No. I've never made any such argument. Perhaps AGW made the heat wave, worse, however.
As far as I know I have never been to thinkprogress. I certainly have never linked any article by them. When it comes to the climate 'debate' I invariably refer to scientific papers, journals and reports.
My conclusions are based on empirical observations and not by partisan nonsense and absolutely not from bipolar sites such as that one.
You could try to explain to them what 'additive' means. Might be easier than explaining to them how feedbacks work.
Interesting that you call me an idiot, but you your are incompetent to elaborate on what you say I am assuming.I had heard of the heat but I had not heard of anything melting. I leave the measuring of air temp by what melts to idiots like WC.
Admit it. You know you were talking out your ass.
Manny....
Where are you...
Interesting that you call me an idiot, but you your are incompetent to elaborate on what you say I am assuming.I had heard of the heat but I had not heard of anything melting. I leave the measuring of air temp by what melts to idiots like WC.
Admit it. You know you were talking out your ass.
I'll ask again...
What do you think I misinterpreted?
It's an old article, but relevant.
Brightening Sun is Warming Earth, first three paragraphs:
There is a better explanation for global warming than air pollution, two Harvard researchers say: the Sun is increasing in brightness and radiance.
"Changes in the Sun can account for major climate changes on Earth for the past 300 years, including part of the recent surge of global warming," claims Sallie Baliunas, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA).
"We're not saying that variations in solar activity account for all of the global rise in temperature that we are experiencing," cautions her CfA colleague, astrophysicist Willie Soon. "But we believe these variations are the major driving force. Heat-trapping gases emitted by smokestacks and vehicles -- the so-called greenhouse effect -- appear to be secondary."
A brightening sun would explain the earth warming. Too bad its not brightening. Try again.
If you say so. I guess you will continue to ignore the truth and stick to your indoctrinated dogma.
Did you even read these links, or are you incapable of understanding them?
Long-Term Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) Variability Trends: 1984-2004
NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE
I'm telling you the sun is not brightening. There's a reason you're bringing up papers nearly a decade old.
No one gives a about global warming or climate change. If anyone did give a , someone would be doing something about it. It's a distraction type of issue just like abortion and s are. They are used as distractions to deflect attention away from the more serious issues.
I missed that one before. Nice catch.The values range from -0.4 to 0.6 and you think the proper way to compile a graph with those values is to set the range from -5 to 5?
But when they make the range from -0.5 to 0.7 that is misleading?
I mean setting the range only fractionally larger than the range of data is misleading but making it 10 times bigger is not?
I guess whatever confirms your bias.
So that is intentionally misleading?
Anyone see this yet:
link: To the Horror of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here
LOL. I literally LOLed when he got to the PDO and AMO. There's a reason their called oscillations and not cycles and yet he still calls them cycles. I found his explanation of how they work to be quite entertaining. Thanks for the link.
Great.
I think you need a good laugh.
Is Global Warming Cooler than Expected?
"Until we actually understand why the global temperature rise has paused over the last decade – and we don't yet – it's still guesswork what the implications are for climate sensitivity and hence the future projections.
If the pause is a "correction" to a naturally-boosted rise over previous decades, then the climate's sensitivity to carbon emissions may indeed be lower than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's central estimate, suggesting that future rises will be towards the lower end of the range, he added.
But if the pause is a temporary natural offset to the man-made rise, then this offset would disappear at some stage and put the globe back on the central estimate track, he said. "I don't see how we can say which it is until we understand the reason for it."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...SA_WR_20130529
As Glaciers Melt, Alpine Mountains Lose Their Glue, Threatening Swiss Village
With global warming, the glaciers are melting. Once stretching to the edge of town, they now end high in the mountains. Moreover, their greenish glacial water is forming lakes. In summer, when the melting accelerates, floodwaters threaten the area. But the avalanche witnessed by Mr. Bomio shows that the shrinking of the glaciers removes a kind of buttress supporting parts of the mountains, menacing the region with rock slides.
Grindelwald stands as a stark example of what is happening these days to Switzerland’s glaciers, and there are more than a hundred, large and small. As the Lower Grindelwald Glacier shrank, its ice no longer buttressed the east wall of the Eiger, a 13,025-foot mountain that is part of the ring south of Grindelwald. Moreover, the warming reduces the effect of permafrost that once acted as a sort of glue binding together the mass of the mountains. On that day in 2006, a chunk of the Eiger amounting to about 900,000 cubic yards fell from the east face, causing the cloud of rock dust that startled Mr. Bomio and his friends.
Over the past century or so, glaciers like those around Grindelwald have receded by about 650 feet, said Hans-Rudolf Keusen, a geologist whose company, Geotest, helped design the overflow tunnel. “Since 1980 it has been very rapid,” Mr. Keusen said. “In the last 30 years the average temperature in the Alps has risen by one and a half degrees.”
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/05/30...?from=homepage
cooling? really? Tell that to the people in the Andes whose only source of water is disappearing glaciers.
Pretty much.
That is one thing that is simple enough for even a lay person like me to grasp.
The Sun is not getting brighter.
I do have to say that after reading through a lot of this stuff again, Skull-1 and poptart are kindred spirit. Same behavior.
Study Ties Epic California Drought, ‘Frigid East’ To Manmade Climate Change
Natural variability alone cannot explain the extreme weather pattern that has driven both the record-setting California drought and the cooler weather seen in the Midwest and East this winter, a major new study finds.
We’ve reported before that climate scientists had predicted a decade ago that warming-driven Arctic ice loss would lead to worsening drought in California. In particular, they predicted it would lead to a “blocking pattern” that would shift the jet stream (and the rain it could bring) away from the state — in this case a “Ridiculously Resilient Ridge” of high pressure.
A new study in Geophysical Research Letters (subs. req’d) takes the warming link to the California drought to the next level of understanding. It concludes, “there is a traceable anthropogenic warming footprint in the enormous intensity of the anomalous ridge during winter 2013-14, the associated drought and its intensity.”
The NASA-funded study is behind a pay wall, but the brief news release, offers a simple explanation of what is going on. The research provides “evidence connecting the amplified wind patterns, consisting of a strong high pressure in the West and a deep low pressure in the East [labeled a 'dipole'], to global warming.” Researchers have “uncovered evidence that can trace the amplification of the dipole to human influences.”
… it is important to note that the dipole is projected to intensify, which means more extreme future droughts for California. Historical data show that the dipole has been intensifying since the late 1970s. The intensified dipole can be accurately simulated using a new global climate model, which also simulates the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Simulations with only natural variability show a weakening dipole, which is opposite to what is currently being observed. Moreover, the occurrence of the dipole one year before an El Nino/La Nina event is becoming more common, which can only be reproduced in model simulations when greenhouse gases are introduced into the system
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/15/3426810/california-drought-climate-change/
The study referenced in the boutons post above is one of the best examples of showing the anthropogenic effect on atmospheric patterns and how it exacerbates certain aspects of them. They showed the effect AGW has had and how it contributed to the severity of the drought extremely well, IMO. Too bad the article felt the need to butcher the graph and put a pin where it makes no sense.
NASA West Antarctic Ice Sheet Findings: Glacier Loss Appears Unstoppable
It’s a key piece of the climate change puzzle. For years, researchers have been eyeing the stability of the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet as global temperatures rise. Melting of the ice sheet could have dire consequences for sea level rise.
A key concern for years has been the possible collapse of western Antarctica’s glaciers, leading to a drastic acceleration in sea-level rise worldwide. Such a catastrophic glacial retreat would dump millions of tons of ice into the sea over a relatively short span of time. And while it’s true that ice calves off of the Western Antarctic ice sheet every summer, the annual overall rate is increasing.
The study is backed up by satellite, airborne and ground observations looking at thickness of ice layers over decades.
http://www.universetoday.com/111827/...#ixzz31anNJdEI
thinkprogress took valid information and turned into nonsense? say it ain't so.
in before WC handwaves about soot.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
