Register to Comment
Page 1183 of 6524 FirstFirst ... 1836831083113311731181118211831184118511931233128316832183 ... LastLast
Results 11,821 to 11,830 of 65236
Like Tree13865Likes
  1. #11821
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,582



    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
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #11822
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,582

    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.
    Last edited by owedtojoy; 26th March 2012 at 08:37 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #11823
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,582

    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
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #11824
    Destiny's Soldier Destiny's Soldier is offline
    Destiny's Soldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    4,009

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post

    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.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #11825
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,582

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier View Post
    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.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #11826
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    16,369
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #11827
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,582

    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
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #11828
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    16,369

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier View Post
    From previous posts it seems that you didn't understand the greenhouse effect either.
    Err..

    Who?

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier View Post
    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???

    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier View Post
    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.

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #11829
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,582

    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.



    Quote Originally Posted by Destiny's Soldier View Post

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

    Take your house insulation (or you under your duvet) - let's just assume the outside wall of the house is of uniform material (or you under your duvet). You turn on your heat and the house reaches an equilibrium temperature.

    On the outside of the wall, the surface is in equilibrium with the surroundings - say T0. On the inside, there is a higher temperature T. So there is a temperature gradient across the wall, given by T= T0 + C*L for a unit area, where L is the thickness of the wall, and C depends on the specific heat of the insulation.

    Note if L increases (adding more insulation), T also increases. Doubling the insulation thickness will raise the temperature, without expending a further microjoule of energy.

    That is conduction, but heat transfer across a gas is accomplished by two mechanisms - convection and radiation.

    Convection removes heat from the earth's surface by the lapse rate - the cooling of the earth's atmosphere with height (you know its gets colder as you climb a mountain), which is about 6C/km. Let the lapse rate - M.

    The Tgnd = Tskin + M*L where L is the height of the atmosphere, and M is the lapse rate. Tgnd is the temperature of the ground, Tskin that of the atmosphere.

    Does adding greenhouse gas molecules to the atmosphere raise the altitude where radiation reaches space (thereby increasing L is the last equation)? Yes, if you think of the thin upper reaches of the atmosphere, where a photon from the surface has eventually arrived. If there are more CO2 molecules, then it will take it a few more collisions at the lower levels before it eventually reaches space from higher, colder levels.

    This diagram from RealClimate is a good explanation:

    Figure 4. A simple schematic showing how the planet is heated at the surface, how the temperature (blue) decreases with height according to the lapse rate, and how infra-red light (wiggly arrows) is absorbed and re-emitted at various stages on its way up through the atmosphere. Energy is also transferred through vertical motion (convection), evaporation, and condensation too (latent heat), but that doesn't affect this picture, as they all act to restore the vertical structure toward the hydrostatically stable lapse rate in the long run. At the top of the atmosphere, the infra-red light escapes freely out to space, and this is where the planet's main heat loss takes place. This level is determined by the optical depth, and the heat loss depends on the temperature here. (click on figure for animation)
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ecipe-for-ghe/

    So it is not true that infra-red back-radiation from the sky is what gives extra warmth to the surface - the back -radiation will just reach equilibrium, just like the inside wall of your house will be at the same temperature as your indoors, or the inside of your duvet will be at your body temperature. At the moment, there is not equilibrium as CO2 is still increasing and temperature will continue to rise until there is equilibrium.

    It is the temperature gradient across the atmosphere that counts in the case of greenhouse warming, and radiative heat loss from the top of the atmosphere that matters.
    Last edited by owedtojoy; 26th March 2012 at 10:32 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #11830
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    16,369

    Planet Venus has more than double the distance to the sun than planet Mercury. Nonetheless, venus has about twice the temperature at the surface. Well. That's another proof for the Greenhouse Effect of CO2.


    Mercury's atmosphere:

    42% Molecular oxygen
    29.0% sodium
    22.0% hydrogen
    6.0% helium
    0.5% potassium
    Trace amounts of argon, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, water vapor, xenon, krypton and neon



    Venus' atmosphere:

    ~96.5% carbon dioxide
    ~3.5% nitrogen
    0.015% sulfur dioxide
    0.007% argon
    0.002% water vapor
    0.001 7% carbon monoxide
    0.001 2% helium
    0.000 7% neon
    trace carbonyl sulfide
    trace hydrogen chloride
    trace hydrogen fluoride


    Nitrogen, helium and oxygen (for example) are no greenhouse gasses, compare to CH4 (methane), CO2 (carbon dioxide), or H2O (water vapour) which are greenhouse gasses.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment