|
Post by jimcripwell on Jul 22, 2009 23:51:36 GMT
glc writes "You have no credibility whatsoever. "
Maybe so. However, I use my real name. I am Jim Cripwell, I do live in Ottawa, Canada, and anyone can confirm this. There are only two Cripwell's in Ottawa; myself and my son. I am proud of everything I write, and your claim of experimental data is just so much garbage. Who the hell you are, I have no idea.
There is no experimental data that shows that if you add CO2 to the atmosphere at current levels, then global temperatures increase. None whatsoever. Everything else you might quote will not change this fact.
|
|
eric
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by eric on Jul 23, 2009 2:54:41 GMT
I was a little surprised to see that the Hadcrut surface anomaly for all of the UK seemed to be .5+ (just based on the map). I guess it wasn't as cool as people on this board made it out to be...
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Jul 23, 2009 3:59:49 GMT
I was a little surprised to see that the Hadcrut surface anomaly for all of the UK seemed to be .5+ (just based on the map). I guess it wasn't as cool as people on this board made it out to be... Umm, the Hadcrut anomaly is for the globe. And, like GISS, it's a wee bit higher for June than RSS and UAH. And, as Essex and McKitrick make clear in Taken By Storm the global mean temperature is not based on any physical reality. Just something to contemplate. As you do so, please consider, too, that agriculture is the primary concern of many of us who question AGW orthodoxy. During the warming since the end of the Little Ice Age, agricultural production has soared. Was Herschel right all along about wheat prices and the Sun? see below: Foliar diseases threatening corn unlike anything in the past Dave Mowitz Successful Farming magazine Machinery Director 7/22/2009, 12:27 AM CDT High humidity, scattered rain showers, overcast skies, and below-normal temperatures are brewing up a huge threat for corn in the form of disease, warns Tamra Jackson. The University of Nebraska plant pathologist warns that diseases not normally seen on corn this time of year are rapidly forming and to such an extent that farmers need to be aggressively scouting their fields now to detect their onset. The weather conditions have already spawn a "rapid spread of gray leaf spot and common rust," Jackson points out. Jackson sounded the alarm on gray leaf spot last week. This week she warns farmers to be the look out other diseases and, in particular, common rust. www.agriculture.com/ag/story.jhtml?storyid=/templatedata/ag/story/data/1248283702058.xml
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jul 23, 2009 4:04:18 GMT
I was a little surprised to see that the Hadcrut surface anomaly for all of the UK seemed to be .5+ (just based on the map). I guess it wasn't as cool as people on this board made it out to be... Umm, the Hadcrut anomaly is for the globe. And, like GISS, it's a wee bit higher for June than RSS and UAH. And, as Essex and McKitrick make clear in Taken By Storm the global mean temperature is not based on any physical reality. Just something to contemplate. As you do so, please consider, too, that agriculture is the primary concern of many of us who question AGW orthodoxy. During the warming since the end of the Little Ice Age, agricultural production has soared. Was Herschel right all along about wheat prices and the Sun? see below: Foliar diseases threatening corn unlike anything in the past Dave Mowitz Successful Farming magazine Machinery Director 7/22/2009, 12:27 AM CDT High humidity, scattered rain showers, overcast skies, and below-normal temperatures are brewing up a huge threat for corn in the form of disease, warns Tamra Jackson. The University of Nebraska plant pathologist warns that diseases not normally seen on corn this time of year are rapidly forming and to such an extent that farmers need to be aggressively scouting their fields now to detect their onset. The weather conditions have already spawn a "rapid spread of gray leaf spot and common rust," Jackson points out. Jackson sounded the alarm on gray leaf spot last week. This week she warns farmers to be the look out other diseases and, in particular, common rust. www.agriculture.com/ag/story.jhtml?storyid=/templatedata/ag/story/data/1248283702058.xmlDog gone it . NOW you have opened the genie bottle. Ya mean, after my cold wet spring that now I need to worry about rust to boot? ?......WE NEED HEAT!
|
|
|
Post by neilhamp on Jul 23, 2009 6:14:44 GMT
hadcrut values are anomalies from the 1961-1990 period wheras gistemp values are anomalies from the 1951-1980 period. Because the 1961-1990 period was warmer than the 1951-1980 period, this makes the hadcrut values 0.1C lower. To compare hadcrut and gistemp on the same baseline, either all the hadcrut values must be increased by about 0.1C or all the gistemp values must be decreased by about 0.1C
Thanks SoCold for correcting my somewhat simplistic comparison record. You have now highlighted the point I was trying to make! In the last 5 years GISS appears to be significantly higher than HadCRU. After applying your corrections: -
From 1998 to 2002 GISS-HadCRU was consistently negative From 2005 to 2009 GISS-HadCRU is now consistently positive
|
|
|
Post by glc on Jul 23, 2009 7:15:55 GMT
Birder
People seem to be saying the suns effect on the earths temperature is complex, but how about temperature being controlled by the solar wind. Like when the sahara wind blows it's hot. When the sunspots are high it's hot and when there low it's cold. Simple.
Fine - if that's the 'rule' we now have something that's at least testable. My only comment would be that we've had low sunspots for 2 years and not really had high sunspots since ~1990, so why are global temperatures over the past 5 years higher than they've ever been. And why do we need to wait until 2015 before we see any temperature response.
We now have a sunspot count comparable to a solar minimum in the early 20th century and which is lower than many periods in the 18th and 19th centuries. Why don't we have temperatures to match. Solar cycle 23 (the last one) was the weakest cycle since 1976 and we now have a deep solar minimum surely, by now, we should be seeing temperatures that were typical in the 1980s. By that I mean several months where UAH anomalies were negative.
|
|
|
Post by glc on Jul 23, 2009 7:18:18 GMT
From 1998 to 2002 GISS-HadCRU was consistently negative From 2005 to 2009 GISS-HadCRU is now consistently positive
The arctic is probably the reason. GISS extrapolates over the arctic - Hadley doesn't. Between 2005 and 2008, the arctic was particularly warm which was reflected in the GISS anomalies.
|
|
|
Post by stevenotsteve on Jul 23, 2009 7:22:28 GMT
glc. so why are global temperatures over the past 5 years higher than they've ever been.
Well the simple answer to that is that they are not. They have been falling steadily, it's only the GISS that is rising due to manual adjustments and poor siting. The current falling temperatures are what you would expect as we enter a deep solar minimum.
|
|
|
Post by jimcripwell on Jul 23, 2009 13:55:43 GMT
glc. Yesterday I wrote "There is no experimental data that shows that if you add CO2 to the atmosphere at current levels, then global temperatures increase. None whatsoever. Everything else you might quote will not change this fact."
I have seen nothing in reply, so I assume you must agree with this statement. If true, then there is no physics, and therefore no science, to support the hypothesis of AGW.
You claim I lack credibility. I will leave that for others to judge. You seem to be of the ilk "My mind is made up; dont confuse me with the facts". You wont tell us your real name, so unlike myself, I must assume you are not proud of what you write.
No-one understands the detailed physics of why the earth's temperatures varied in the past. So how anyone is supposed to know how the sun affects climate, I have no idea. We have little basis in deducing what the recent decline in solar magnetic effects has on world temperatures. So why you persist on insisting that because the sun is quiet magentically, therefore we ought to see some sort of immediate temperature effect, I have no idea.
I had hoped I could have a scientific discussion with you. That, however, is obviously quite impossible.
|
|
|
Post by socold on Jul 23, 2009 18:30:42 GMT
glc. Yesterday I wrote "There is no experimental data that shows that if you add CO2 to the atmosphere at current levels, then global temperatures increase. None whatsoever. Everything else you might quote will not change this fact." I have seen nothing in reply, so I assume you must agree with this statement. If true, then there is no physics, and therefore no science, to support the hypothesis of AGW. Or he disagrees and cannot be bothered to explain it yet again. Not the first time the "if we don't observe it, it isn't science" argument has been dragged out is it? At some point you have to understand that people will just not bother answering you anymore. So much for dinosaurs for example. Noone has observed them directly in any experiment I am aware of.
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Jul 23, 2009 19:00:41 GMT
glc. Yesterday I wrote "There is no experimental data that shows that if you add CO2 to the atmosphere at current levels, then global temperatures increase. None whatsoever. Everything else you might quote will not change this fact." I have seen nothing in reply, so I assume you must agree with this statement. If true, then there is no physics, and therefore no science, to support the hypothesis of AGW. Or he disagrees and cannot be bothered to explain it yet again. Not the first time the "if we don't observe it, it isn't science" argument has been dragged out is it? At some point you have to understand that people will just not bother answering you anymore. So much for dinosaurs for example. Noone has observed them directly in any experiment I am aware of. AGWers are dinosaurs, and I see them everywhere I look. ;D
|
|
|
Post by spaceman on Jul 24, 2009 12:29:28 GMT
As I understand it, the natural co2 level remains constant and the increase in co2 levels is caused soley by the activity of man. Doesn't it seem strange that co2 levels don't fluctuate? If it is drier and there are more forest fires, doesn't that relase a lot more co2? Or volcanoes? Or a natural global warming that releases trapped co2? So how does co2 levels fluctuate and where is the data that shows where they take in or add different natural events that contributes to the overall co2 level (or substract) and left with a number that reflects the increase in co2 caused by man and the resulting increase? As far as I can see, it political science. The real concern is crops. Where the growing lines are is a much better indicator of temps. Thats where we live. Global warming is a benefit, gobal cooling will be a diaster. here's the problem: If we are headed into a global cool down, are we prepared? Are we wasting time and effort arguing about a red herring? I never disagreed that there was or is global warming. The cause I have. To say with such certainity that we are the cause of global warming is stupid. So far we can can't forecast hurricanes or the weather for the next 3 days. Yesterday it was supposed to be in the high 80's, it never got out of the low 70's, for this time of July that's cold.
|
|
|
Post by glc on Jul 24, 2009 17:11:26 GMT
glc. so why are global temperatures over the past 5 years higher than they've ever been. Well the simple answer to that is that they are not. They have been falling steadily, it's only the GISS that is rising due to manual adjustments and poor siting. The current falling temperatures are what you would expect as we enter a deep solar minimum. stevenotsteve The simple answer is that they are. The warmest 5 year period in the satellite record is 2004-2008, the second warmest 5 year period is 1999-2003, the third warmest 5 year period is 1994-1998.....
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jul 24, 2009 17:25:18 GMT
And all those warm 5 year period are to be expected are they not? It won't be long, prob another 100 years give or take, and the warmth will have exausted itself and the cold will start again. I am glad that I won't be around to see that.....but my grandchildren may. Oh well, not going to worry about it as there is nothing that can be done to change the natural cycles of warmth and cold. Sure am glad to be living during a period of warmth tho, as history indicates that cold is not fun at all.
|
|
|
Post by glc on Jul 24, 2009 20:26:19 GMT
And all those warm 5 year period are to be expected are they not?
Are they, why?
|
|