Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

Status
Not open for further replies.
r-j said:
Does this mean you are ready to actually have a discussion about these things?

For starters, lets clear the table of all nonsense, because like yourself, I don't care for it.

Can we agree on some facts? Correct me if you think any of the following isn't true.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It is opaque to certain bands of IR but transparent to visible and UV light. CO2 molecule absorb certain wavelengths, and either warm other molecules by collision, or re-radiate the same energy, in all directions. CO2 is heavier than "air", but mixes well, even in the stratosphere.

Some of the CO2 we can measure in the atmosphere is from fossil fuels that people have burned, or from making concrete, and we know with out a doubt the increasing levels are partly due to these source. Land use also has decreased the natural uptake of CO2, further increasing the amount in the air.

CO2 levels are higher now that at any other time humans have been around. In fact, the best evidence says it has been a very long time since levels were this high. It is not a natural increase. There is no doubt from a scientific view on this.

How's that for a start? And that was off the top of my head.
Click to expand...

I'm going to respond in kind here. Before I answer your questions I want you to answer the ones posed to you. Do you believe that the earth's climate is still being influenced by man made CO2 emissions including from the recent past? Do you accept that it's a possibility that the jet stream can be influenced by this and this could sometimes cause colder winters in some areas than would have otherwise been the case? Do you retract the statement that winters are getting colder?
 
a_unique_person said:
You were, you want to know how Global Warming explains some localised cooling.
Click to expand...
False. What I asked about was here.
Reality Check said:
Colder winters are a prediction of climate models!
Click to expand...
I have asked many times for any evidence, even one model, that predicted winters would be colder, based on global warming.

I clearly stated that claim is false, and that it in fact doesn't even exist. Anywhere except in this thread. It was made up.

This is why there is no evidence being presented. Because that claim is 100% wrong.
 
greybeard said:
I'm going to respond in kind here. Before I answer your questions I want you to answer the ones posed to you.
Click to expand...
Be careful, because I love answering questions that are science based.
greybeard said:
Do you believe that the earth's climate is still being influenced by man made CO2 emissions including from the recent past?
Click to expand...
The question is leading, but I know what you are wanting to know. Let's phrase it like this instead.

Do you believe that the earth's climate is influenced by man made CO2 emissions? Yes. It's not even a belief, it's a scientific theory based on physics.

Do you believe that the earth's climate is still being influenced by man made CO2 emissions including from the recent past? Yes, for the same reason as before.
greybeard said:
Do you accept that it's a possibility that the jet stream can be influenced by this and this could sometimes cause colder winters in some areas than would have otherwise been the case?
Click to expand...
Anything is possible, but there is no mechanism for this, much less evidence that cold is the result of CO2 levels. Of course CO2 forced warming could contribute to changes in circulation and result in feedbacks that cause cooling, but at present this is not know. It was not predicted by any climate models, nor the greenhouse theory. Certainly if anyone had claimed a decade ago that increasing CO2 was going to lead to global cooling, it would be considered ridiculous.

greybeard said:
Do you retract the statement that winters are getting colder?
Click to expand...
The facts are that the NH boreal winters, in very large areas, have been getting colder, with much more snow and ice. this is not a claim, it is facts from all the data we have.

This is a NH trend, the colder winters, but it is so negative, such a cooling trend, that the winter season has actually brought the entire global mean down, so that we are seeing a global mean trend that is negative.

You can't retract reality.

The interesting thing, to me, is that the NH summers are still warming. They never stopped going up.

CO2 theory and greenhouse gas warming can not account for this. This does not mean CO2 isn't playing a part, it's just not driving the engine.

And remember, I warned you about asking me questions.

I can prove every last bit of the above, with scientific sources, facts and data that are beyond question.

So before you start calling me names again, how much you got to lose?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by r-j

For starters, lets clear the table of all nonsense, because like yourself, I don't care for it.

