something? Anyone who was ever flown in Los Angeles, as I have done hundreds of times, will tell you that air quality is a MAJOR health issue. When I read stuff like this and the author starts going on about the politics of the issue, it's hard not to imagine that he has an agenda that isn't purely scientific.


Anyone who's lived in Los Angeles for any length of time will tell you that air quality is vastly better now than it was in decades past.

You think that was just the natural course of events, or because of human action curbing car and other emissions?


Was this rhetorical?
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Andrew Zuber
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles, CA
2653 Posts

Profile of Andrew Zuber
It may be better than it was in L.A. but it's still an ugly sight to see and I don't think it's the marine layer from the Pacific Ocean that's causing it.

Apparently, not everyone is in agreement with this Evans guy, seeing as how the UK has pledged to halve CO2 emissions by 2025:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/na......nge.html
"I'm sorry - if you were right, I would agree with you." -Robin Williams, Awakenings
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Magnus,

I'm not sure that the absence of hot spots is as telling as Richard Evans thinks it is, but I do agree that the political agenda of the AGW enthusiasts is based on predictions of disasters that are unsupported by reliable data. Moreover, I think we are entering a period of climate cooling in the Northern Hemisphere that is less desirable than climate warming.

Woland
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
So what you are saying is that you like Evans's politics, so his false credentials and lack of evidence aren't so problematic? Really?

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
No. What I am saying is that whether the "world climate" is significantly affected by industrial CO2 production is unproven; whether the "world climate" is changing to an extent not encompassed by its normal variability is unproven; whether there would be significant results from the drastic measures proposed to ameliorate a problem that may or may not exist is unproven; and that there is actually quite a bit of evidence to support the contention that (1) the "world climate" is not getting warmer; (2) even if it was getting warmer, the degree of warming is within normal limits of variability; (3) industrial CO2 has nothing to do with any significant global climate effects; (4) the AGW "community" is full of frauds and hucksters.

Woland
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » "A theory based on a guess . . . that is now a known falsehood" (0 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.2 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL