|
Post by acidohm on May 12, 2019 19:55:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on May 12, 2019 20:17:04 GMT
Haven't seen that one ... but will read it. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 12, 2019 20:35:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on May 13, 2019 12:42:23 GMT
This paper was very humorous. I'd like to meet the person who lends it any credence. Let's see, a temperature "reconstruction" performed by "weighted averages" (i.e. cooked/fiddled/manipulated figures) of "proxy" data (i.e. entirely fabricated in the first place) just to render the "conclusion" that warming between 1971-2000 was "higher than any other time in nearly 1,400 years." You have got to be kidding me. I'd like to meet the person gullible enough to buy this at face value.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on May 13, 2019 12:51:01 GMT
Let me ask you, what do you believe results from changes in the ozone? What do you believe changes the ozone?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on May 13, 2019 12:56:17 GMT
This paper was very humorous. I'd like to meet the person who lends it any credence. Let's see, a temperature "reconstruction" performed by "weighted averages" (i.e. cooked/fiddled/manipulated figures) of "proxy" data (i.e. entirely fabricated in the first place) just to render the "conclusion" that warming between 1971-2000 was "higher than any other time in nearly 1,400 years." You have got to be kidding me. I'd like to meet the person gullible enough to buy this at face value.Ok. I will start with:
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 13, 2019 17:08:22 GMT
Let me ask you, what do you believe results from changes in the ozone? What do you believe changes the ozone? I think as solar activity decreases, and therefore uv, ozone quantities change in strat. As the stability of polar vortex is based on temperature gradients, im wondering how a change in quantity of a molecule with known warming influence has on this temp gradient. I also want to know if this temp change creates a difference in the depth of strat.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on May 13, 2019 18:53:06 GMT
So the AOC was only joking and believers were idiots.
Yes many on the right took her literally, and you may judge them as idiots but in fact much of the left mobilized behind this idea in degrees.
Maybe she needs to say when she is joking because there were many more idiots on the left. Did congress get to vote on this?
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on May 14, 2019 13:16:15 GMT
Let me ask you, what do you believe results from changes in the ozone? What do you believe changes the ozone? I think as solar activity decreases, and therefore uv, ozone quantities change in strat. As the stability of polar vortex is based on temperature gradients, im wondering how a change in quantity of a molecule with known warming influence has on this temp gradient. I also want to know if this temp change creates a difference in the depth of strat. Has solar activity been changing drastically? Has it been fluctuating of late? Is it your contention that little-to-no change in solar activity implies no Climate change?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on May 14, 2019 14:41:49 GMT
Let me ask you, what do you believe results from changes in the ozone? What do you believe changes the ozone? I think as solar activity decreases, and therefore uv, ozone quantities change in strat. As the stability of polar vortex is based on temperature gradients, im wondering how a change in quantity of a molecule with known warming influence has on this temp gradient. I also want to know if this temp change creates a difference in the depth of strat. You might be interested in this Acid. Data! data.mfe.govt.nz/table/89463-annual-ozone-concentrations-19792016/data/
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 14, 2019 16:09:46 GMT
I think as solar activity decreases, and therefore uv, ozone quantities change in strat. As the stability of polar vortex is based on temperature gradients, im wondering how a change in quantity of a molecule with known warming influence has on this temp gradient. I also want to know if this temp change creates a difference in the depth of strat. Has solar activity been changing drastically? Has it been fluctuating of late? Is it your contention that little-to-no change in solar activity implies no Climate change? Your losing me a little...solar activity is well documented. Its effect on ozone and and any differences in our atmospheric processes however are not. Also, i dont assume 'climate change' is influenced by any single forcing, rather an accumulation of different factors. The atmosphere alone operates on a mindboggling chaotic level, and thats before you factor in oceans, and yes, the sun. Overall, im just that bit happier at the end of the day if ive exercised my over-analysing, very active brain....if youd like to help validate or constructively criticise any ideas i have id welcome your thoughts 😊
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on May 15, 2019 12:53:15 GMT
Your losing me a little...solar activity is well documented. You can presume that I thoroughly accept solar activity. Its effect on ozone and and any differences in our atmospheric processes however are not. Actually, it's a simple matter of chemistry and there's more written on it than you could read in a week. Solar radiation creates our ozone by breaking apart O2 molecules into single oxygen atoms that collide with other O2 molecules and form O3 molecules. Three O2 (oxygen) molecules form two O3 (ozone) molecules. Later, those O3 molecules lose an oxygen atom in other collisions (returning to the O2 form) while the individual oxygen atoms collide with other individual oxygen atoms and reform into O2 molecules. This process repeats on a daily cycle, and has ever since there was oxygen in the atmosphere. It just sounded like you had more to add and I was curious about what that might be. Also, i dont assume 'climate change' is influenced by any single forcing, rather an accumulation of different factors. What's a "forcing"? There isn't any such thing in science. Could you give me some examples? The atmosphere alone operates on a mindboggling chaotic level, and thats before you factor in oceans, and yes, the sun. So you never actually get to factoring in the earth's core, the moon, Venus and certainly not the asteroid belt I imagine? By the way, into what are you factoring/not factoring everything?
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 16, 2019 19:13:37 GMT
I think as solar activity decreases, and therefore uv, ozone quantities change in strat. As the stability of polar vortex is based on temperature gradients, im wondering how a change in quantity of a molecule with known warming influence has on this temp gradient. I also want to know if this temp change creates a difference in the depth of strat. You might be interested in this Acid. Data! data.mfe.govt.nz/table/89463-annual-ozone-concentrations-19792016/data/Thanks Missouri! 😊 im going to have to get handy and graph it! On the face of it....seems more scattered then cyclical?? This is what it seemed when i first looked into ozone/timeseries. However a few papers suggest cyclical relevance to solar. Will have to compile evidence and pick out the sense.....
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 16, 2019 19:20:20 GMT
science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast11oct_1/An article i had pinned for a while describing planetary waves and, coincidentally, their influence on ozone. Note Ibdaman, the use of the term forcing amongst the descriptions.... "The Himalayan plateau is a terrific forcing function for these waves in the north," says Paul Newman, an atmospheric physicist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center.
|
|
|
Post by IB DaMann on May 16, 2019 19:32:48 GMT
science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast11oct_1/An article i had pinned for a while describing planetary waves and, coincidentally, their influence on ozone. Note Ibdaman, the use of the term forcing amongst the descriptions.... "The Himalayan plateau is a terrific forcing function for these waves in the north," says Paul Newman, an atmospheric physicist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. I hate to break it to you but that article is crap. There's no science basis for anything discussed. Most of the article is just pulled out of someone's pass. The terms used are just inventions; it's like a cheap sci-fi short story. If you enjoy that sort of thing then more power to you but you shouldn't allow yourself to be fooled to the point that you forget that it is entirely for entertainment value only. Just remember there's a reason there's no science involved.
|
|