Can we agree on some facts? Correct me if you think any of the following isn't true.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It is opaque to certain bands of IR but transparent to visible and UV light. CO2 molecule absorb certain wavelengths, and either warm other molecules by collision, or re-radiate the same energy, in all directions. CO2 is heavier than "air", but mixes well, even in the stratosphere.

Some of the CO2 we can measure in the atmosphere is from fossil fuels that people have burned, or from making concrete, and we know with out a doubt the increasing levels are partly due to these source. Land use also has decreased the natural uptake of CO2, further increasing the amount in the air.

CO2 levels are higher now that at any other time humans have been around. In fact, the best evidence says it has been a very long time since levels were this high. It is not a natural increase. There is no doubt from a scientific view on this.
Click to expand...

There was no doubt on that in 1995 when the fossil fuel companies own scientists confirmed it. Where have you been in the last 20 years?

Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate

By ANDREW C. REVKINPublished: April 23, 2009

For more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.

“The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood,” the coalition said in a scientific “backgrounder” provided to lawmakers and journalists through the early 1990s, adding that “scientists differ” on the issue.

But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted.
​

Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate - NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/scien ... .html?_r=2
Click to expand...

you waste everyone's time here going over stuff that is taught in grade school these days.

Now that you have this vast understanding let the conversation move on to current science such as the ocean/air interface phenomena and the changes in the winds and Arctic weather systems without constant repetition and questions for things already covered off.

Ask knowledgeable questions and accept the answer, READ the links provided and stop trying to reinvent the climate change wheel for which you are inadequately knowledgeable.

Might introduce some sanity back into this thread.
 
r-j said:
Be careful, because I love answering questions that are science based. The question is leading, but I know what you are wanting to know. Let's phrase it like this instead.

Do you believe that the earth's climate is influenced by man made CO2 emissions? Yes. It's not even a belief, it's a scientific theory based on physics.

Do you believe that the earth's climate is still being influenced by man made CO2 emissions including from the recent past? Yes, for the same reason as before.
Click to expand...


Good. When your reply to someone showing that Arctic ice was diminishing fast was that ice had been melting from centuries and a passive aggressive "cool video bro" I assumed you were another climate science denier. That and of course many other nit picking posts.

If you read the media you would imagine that AGW was open to doubt. Whilst paid commentators sow their seeds of doubt those in authority are actually preparing for the changes it will bring. From companies preparing to exploit areas now under ice to governments preparing to abandon areas near the coast.
So I am happy to see you are not one to have fallen for easily debunked propaganda. Possibly you are cleverer than your abrasive posting style suggests and if you were to give up the attitude you might find that you and other posters had more common ground and less conflicting views.
r-j said:
Anything is possible, but there is no mechanism for this, much less evidence that cold is the result of CO2 levels. Of course CO2 forced warming could contribute to changes in circulation and result in feedbacks that cause cooling, but at present this is not know. It was not predicted by any climate models, nor the greenhouse theory. Certainly if anyone had claimed a decade ago that increasing CO2 was going to lead to global cooling, it would be considered ridiculous.

The facts are that the NH boreal winters, in very large areas, have been getting colder, with much more snow and ice. this is not a claim, it is facts from all the data we have.

This is a NH trend, the colder winters, but it is so negative, such a cooling trend, that the winter season has actually brought the entire global mean down, so that we are seeing a global mean trend that is negative.

You can't retract reality.

The interesting thing, to me, is that the NH summers are still warming. They never stopped going up.

CO2 theory and greenhouse gas warming can not account for this. This does not mean CO2 isn't playing a part, it's just not driving the engine.
Click to expand...
This has already been answered above by others.


r-j said:
And remember, I warned you about asking me questions.

I can prove every last bit of the above, with scientific sources, facts and data that are beyond question.

So before you start calling me names again, how much you got to lose?
Click to expand...

Calling people names isn't my usual style. I generally leave it to others.
 
Last edited:
one more wrinkle to deal with

There are a LOT of pine trees on the planet..

