Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier

The Climate Change Debate is over and Humans are not the Cause!

So, let's see, Deatiny's Soldier now accepts the following:

1. CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing.
2. The Greenhouse Effect is real
3. Therefore, temperature is increasing, and the planet is warming

Apparently, his only dissent is he says humans are not the cause. If (3) above is true, then it seems pretty academic. What sort of solutions would he propose, given he opposes carbon taxes?

Apparently, denialist Professor Richard Lindzen recently gve a presentation in London at which he admitted:

• Carbon Dioxide has been increasing
• There is a greenhouse effect
• There has been a doubling of equivalent CO2 over the past 150 years
• There has very probably been about 0.8 C warming in the past 150 years
• Increasing CO2 alone should cause some warming (about 1C for each doubling)

Still, these people insist on a do-nothing approach.

Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier

What Owedtojoy says and Sir Charles says to counter the above is really not important.

But your incomplete graph and your ludicrous conclusions do matter, yeah. You're some super scientist

How do you explain this here?

World carbon dioxide emissions (2006):

Total:


Per capita:


And that?



Only people with an agenda or illiterate morons would follow your "argumentation".

This chart gives that world average temperature by decade.

The World Meteorological Organisation produce a summary of the 2011 climate.

“This 2011 annual assessment confirms the findings of the previous WMO annual statements that climate change is happening now and is not some distant future threat. The world is warming because of human activities and this is resulting in far-reaching and potentially irreversible impacts on our Earth, atmosphere and oceans,” said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud.

http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wc...ts/1085_en.pdf

Comment at Manmade Climate Change Accelerated In 2001-2010, World Meteorological Organization Reports | ThinkProgress

Sometimes, rarely, I have to take my hat off to Dr Roy Spencer.

Spencer manages the temperature record of the University of Alabama, Huntsville. While he has made errors, he has corrected them, and the satellite temperature record of the UAH shows unmistakable global warming.

Ok, he is also a Creationist, a right-wing ideologue, and blind to the necessity of action on climate change, BUT he is a professional scientist who can write very well about the Greenhouse Effect.

And, yes, he does accept the scientific theory of the Greenhouse Effect, as does everyone who has a modicum of scientific understanding.

The Alabama Two-Step

STEP 1:
Temperature is determined by rates of energy gain and energy loss. It does not matter whether we are talking about the human body, a car engine, a pot of water on the stove, or the climate system. The temperature (and whether it is rising or falling) is determined by the rates of energy gain and energy loss. In the case of the climate system, the Earth receives energy from the sun (primarily at visible wavelengths of light), and loses energy to outer space (primarily at infrared wavelengths). A temperature rise can occur either from (1) increasing the rate of energy gain, or (2) decreasing the rate of energy loss. The greenhouse effect has to do with the 2nd of these possibilities.

STEP 2:
Infrared absorbing gases reduce the rate at which the Earth loses infrared energy to space. Satellite measurements of the rate at which the Earth loses infrared energy to space have been made as early as the 1970’s, from the NASA Nimbus 4 spacecraft. The following plot shows the IR intensity (vertical axis) as a function of IR wavelength (horizontal axis). The area under the jagged curve is proportional to the rate of energy loss to space. Note that at the wavelengths where water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone absorb and emit IR energy, the rate of energy loss by the Earth is reduced.

It is amazing that someone who is basically an ally of science deniers would be attacked for accepting a scientific theory. But that is what is happening.

Slaying the Slayers with the Alabama Two-Step « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

Texas State Climatologist updates us on the Texas Drought. Conditions have alleviated in some parts of the State, but in other conditions are worse.

In 2011, the entire state of Texas experienced extreme drought conditions. In 2012, conditions will vary widely across the state, from extreme or exceptional drought conditions to no drought at all. This will complicate drought response. Much of the rain has fallen in heavily-populated areas of the state, so many Texans may forget that other parts of the state are suffering under drought impacts that may be as bad or worse locally as those in 2011.

Texas Drought Update | Climate Abyss | a Chron.com blog

Originally Posted by owedtojoy

And, yes, he does accept the scientific theory of the Greenhouse Effect, as does everyone who has a modicum of scientific understanding.

From previous posts it seems that you didn't understand the greenhouse effect either. You didn't seem to grasp the principle of the Greenhouse Gas Theory concept that cloud radiates more energy onto the Earth than the Sun.

