Strong Negative Feedback Found in Radiation Budget

Some people still bring up Kyoto. Can't say I'm surprised.

How it relates to radiative balance and (by extension?) climate sensitivity is anybody's guess.
 
TShaitanaku said:
Kyoto was intended to be a "first-step" measure, not the end-all solution to all emission issues, and it was more about building the framework for future international agreements and treaties, rather than taking substantive steps to actually resolve emissions issues or atmospheric contamination.
Click to expand...

Not related to OP, please move such a subject elsewhere. Better, go actually read the Kyoto legal documents and correct your own misunderstandings, then report back in some appropriate thread.

CapelDodger said:
Some people still bring up Kyoto. Can't say I'm surprised.

How it relates to radiative balance and (by extension?) climate sensitivity is anybody's guess.
Click to expand...

No, it is not anyone's discretionary guess. It's not related.

Cayvmann said:
If my coworkers are any indication, then your estimate may be generous. And I work in IT, I was hoping to be amongst thinkers and nerds, but apparently anybody can get a certificate... Creationists, libertarians, and AGW deniers all around.
Click to expand...
Exactly the sort of "bickering" that has caused the mods to have just one thread on "Global Warming". This thread is about published scientific articles on Radiative Balance (Imbalance). Read the OP and contribute or...

Have fun with your bickering. Somewhere....
 
Last edited:
TellyKNeasuss said:
The counter-argument to Spencer and Braswell is also "in press" (in the Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer):

http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...d=918210&md5=6a9b90b4608e95acdcd14c103d80459a

(Item 1 - "can climate sensitivity be estimated..." as of the time of this post)
Click to expand...

The Linky No Worky

(also known as ...)

The Mad Scrambling of the True Believers in Bad People Destroying the Earth to Counter Skeptical Arguments Round 2,331,067.1103.
 
So the "Strong Negaitve Feedback" chiselled by Spencer from a large mass of data to confirm his beliefs has been soundly kicked to pieces. Just another graven image, it turns out.

End of thread.
 
mhaze said:
The Linky No Worky

(also known as ...)

The Mad Scrambling of the True Believers in Bad People Destroying the Earth to Counter Skeptical Arguments Round 2,331,067.1103.
Click to expand...

Whatever. Just go to http://www.sciencedirect.com and search for author "Bing Lin" and Journal/book title "Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer". The full article might (or might not) be behind a pay wall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom