Global warming discussion IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trakar said:
Again, quite simply, wrong. But understandable from people who go to tabloid conspiracy blogs which cite references that do not compellingly support their own arguments.
Click to expand...


Trakar are all these "quite simply, wrong" about climate modeling too? :D

Modeling
 
Haig said:
Sure there is and more data is coming all the time, to back it up, as well as the empirical evidence :cool:
Click to expand...
Haig, the delusion that the Sun is the cause of global warming is not supported by
  • Someone a bit ignorant about climate science.
    We have measurements of the Sun's activity throughout the 20th century including satellite measurements. They dhow that over the last 35 years the Sun's activity has decreased slightly, not increased as he claims from proxy data.
  • Some German scientists displaying the same ignorance of climate science!
    The papers look like curve fitting exercises that ignore the physics that people increasing CO2 will cause increasing global temperatures. The latest paper looks at paleoclimate and ignore our existence.
    H.-J. Luedecke, C. O. Weiss, and H.Hempelmann: Paleoclimate forcing by the solar De Vries / Suess cycle, Clim. Past Discuss. 11, 279 (2015); http://www.clim-past-discuss.net/11/279/2015/cpd-11-279-2015.pdf
The paper is a discussion paper that might still be under review in Climate of the Past Discussions.

One inane comment by them is in that blog: "The three German scientists sharply criticize the IPCC for refusing to acknowledge the sun as an obvious driver of the global climate."
The IPCC acknowledge all drivers of the climate including the Sun :eye-poppi.

Horst-Joachim Lüdecke is a retired physicist and professor emeritus of computer science, physics and operations research.
“Climate Specialist I'm not. […] My criticism is well founded and professionally sound mix, but [I am] not a specialist in technical details of climate physics.” [2]
Click to expand...
which includes that the Sun's output has been decreasing over the last 35 years!

C. O. Weiss is a retired scientist from Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Braunschweig, Germany.

H. Hempelmann is at least working! He looks like an astronomer at the University of Hamburg, Hamburg Observatory, Hamburg, Germany.

Confirmation that they are climate change deniers - they blogged at WUWT!
 
Last edited:
Haig said:
Trakar are all these "quite simply, wrong" about climate modeling too? :D
Click to expand...
All of the rants from the WUWT climate change denial web site are wrong by definition, Haig :p!
  1. 11th May 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies by cherry picking the source and start date about "No global warming for 18 years and 3 months" as easily seen by anyone who looks at the data.
  2. 7th August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog about "No global warming for 18 years and 7 months"
  3. 14 August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about the BEST data showing global warming (it does!)

As you already know, Haig, the insanity of their many rants about modeling is best seen by reading about the real, scientific world of climate modeling, e.g. How reliable are climate models?
While there are uncertainties with climate models, they successfully reproduce the past and have made predictions that have been subsequently confirmed by observations.
Click to expand...

So now we have: 25 August 2015 Haig: Linking to the many invalid rants on WUWT about climate models.
 
Haig: Science progresses by proposing solutions to a problem

Haig said:
Delusional eh?
Click to expand...
Yes Haig - it is delusional to continue to cite a web site when the citations you have provided show a track record of ignorance and even lies about climate science.
  1. 11th May 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies by cherry picking the source and start date about "No global warming for 18 years and 3 months" as easily seen by anyone who looks at the data.
  2. 7th August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about "No global warming for 18 years and 7 months"
  3. 14 August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about the BEST data showing global warming (it does!)
  4. 25 August 2015 Haig: Linking to the many invalid rants on WUWT about climate models.

And now we have a WUWT blog entry with a lie and insane ignorance about basic science.
26 August 2015 Haig: WUWT and HockeySchtick lies about a "18-26 year ‘pause’ in global warming".
There was never a pause in global warming - there was a pause in global surface temperatures. What has global warming done since 1998?

26 August 2015 Haig: WUWT and HockeySchtick are ignorant about basic science.
Science progresses by proposing solutions to a problem. These solutions are then tested until the problem is solved by some or even just one of the solutions.
The WUWT list of every possible speculation about a solution to the "hiatus" mentioned anywhere is insanely ignorant. It would be just ignorant if it was a list of the scientific literature but becomes insane with its dependence on news articles and personal opinions :eek:!
 
Last edited:
Haig said:
Careful Traker you're beginning...
Click to expand...

The repeated misspelling of my name is becoming wearisome, my given name is Trakar (Trā - Kăr, similar to tray car) Shaitanaku (similar to shy-tan-uh-coo). if you have that much trouble spelling my name please refer to the posts you are quoting they have the correct spelling to make it easier for people who have problems figuring such things out.


Haig said:
...wattsupwiththat.com/climate-fail-files/list-of-excuses-for-the-pause-in-global-warming/ The Official list of excuses for the 18-26 year ‘pause’ in global warming...
Click to expand...

I have yet to see any compelling evidence in support of your seemingly mythical "pause." All of the legitimate and compelling science I am aware of does not support the existence of any such phenomenon. I have repeatedly presented this supporting evidence over the last 8 years, please provide legitimate and compelling references to scientific support for your assertions regarding a "pause" in the rise of global averaged temps over any significant time frame.
 
macdoc said:
Why don't you read the science instead of making puerile comments worthy of a Grade 6 student?

http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/STEP Technical 8-10-15.pdf

This is a sizeable team of scientists at work with 300 + peer reviewed patents and publications.
http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/Licht selected publications.pdf
I'm sure they would be very impressed with your cavalier dismissal of their work. :rolleyes:

They are looking at a wide range of processes to reduce CO2 ( cement manufacturing notably ) and in this case actively reduce CO2 with a sound theoretical process borne out in experiment.

http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/Solar.html

What have you done that earns coverage in the wide range of publications noted below??

http://home.gwu.edu/~slicht/STEP solar Press reports 2014.pdf

Do you have some meaningful science based commentary to add to the discussion??
Click to expand...

You'll probably enjoy Tim Flannery's new book

https://theconversation.com/theres-...nge-but-lets-not-call-it-geoengineering-46519
 
Trakar said:
The repeated misspelling of my name is becoming wearisome, my given name is Trakar (Trā - Kăr, similar to tray car) Shaitanaku (similar to shy-tan-uh-coo). if you have that much trouble spelling my name please refer to the posts you are quoting they have the correct spelling to make it easier for people who have problems figuring such things out.
Click to expand...

Sorry Trakar, no excuse for that, it won't happen again.

I have yet to see any compelling evidence in support of your seemingly mythical "pause." All of the legitimate and compelling science I am aware of does not support the existence of any such phenomenon. I have repeatedly presented this supporting evidence over the last 8 years, please provide legitimate and compelling references to scientific support for your assertions regarding a "pause" in the rise of global averaged temps over any significant time frame.
Click to expand...


If you believe in the overblown climate models I can see your inability to see the reality of the Pause.

Climate Models Fail: Global Ocean Heat Content (Based on TOA Energy Imbalance)
The energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere and ocean heat accumulation are crucial elements in the hypothesis of human-induced global warming. Because there is no agreement among the climate models about the energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere (Figure 1), there can be no agreement among the climate models about the heat accumulating in the oceans (Figures 7 and 13).
Click to expand...
 
Haig said:
If you believe in the overblown climate models I can see your inability to see the reality of the Pause. ...wattsupwiththat.com/2015/08/26/climate-models-fail-global-ocean-heat-content-based-on-toa-energy-imbalance/"]Climate Models Fail: Global Ocean Heat Content (Based on TOA Energy Imbalance)[/URL][/B]
Click to expand...

No belief required, the evidence and the best available explanations of that evidence provide compelling analysis and support for the mainstream scientific understandings, unlike the wild rants and pseudoscience buffoonery at the fringe political conspiracy site you keep linking to.
 
Haig: Bob Tisdale is an ignorant climate change denier, not a climate researcher

Haig said:
If you believe in the overblown climate models I can see your inability to see the reality of the Pause.
Click to expand...
What we see is denial of the real world, Haig, where climate models are reliable: How reliable are climate models?
What we see is a lie because there has been no "Pause" in global warming.
What we see is perhaps more reliance on the lies and denial from WUWT, Haig.
  1. 11th May 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies by cherry picking the source and start date about "No global warming for 18 years and 3 months" as easily seen by anyone who looks at the data.
  2. 7th August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about "No global warming for 18 years and 7 months"
  3. 14 August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about the BEST data showing global warming (it does!)
  4. 25 August 2015 Haig: Linking to the many invalid rants on WUWT about climate models.
  5. 26 August 2015 Haig: WUWT and HockeySchtick lies about a "18-26 year ‘pause’ in global warming".
  6. 26 August 2015 Haig: WUWT and HockeySchtick are ignorant about basic science.
You link to a blog entry by the ignorant Bob Tisdale, Haig.
27 August 2015 Haig: Bob Tisdale is an ignorant climate change denier, not a climate researcher.

Bob Tisdale rejects the greenhouse effect (again)
Perennially puzzled Bob Tisdale is a bit of a nutter. He doesn't accept that carbon dioxide, water vapour and other gases like methane absorb long wave radiation and prevent earth from turning into a block of ice. Anthony Watts has banned from WUWT a number of people who don't accept the greenhouse effect but he gives a platform to greenhouse effect deniers Bob Tisdale and the appalling Tim Ball (who co-authored the silly slayers book) and other people who indulge in pseudo-science and quackery.
Click to expand...

Bob Tisdale – wilful ignorance personified?

There is an inane open letter to Jon Stewart – The Daily Show that clearly shows his denial of climate science (e.g. models do work!).
Open Letter to Jon Stewart – The Daily Show at the Wotts Up With That blog. The letter is analyzed at "Dr" Bob in retirement - just keep churning it out

Look at the lies in Open Letter to Lewis Black and George Clooney, e.g. that that IPCC controls the climate science community!

Look at the ignorance in Open Letter to the Executive Producers of YEARS of LIVING DANGEROUSLY. For example he states he thinks that cherry picked congressional testimony is science!
 
Last edited:
Reality Check said:
What we see is denial of the real world, Haig, where climate models are reliable:

.... snip RC rant ...

For example he states he thinks that cherry picked congressional testimony is science!
Click to expand...


I think this article had you in mind RC :rolleyes:

The ‘Cult’ of Climate Change (née Global Warming)
Global warming has become a religion

This is the opinion of Nobel Prize Winning Physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever , Prof. Richard Lindzen, and many others. Climate change alarmism has a surprising number of attributes of a medieval or even ancient religion. Nevertheless, real religions have some pre-requisites, like a tradition spanning at least few generations. So the proper name for climate alarmism is a cult.
Click to expand...
 
Haig: "Ari.H"'s ignorance, lies and political rants in a blog on WUWT

Haig said:
I think this article had you in mind RC
Click to expand...
No sign that you understand that WUWT has lied to you (sometimes on purpose, sometime from ignorance), Haig:
  1. 11th May 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies by cherry picking the source and start date about "No global warming for 18 years and 3 months" as easily seen by anyone who looks at the data.
  2. 7th August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about "No global warming for 18 years and 7 months"
  3. 14 August 2015 Haig: WUWT blog lies about the BEST data showing global warming (it does!)
  4. 25 August 2015 Haig: Linking to the many invalid rants on WUWT about climate models.
  5. 26 August 2015 Haig: WUWT and HockeySchtick lies about a "18-26 year ‘pause’ in global warming".
  6. 26 August 2015 Haig: WUWT and HockeySchtick are ignorant about basic science.
  7. 27 August 2015 Haig: Bob Tisdale is an ignorant climate change denier, not a climate researcher.
And now you link to a post on WUWT by a "Guest essay by Ari.H" as if that makes them look better!
The ‘Cult’ of Climate Change (née Global Warming) "Global warming has become a religion".
There are climate change "alarmists" who as deluded as climate change "deniers" such as the bloggers on WUWT. So I agree with point 1).
Point 2) is a rant about dogma.
Point 3) is insane: "3) The alarmist movement has a formal doctrine-setting body — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).".
Point 4) is political rhetoric: "taxpayer-funded impostor “climate scientists” stuff.
Point 5) is totally ignorant. The scientific start for global warming is the greenhouse effect established over 100 years ago. Climate scientists "worship" the physics that is used to create compute models and treat the output of those models skeptically.
Point 6) is a list of climate myths and what looks like personal delusions. The "CO2 is plant food" myth. Total ignorance about what causes sea level rise (thermal expansion + land ice melting + melting sea ice diluting sea water). The "it is the Sun" climate myth. This "Ari.H" does not know that sun spot numbers (and solar output) have decreased over the last couple of cycles while warming has continued.
Point 7) is a lie . Everyone knows that climate has changed in the past - even alarmists and deniers.
Point 8) is fairly delusional - it is climate change deniers who deny the well founded physics of the greenhouse effect. There are some idiotic claims
  • the greenhouse effect is about actual greenhouses :eek:!
  • glaciers and ice sheets do not melt if temperatures get warmer!
  • droughts do not get worse or more frequent if temperatures get warmer!
  • wild fires do not get worse or more frequent if temperatures get warmer!
Point 9) is ignorant. Temperature records started when temperature records first began to be recorded! Identifying when complete and reliable temperature record began is harder. This is considered to be 1850 not 1880.
Point 10) is just dumb. Climate science predicts "calamities, catastrophes.... " so climate scientists publish that. Paranoia about the IPCC and UNFCC .
Point 11) is a total lie. Climate science makes scientific statements. These are in a thing called the scientific literature!
Point 12) is a political rant about people wanting to take over governments.
"Ari.H" ends with a lie about "multiple frauds".

A nitpick - no description of who this "Ari.H" is. Why is WUWT allowing an seemingly anonymous poster make them look like fools with such an embarrassing blog?

28 August 2015 Haig: "Ari.H"'s ignorance, lies and political rants in a blog post on WUWT.
 
Last edited:
Can anyone tell me where the pause is, exactly? I see a quite steady rise in the temperature anomalies, decade after decade.

 
Last edited:
If the pause exists, then there is no way that we would be presently exactly where the trendline up to 1998 predicted, right?

 
Megalodon said:
Can anyone tell me where the pause is, exactly? I see a quite steady rise in the temperature anomalies, decade after decade.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_28155e059b6a651f.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...


A good place(s) to start to understand what the Pause is, is to read through the current count: 52 excuses for this hiatus in global warming. :D or this Study Resurrects The Global Warming ‘Hiatus’ :p


You will find there is a 97% consensus on what the Pause actually is. :dl:
 
Trakar said:
I have yet to see any compelling evidence in support of your seemingly mythical "pause." All of the legitimate and compelling science I am aware of does not support the existence of any such phenomenon. I have repeatedly presented this supporting evidence over the last 8 years, please provide legitimate and compelling references to scientific support for your assertions regarding a "pause" in the rise of global averaged temps over any significant time frame.
Click to expand...
Haig has repeatedly shown his evidence of a pause. It is actually a mislabeled evidence of a pause in the acceleration of global warming. ie instead of an accelerating curve, a straight line increase.

Anyone experienced in calculus understands how to change a curve, to a straight line with a + slope, to a flat line on a graph; just a simple calculus derivative.

People with an ax to grind can easily manipulate the numbers in an attempt to deceive. I have seen both sides do it actually. It's easy to do it even unintentionally when making predictive models.

But one thing absolutely can not be legitimately denied. The measured increases in temp are not in question. Nor are the ~400ppm atmospheric CO2 measurements in question. There is hard evidence AGW is already happening. It is not only some prediction or theory. It is a real, observable, and measurable fact.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom