|
Post by missouriboy on Nov 22, 2018 14:50:16 GMT
"These results highlight a substantial degree of uncertainty in our interpretation of the observed climate change using current generation of climate models."Such tact. If I may translate: The models do not forecast the Earth climate system. Yet idiot virtue signalling politicians are using the output of these crap unreliable models to cripple the world economy and keep Africa in poverty. And .... Although some of the climate models are able to simulate certain qualitative features of the observed DCV [Decadal climate variability] our results summarise and rigorously document pronounced quantitative discrepancies between models and observations, which should help guide further DCV research.Go with throttle up Challenger.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Nov 23, 2018 4:53:04 GMT
If we were to believe the lies that Carbon Dioxide is the cause of global warming, via its mechanism of back radiation, then adding CO2 gas to a vacuum chamber, which within contains a tungsten filament, should cause the temperature of the filament to rise.
Heated Straight tungsten filament contained within a vintage vacuum bulb glows in the temperature range of 1000 to 2000K. It emits radiation in the IR wave bands which CO2 most strongly absorbs and so it would be expected that any back-radiant heating effect would be maximal and self-evident. Unfortunately as we will see later, it is not.
This can be seen in the CO2 spectral absorption graph, its absorbance in 4 to micron wavelength (light bulb spectra) is far in excess of the strength of its absorption in the 14 to 16 micron wavelengths.Filament Experiment Proves CO2 Causes Temperature To Fall, Not Rise Any comments?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 23, 2018 6:23:28 GMT
Not yet. Tungsten is in short supply.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Nov 23, 2018 7:11:30 GMT
Not yet. Tungsten is in short supply. When you have sourced your supply and completed your experiment, please advice.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 23, 2018 9:42:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on Nov 23, 2018 20:01:56 GMT
[[Stop global warming by dimming the SUN! UV-blocking aerosols could be sprayed into the stratosphere by 2033 (but some warn the results will be 'catastrophic') Global warming could be cut in half, says study by Harvard and Yale universities Scientists say they will use high-altitude aircraft, balloons or large naval guns Sceptics say that the hypothetical is costly and ' more risky over the long run' There are potentially extreme risks including droughts or extreme weather]]
Daily Mail
I really, really hope that no-one tries this.
If it worked, and co-incided with a cyclical downward shift in temperature, consequences might be truly catastrophic.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 23, 2018 20:59:05 GMT
Yep.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 24, 2018 10:03:42 GMT
Alarmist Claim Rebuttal Update Alarmist Claim Rebuttal Overview Below are a series of rebuttals of the most common climate alarmists’ claims such as those made in the recently released Fourth National Climate Assessment Report. The authors of these rebuttals are all recognized experts in the relevant scientific fields. The rebuttals demonstrate the falsity of EPA’s claims merely by citing the most credible empirical data on the topic. For each alarmist claim, a summary of the relevant rebuttal is provided below along with a link to the full text of the rebuttal, which includes the names and the credentials of the authors of each rebuttal. icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate
|
|
|
Post by blustnmtn on Nov 24, 2018 12:59:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 24, 2018 13:02:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by RicksFormula on Nov 24, 2018 14:55:43 GMT
Alarmist Claim Rebuttal Update Alarmist Claim Rebuttal Overview Below are a series of rebuttals of the most common climate alarmists’ claims such as those made in the recently released Fourth National Climate Assessment Report. The authors of these rebuttals are all recognized experts in the relevant scientific fields. The rebuttals demonstrate the falsity of EPA’s claims merely by citing the most credible empirical data on the topic. For each alarmist claim, a summary of the relevant rebuttal is provided below along with a link to the full text of the rebuttal, which includes the names and the credentials of the authors of each rebuttal. icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate great article, should be required reading for all citizens of UN member countries as well as their mis-guided leaders. Did you see the article just below it on the same page Naut linked titled "Greatest Scientific Fraud of All Time"? one blurb from the study on the adjustments used in the HadCRUT4 records: "A measuring site, originally located in an undisturbed rural area, gradually becomes surrounded by urban build-up, and becomes subject to the urban heat island effect. Thus, the temperatures it is recording are “too high” at least as compared to some theoretical un-affected “true” temperature. At some point, the station is appropriately moved to a new location without the urbanization. The difference between the temperatures recorded at the new and old locations is calculated. And then - and here is the key error - the temperatures at the old location are adjusted downward by the amount of that difference, for all times going back to the beginning of the station. But here’s the error: in its early years, the station was not affected by an urban heat island, so temperatures from that period should not be adjusted downward. Yet they are. From page 84 of the Report"
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 24, 2018 15:44:49 GMT
Alarmist Claim Rebuttal Update Alarmist Claim Rebuttal Overview Below are a series of rebuttals of the most common climate alarmists’ claims such as those made in the recently released Fourth National Climate Assessment Report. The authors of these rebuttals are all recognized experts in the relevant scientific fields. The rebuttals demonstrate the falsity of EPA’s claims merely by citing the most credible empirical data on the topic. For each alarmist claim, a summary of the relevant rebuttal is provided below along with a link to the full text of the rebuttal, which includes the names and the credentials of the authors of each rebuttal. icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate great article, should be required reading for all citizens of UN member countries as well as their mis-guided leaders. Did you see the article just below it on the same page Naut linked titled "Greatest Scientific Fraud of All Time"? one blurb from the study on the adjustments used in the HadCRUT4 records: "A measuring site, originally located in an undisturbed rural area, gradually becomes surrounded by urban build-up, and becomes subject to the urban heat island effect. Thus, the temperatures it is recording are “too high” at least as compared to some theoretical un-affected “true” temperature. At some point, the station is appropriately moved to a new location without the urbanization. The difference between the temperatures recorded at the new and old locations is calculated. And then - and here is the key error - the temperatures at the old location are adjusted downward by the amount of that difference, for all times going back to the beginning of the station. But here’s the error: in its early years, the station was not affected by an urban heat island, so temperatures from that period should not be adjusted downward. Yet they are. From page 84 of the Report" OK people - who thinks that is an error and not a desirable and useful side effect of 'adjustment' for moving the station?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Nov 24, 2018 15:47:24 GMT
The "Freudian slip" has become the "Fraudian slip". It's still about your mother. Ma Barker was a statistician ... of sorts.
|
|
|
Post by RicksFormula on Nov 24, 2018 16:03:30 GMT
almost like there is a mann's thumb on the left side of a balanced scale
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Nov 25, 2018 15:08:02 GMT
|
|