It is amazing that someone who is basically an ally of science deniers would be attacked for accepting a scientific theory. But that is what is happening.

It's amazing you blather on as if you know what you're talking about and yet you didn't know (from previous posts) the difference between Absorbtion and Transmission with regard to IR Spectra.

The above graph you show makes no sense to me. How does IR gases raise the "altitude" ?



Re the Greenhouse Effect: Show an experiment which proves how a cold gas (the atmosphere) can make a hot object (the Earth) hotter when the energy souce for the cold gas is the Earth.
Proviso ... An IPCC Approved Experiment.

Describe any experiment showing the temp rise of a quantity of air when raising the CO2 content from 0.028% to 0.039% using an IR light source at 15 C. ?



Ha Ha Ha.

Stick to the playstation climatology.


I believe in evidence based science not makey uppie climate ************************ery.

Ferenc Miskolczi has already proven that the Optical Thickness of the Earth (Insulation Blanket) hasn't changed in 61 years and that it has a constant -like the constant of a spiral spring derived from first principles, and verified through physical measurement of 61 years of data. The constant is 1.87.





And yes kids, that big cloud of CO2 over Africa came from the natural environment. Note how it dwarfs industrialised Europe?

All of Owedtojoy's good work goes is for nothing. And the facts speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier

From previous posts it seems that you didn't understand the greenhouse effect either. You didn't seem to grasp the principle of the Greenhouse Gas Theory concept that cloud radiates more energy onto the Earth than the Sun.

I am afraid you will have to take that up with climate scientists, like just about every single climate scientist now living on planet earth, including out and out contrarians like Dr Roy Spencer (whose temperature charts you publish regularly to high acclaim from you), and Professor Richard Lindzen.

You might start by explaining what you are talking about, or explain this thought experiment. You enter a cool bedroom clad only in a pyjamas - say the room is at 4C. Everything in the room is at equilibrium temperature of 4C, including a thick duvet.

You wrap yourself in the duvet and lie on the bed. Soon you are warm and toasty, and sleep comfortably. Are you saying that the duvet generated heat and warmed your body?

It's amazing you blather on as if you know what you're talking about and yet you didn't know (from previous posts) the difference between Absorbtion and Transmission with regard to IR Spectra.

The above graph you show makes no sense to me. How does IR gases raise the "altitude" ?

Take it up with Dr Roy Spencer, whose charts you publish (see below), like the one below, showing global warming from satellite data. The chart you reject is also taken from his website:

Re the Greenhouse Effect: Show an experiment which proves how a cold gas (the atmosphere) can make a hot object (the Earth) hotter when the energy souce for the cold gas is the Earth.
Proviso ... An IPCC Approved Experiment.

Describe any experiment showing the temp rise of a quantity of air when raising the CO2 content from 0.028% to 0.039% using an IR light source at 15 C. ?

Show me an experiment which can duplicate an atmospheric column 5 kilometres high. Show me an experiment that shows the sun is powered by nuclear fusion.But there is no need for an experiment, when observation agrees with prediction, as it does here.



CO2 – An Insignificant Trace Gas? Part One « The Science of Doom

Ferenc Miskolczi has already proven that the Optical Thickness of the Earth (Insulation Blanket) hasn't changed in 61 years and that it has a constant -like the constant of a spiral spring derived from first principles, and verified through physical measurement of 61 years of data. The constant is 1.87.

Miskolci is agreed to be on the nutty fringe, and there you are welcome to stay with him.

Global Warming: What We Knew in ’82

Another conundrum for Destiny's Solider, who insists that satellite temperature records do not show planetary warming.

But they do.

Skeptical Science have a new facility for estimation of rates in the main temperature records, including satellite. Here is teh Univeristy of Huntsville, Alabama's record for the last 17 years, with estimated warming rate.



The Skeptical Science temperature trend calculator

Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier

From previous posts it seems that you didn't understand the greenhouse effect either.

Err..

Who?

Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier

You didn't seem to grasp the principle of the Greenhouse Gas Theory concept that cloud radiates more energy onto the Earth than the Sun.

What???

Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier

Re the Greenhouse Effect: Show an experiment which proves how a cold gas (the atmosphere) can make a hot object (the Earth) hotter when the energy souce for the cold gas is the Earth.

To make a long story short. Here an experiment which proves the Greenhouse Effect of CO2. BTW, it should be common knowledge.