Reply With Quote
They're not gonna get any funding back if they keep putting out reports like this...
They're not gonna get any funding back if they keep putting out reports like this...
Oh, don't worry....we're going back to the moon!
LOL...
The intensity of the sun isn't going to change if there is a net gain or loss. If it wan't Hansen making the statement, I might listen. Look at his words carefully.
Who's he trying to fool?"The fact we still see a positive imbalance despite the prolonged solar minimum isn't a surprise given what we've learned about the climate system,"
Now consider this, when ocean currents take an average 800 years to circulate and the sun has been warming after the Maunder Minima for the last 250+ years:
NASA study solves case of Earth's 'missing energy'; 01.31.12"Our data show that Earth has been ac ulating heat in the ocean at a rate of half a watt per square meter (10.8 square feet), with no sign of a decline," Loeb said. "This extra energy will eventually find its way back into the atmosphere and increase temperatures on Earth."
The oceans have been and will continue to collect extra heat until we are in balance. They collect far more solar heat directly than, about 90+% of the light from the sun. Greenhouse gasses make little difference as only the very top of the ocean car release IR, but the light penetrates very deep.
The OP linked article also doesn't address other reasons that cause warming, like soot on the Arctic ice.
Cleaning the Air Would Limit Short-Term Climate Warming
BC also cause snow to melt at a far greater rate. The norther ice, Arctic and Greenland, gets blanketed by a very light coat of it. The ice then absorbs far more of the solar energy than normal, melting it.What is black carbon, and where does it come from?
Black carbon, or soot, is a type of dark particulate matter produced by the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, wood, and other biofuels. It’s linked to a number of health problems, and it also warms the atmosphere by intercepting sunlight. Black carbon, along with other particles, can come from motor vehicles, residential stoves, forest fires, and certain industrial processes. All in all, it’s pretty nasty stuff.
BLACK SOOT AND SNOW: A WARMER COMBINATION
Black Carbon Deposits on Himalayan Ice Threaten Earth's "Third Pole"New research from NASA scientists suggests emissions of black soot alter the way sunlight reflects off snow. According to a computer simulation, black soot may be responsible for 25 percent of observed global warming over the past century.
Arctic Nations Order Investigation of Black Carbon, Blamed for Significant Ice MeltBlack soot deposited on Tibetan glaciers has contributed significantly to the retreat of the world's largest non-polar ice masses, according to new research by scientists from NASA and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Soot absorbs incoming solar radiation and can speed glacial melting when deposited on snow in sufficient quan ies.
Since the 2007 AR4 report, they have revised the impact upward.Soot, or black carbon, is believed to be responsible for 18 percent of the planet’s warming, an impact that wasn't well understood just two years ago when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its latest report.
Hey WC how about you link the natural gas boiler sales brochures for us again. You still going to explain how a satellite up in the stratosphere 'looks' down into the troposphere. Better yet lets talk conservation of energy, systems analysis, or electronics parts.
These threads are always the best at outlining how stupid you are.
LOL...
LOL...
:
Satellite in the stratosphere...
And who here is surprised that he misses the point?
I have a hard time remembering when and if you ever had a valid point.
I guess I need you to link and elaborate on what you are talking about, because to me, it appears you think there are satellites in the stratosphere.
Give WildDumbass enough rope and he inevitably ends up hanging himself. This is actually reminiscent of when you tried to ridicule me over the existence of 1F caps...
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freea...number=5362225
So to everyone reading that may not be familiar with WC and his stupidity I ask this question: why are engineers trying to improve the performance of something that doesn't exist?
Idiot.
Just because they choose to call it that, doesn't make it that. It is still a balloon.
It orbits the earth. What, pray tell, would you classify it as?
No it doesn't. It doesn't properly fit the appropriate definitions.
The earth includes the atmosphere. It therefore is not orbiting, but inside the bounds of the earth. Because of that, it doesn't classify as one body orbiting another.
I see why they like to call it a satellite, but is is still just a sophisticated balloon.
I can call my cat a dog. That doesn't make her a dog.
Does it follow Kepler's laws of motion? I think not.
You really like making up. Satellites orbit the Earth. These orbit the Earth.
As for Kepler, yes lets go down this path. He is a nuclear physicist so you being a parts changer are bringing a spork to a gun fight as concerns field theory. I guess your dumb ass thinks that the Earth's gravitational field ends if there is vapor.
And just cause its funny watching you be stupid: what 'appropriate definitions?'
In reading about these stratospheric satellites, looks like they have only prototyped failures. I couldn't find any reference to functioning systems beyond test flights. i like the idea, and yes, they exist, but again... they are only balloons.
Just because you found something that is called that, doesn't mean it's a satellite. Even all the literature i find in these still refers to tghem as balloons. It is just they call this varietuy of balloon a satellite.
Whoop-tee-do...
If you wish to call that a victory over me, then by all means... take it. My... oh... my... what standards you [don't] have.
Most people realize that most things are many things all at the same time. This particular parts changer only knows of developments from the 1960s. Thats actually quite sad because NASA sent their first sateloons up into orbit 50 years ago.
But you know more than NASA or any of the engineers who work on these things.
Dumbass.
New Research Show Earth Has Not Warmed in 15 Years
By Jon E. Dougherty at 29 Jan 12:42
(Newsroom America) -- New data released by a noted climate research ins ute last week indicated that the earth has not warmed in more than a decade, findings that are sure to challenge the global warming mentality for years held by a number of scientists.
The data, released with little fanfare by the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit in London, shows that the earth has not warmed in at least 15 years. The university's conclusion was based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations.
In fact, the university said, it was possible the earth was moving into a cooling cycle, suggesting "that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century," London's Daily Mail newspaper reported.
Leading climate scientists told the paper that the sun, after emitting high energy levels throughout the 20th century, may be entering a period of "grand minimum" output, which could produce colder summers, extreme winters and shorter seasons for growing food.
Other climate scientists made similar predictions.
"World temperatures may end up a lot cooler than now for 50 years or more," Henrik Svensmark, director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at Denmark’s National Space Ins ute, told the paper.
"It will take a long battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important. It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own, without the need for their help," he said.
Some scientists said models set forth by in 2000 by the British government have not yet run their course and could still wind up producing warmer temperatures.
Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Ins ute of Technology, a noted U.S. climatologist, said many scientists "are not surprised" by the warming pause.
She said it's becoming more evident that factors other than CO2 affect global warming and cooling, such as the 60-year water temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, the Mail reported.
Isn't that similar to what I have said?Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some scientists underestimate the importance of water cycles when considering global temperature trends.
"Doing so means admitting that the oceans - not CO2 - caused much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997," Brekke said.
Thanx for the find Snake.
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
Beginning of article:
The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
Notice the difference in terminology between what the first echo's were, and what they now call a stratopheric satellite? My God... You go with stratopheric satellites, then change the goal post to sateloons...
In my other post, I was saying it doesn't appear they have fully functioning stratospheric satellites yet. They are still in development. If you wish to twist my words again, what can I say. I was going to ignore you, but figured I would point out once again how you twist things first.
Oh Good..... A global warming thread.....something new.
Wolf!
All I can say is that it was good thing Liberals and Greenies didn't exist
during the ending of the last ice age. Can you just picture it.....
ray!!!!!!
Oooops, sorry I woke you clam.....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