Pine forest particles appear out of thin air, influence climate

Date:​
February 26, 2014
Source:​
University of Washington
Summary:​
Pine forests are especially magical places for atmospheric chemists. Coniferous trees give off pine-scented vapors that form particles, very quickly and seemingly out of nowhere. New research elucidates the process by which gas wafting from coniferous trees creates particles that can reflect sunlight or promote formation of clouds.
Click to expand...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140226132954.htm
 
R-J
The facts are that the NH boreal winters, in very large areas, have been getting colder, with much more snow and ice. this is not a claim, it is facts from all the data we have.

This is a NH trend, the colder winters, but it is so negative, such a cooling trend, that the winter season has actually brought the entire global mean down, so that we are seeing a global mean trend that is negative.
Click to expand...

NO THEY ARE NOT!!!!! - READ THE GODDAMN REFUTATION AND STOP PUBLISHING UNSUPPORTED CRAP!!!!

your statement is factually incorrect and this is getting very tiresome having to constantly correct your myriad errors in fact.
 
Recent extreme weather caused years of erosion in just a few weeks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26277373

The speed of coastal erosion caused by recent extreme weather has been "breathtaking", according to the National Trust.

It said that in a matter of weeks some popular areas had suffered levels of erosion which normally take years.
Click to expand...

Area ranger Kate Martin said: "In December we had two years of erosion in one afternoon and we're working hard to look at how we manage this intense change at a much-loved stretch of the Sefton coast as dunes are lost and access points become more difficult to manage."
Click to expand...

Peter Nixon, the trust's director of land, landscape and nature, said: "We're expecting more extremes, less predictability, more stormy events, combined with an underlying issue of rising sea levels."
Click to expand...
 
r-j said:
Anything is possible. If you claim global warming might make it colder, or it might make it warmer, you pretty much can't go wrong.
Click to expand...
Might make what warmer or colder? "It" doesn't suffice, and something novel is needed if this is supposed to make sense. Of course, AGW will make the planet warmer, just as it already has. If the planet was getting colder then it wouldn't be gettting warmer. It would be getting colder.

Or "it might be warmer some places, but colder other places", that is also some good science there.
Click to expand...
It is. Overall, of course, the planet is getting warmer, due to the enhanced greenhouse effect. Everywhere will get warmer in time if the warming doesn't stop, but some very small regions might get slightly colder for a few decades.

Or maybe "there will be more extreme weather", or "more heat means more chaos", that kind of science is really good, it is impossible to ever be wrong.
Click to expand...
If there were no more extreme weather then a prediction of such would be wrong. Just as your belief that "it" is getting colder in winter is, in fact, wrong, absent a very interesting definition of "it".

More heat doesn't mean more chaos; you may be getting chaos confused with entropy. More energy in a system makes that sytem more energetic, obviously, and if that happens to be a weather system we can expect more energy to make it more active. This shifts the distribution of such systems (as demonstrated in the graphs provided above) towards one extremity. Short version : more extreme weather.
 
r-j said:
I have asked many times for any evidence, even one model, that predicted winters would be colder, based on global warming.
Click to expand...
I have replied several times with a climate model that predicts "colder winters": The evidence that climate models + science! predict a trend of colder winters (posted 24th February 2014).

You have clearly stated that claim is false without citing any evidence while demanding that I provide evidence. Hypocrisy, r-j ?

I have presented a little evidence. Personally I am not satisfied with the evidence but there is no point in wasting my time locking for more evidence when you are ignoring even this small bit of evidence, r-j.
 
