|
Post by duwayne on Nov 1, 2013 22:46:26 GMT
Andrew, with your in depth knowledge of the science, what is your prediction for global warming? The short answer is I dont have any strong views either way for the direction of temperature change. So with your in-depth knowledge, you do not support the IPCC predictions?
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Nov 2, 2013 2:10:27 GMT
Temperature reconstructions from eastern Mediterranean tree ring samples identify the medieval warm period and the little ice age, but fail to identify the twentieth century warming trend, nor was it found in the corresponding meteorological data used for the study. Paper link: link.springer.com/static-content/lookinside/231/art%253A10.1007%252Fs00382-013-1702-3/000.pngAbstract In the eastern Mediterranean in general and in Turkey in particular, temperature reconstructions based on tree rings have not been achieved so far. Furthermore, centennial-long chronologies of stable isotopes are generally also missing. Recent studies have identified the tree species Juniperus excelsa as one of the most promising tree species in Turkey for developing long climate sensitive stable carbon isotope chronologies because this species is long-living and thus has the ability to capture low-frequency climate signals. We were able to develop a statistically robust, precisely dated and annually resolved chronology back to AD 1125. We proved that variability of ?13C in tree rings of J. excelsa is mainly dependent on winter-to-spring temperatures (January–May). Low-frequency trends, which were associated with the medieval warm period and the little ice age, were identified in the winter-to-spring temperature reconstruction, however, the twentieth century warming trend found elsewhere could not be identified in our proxy record, nor was it found in the corresponding meteorological data used for our study. Comparisons with other northern-hemispherical proxy data showed that similar low-frequency signals are present until the beginning of the twentieth century when the other proxies derived from further north indicate a significant warming while the winter-to-spring temperature proxy from SW-Turkey does not. Correlation analyses including our temperature reconstruction and seven well-known climate indices suggest that various atmospheric oscillation patterns are capable of influencing the temperature variations in SW-Turkey. _________________________________________________________ Steven Goddard reports: "IPCC Officially Erases The MWP"IPCC participant Jay Overpeck said in his email to Professor Deming, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.”They have done just that, and renamed it the Medieval Climate Anomaly New paleoclimate reconstruction efforts since AR4 (Figure 5.7; Table 5.4; Table 5.A.1) have provided further insights into the characteristics of the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA; Table 5.1) almost all reconstructions agree that each 30-year (50-year) period from 1200 to 1899 was very likely colder in the NH than the 1983–2012 (1963–2012) instrumental temperature. Link: www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5_WGI-12Doc2b_FinalDraft_Chapter05.pdfCuttydyer,I think the Jay Overpeck you refer to above is Jonathon Overpeck, a climate scientist I’ve conversed with at the University of Arizona. You may find this hard to believe but last January “Peck” told me that the earth is warming even faster than predicted by the IPCC. He also told me that I had to watch out for Oil Company propaganda and for denialists who were saying the opposite. When I referred him to websites showing flat global temperatures and provided quotes from articles including a paper by James Hansen which said temperatures have been flat, only then did he agree that it was possible to come to that conclusion. Maybe it’s because he’s a nice guy, but at the time my conclusion was that he just didn’t know the facts rather than that he was intentionally misleading me. But when I read what you’ve written, he may have been intentionally giving out misleading information.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Nov 2, 2013 3:54:48 GMT
The short answer is I dont have any strong views either way for the direction of temperature change. So with your in-depth knowledge, you do not support the IPCC predictions? I dont know why you keep saying i have all of this in depth knowledge and I already told you I have no strong views on temperature either way.
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Nov 2, 2013 14:16:59 GMT
So with your in-depth knowledge, you do not support the IPCC predictions? I dont know why you keep saying i have all of this in depth knowledge and I already told you I have no strong views on temperature either way. All right, then I'll assume you are not very knowledgeable. Perhaps you should follow the advice you gave to Sigurdur below. "Sigurdur, I find it amazing that you spend so much time reading all of these papers and yet you refuse to take the opportunity to learn about some of the underlying scientific ideas that you pretend to know so much about."
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Nov 2, 2013 14:49:15 GMT
I dont know why you keep saying i have all of this in depth knowledge and I already told you I have no strong views on temperature either way. All right, then I'll assume you are not very knowledgeable. Perhaps you should follow the advice you gave to Sigurdur below. "Sigurdur, I find it amazing that you spend so much time reading all of these papers and yet you refuse to take the opportunity to learn about some of the underlying scientific ideas that you pretend to know so much about." 1. I am not reading any modern scientific papers at all. 2. I am not pretending anything at all. I demonstrated how simple the basic greenhouse idea was with two concrete bricks and 4 thermometers.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 3, 2013 5:16:43 GMT
Andrew: I am going to recommend that you read some modern scientific papers. It is great fun to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Nov 3, 2013 5:25:26 GMT
Andrew: I am going to recommend that you read some modern scientific papers. It is great fun to do so. I am not an intellectual person so I prefer to stick to something I can be confidant I can understand and easily explain, such as something as simple as the basic greenhouse effect, the solidly frozen thickness of Baltic ice ridges, latent heat and dehumidifiers.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Nov 3, 2013 7:26:37 GMT
some bad news, that is science and all that supports those aspects of science is documented in "papers".
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Nov 3, 2013 7:47:26 GMT
some bad news, that is science and all that supports those aspects of science is documented in "papers". The context of the conversation is that I am not reading modern scientific papers.
|
|
|
Post by strongminded on Nov 4, 2013 0:56:20 GMT
bbbbbbbb but statistic expert M Mann found at least two trees. . . . . Mike tried to find something that just wasn't there. And it is really no big deal, except that using hindcast, the models can't deal with it. Which again, shows that the models need work. I don't understand why anyone can't see that.....heck.......even a buffoon could see that. [/fontgard]
Sig:
I finished my undergrad studies in the mid 1980's and my grad studies in the later 80's and was told by all of my Prof's to never believe computer generated climate models because there was no way all the variables could be effectively or accurately loaded into a program. Although computers have come a long way since then...there is still not one that can work though all of the variables...hell, they can't even accurately tell you what the weather was several weeks AFTER it has occured, when they can actually study the variables.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 4, 2013 1:22:13 GMT
Your Professors were correct. For the life of me, I can't understand why that is so hard to admit?
Climate Models are a stab....they set parameters that don't move except for one.....and call that a prediction. WE all know how important clouds are.......and there is not ONE model that can do clouds at this time.
Just how damn dumb do they think us "laypeople" are?
|
|
|
Post by strongminded on Nov 7, 2013 2:44:55 GMT
Code:
They also never ever put in the effects of the sun...perhaps that large glowing orb is just too obvious...
|
|
|
Post by strongminded on Nov 7, 2013 2:58:43 GMT
Your Professors were correct. For the life of me, I can't understand why that is so hard to admit? Climate Models are a stab....they set parameters that don't move except for one.....and call that a prediction. WE all know how important clouds are.......and there is not ONE model that can do clouds at this time. Just how damn dumb do they think us "laypeople" are? Sig: Given that for the past 20 years everyone has been waiting/expecting to own ocean front property in central PA...we "laypeople" are either pretty gullable or pretty dumb. Face it, most people do not think. They are not taught to think; they are taught to memorize, take tests, and believe the most charismatic politician on television. When I was teaching I bought AL Gore's movie as a teaching tool. I would stop it and ask questions and by the end of the movie we had debunked a large portion of his "science". Thinking requires questions and questions lead to research and research leads to knowledge and knowledge eventually leads to truths and truths have the potential to do serious damage to the charismatic politician.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 23, 2014 22:37:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Apr 6, 2014 5:49:22 GMT
The Little Ice Age Was The Coldest Period For 10000 Years. Paul Homewood reports: Video link: vimeo.com/14366077Full video linkJørgen Peder Steffensen is Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen and one of the world’s leading experts on ice cores. Using ice cores from sites in Greenland, he has been able to reconstruct temperatures there for the last 10000 years. So what are his conclusions? >Temperatures in Greenland were about 1.5 C warmer 1000 years ago than now. >It was perhaps 2.5 C warmer 4000 years ago. >The period around 1875, at the lowest point of the Little Ice Age, marked the coldest point in the last 10,000 years. Other evidence from elsewhere in the Northern Hemisphere confirms this picture. His final comment is particularly telling :- I agree totally we have had a global temperature increase in the 20thC – but an increase from what? ..Probably an increase from the lowest point in the last 10,000 years. We started to observe meteorology at the coldest point in the last 10,000 years. And people are worried we have warmed up a bit since!
|
|