For those interested in climate science:
A link between reduced Barents-Kara sea ice and cold winter extremes over northern continents
The recent overall Northern Hemisphere warming was accompanied by several severe northern continental winters, as for example, extremely cold winter 2005–2006 in Europe and northern Asia. Here we show that anomalous decrease of wintertime sea ice concentration in the Barents-Kara (B-K) seas could bring about extreme cold events like winter 2005–2006. Our simulations with the ECHAM5 general circulation model demonstrate that lower-troposphere heating over the B-K seas in the Eastern Arctic caused by the sea ice reduction may result in strong anticyclonic anomaly over the Polar Ocean and anomalous easterly advection over northern continents. This causes a continental-scale winter cooling reaching −1.5°C, ...
Click to expand...
 
r-j is likely nattering on about this

In summary, large-scale cooling has occurred during boreal winter over much of the NH landmasses over the last two and a half decades
Click to expand...

http://glisaclimate.org/media/Cohen_Arctic_Warming_Snow_Cover_EnvironResLett_2012.pdf

he neglects the land masses addendum....not surprising

and neglects the "regional" bit.

Though we cannot conclude definitively that warming in the summer and autumn is forcing winter regional cooling, analysis of the most recent observational and modelling data supports links between strong regional cooling trends in the winter and warming trends in the prior seasons. A warmer, more moisture-laden Arctic atmosphere in the autumn contributes to an increase in Eurasian snow cover during that season. This change in snow cover dynamically forces negative AO conditions the following winter. We deduce that one main reason for models failing to capture the observed wintertime cooling is probably their poor representation of snow cover variability and the associated dynamical relationships with atmospheric circulation trends (Hardiman et al 2008, Jeong et al 2011).
Incorporation of the snow cover–AO relationship into seasonal forecasts is shown to greatly improve their abilities, and hence long-term climate solutions from coupled climate models may also benefit from improved snow–AO relationships.
Click to expand...

This IS the kind of work that will improve regional models but I would tend to put my bets on the wavering jet stream rather than snow cover. Could be some of each and the thesis about is conditional and exploratory....not conclusive.

Whether the recent colder winters are a consequence of internal variability or a response to changes in boundary forcings resulting from climate change remains an open question.
Click to expand...

I am however interested in snow cover as a driver...if we have stalled highs then any meager sun in the NA winter is reflected on the continents. How that offsets the decreased albedo and higher uptake of incoming radiation by open seas is a question.

I do suspect more of the warmth in the Arctic is being driven by ocean currents transporting increased heat from the tropics.

Arctic News: Global Warming and the Gulf Stream
arctic-news.blogspot.com/2014/.../global-warming-and-the-gulf-stream.h...‎
Jan 5, 2014 - The excessive heating off the Gulf Stream by pollution clouds pouring ... a gaseous state (Latent heat of evaporation; Hyperphysics, 2013; Lide and Fredrickse, 1995). ... The United Kingdom emitted the most carbon dioxide per person at ... The extremely high current transport rates of the Gulf Stream directly .
Click to expand...

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/global-warming-and-the-gulf-stream.html

I can't comment on the conclusions but it's an interesting approach ( think I posted it earlier )

Bit of a crank on the catastrophic warming end of the scale but some chops to back his ideas....

Malcolm P. R. Light is working for the University of London, UK, at CPOM on polar climate modeling and methane hydrates in the permafrost and submarine Arctic.
Click to expand...

it shows him as retired.....
Pretty thorough article worth looking at even tho I think maybe over stating the effect.
 
Last edited:
Enough about winter. Summer's coming (for me, anyway).

Nature Stunner: As Climate Change Speeds Up, The Number Of Extremely Hot Days Is Soaring
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/26/3332101/climate-change-extremes

The number of very hot days have soared in the past 15 years, a new study in the journal Nature Climate Change reports. Based on observations, the authors conclude that “the term pause, as applied to the recent evolution of global annual mean temperatures, is ill-chosen and even misleading in the context of climate change.”
Click to expand...
... it is land-based changes in extreme temperatures, particularly those in hot extremes in inhabited areas, that have the most relevance for impacts. It seems only justifiable to discuss a possible pause in the Earth’s temperature increase if this term applies to a general behaviour of the climate system, and thus also to temperature extremes.

However, we show that analyses based on observational data reveal no pause in the evolution of hot extremes over land since 1997.
Click to expand...
Just one paper, of course; we'll see how it fares in the big wide world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom