andor
Level 2 Rank
Posts: 60
|
Post by andor on Nov 4, 2014 15:23:14 GMT
Looking at the current solar cycle trend we are declining into a mini ice age!
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jan 20, 2015 22:17:57 GMT
I try to follow up on the various predictions I make here and as soon as the Hadcrut4 anomaly is available for December 2014, I'll report on my long-term global temperature prediction. Today, I wanted to report on my prediction from a few years ago that the warmists will before too long begin to "discover" the natural 30-year "Ocean Current" cycle. Several months after I made the prediction, Kevin Trenberth, a warmist scientist, was quoted as saying there was a 30-year natural cycle which affected global temperatures. When I posted a link to this quote, "Steve", a warmist poster here, went ballistic and claimed that Trenberth was misquoted in the source because the writer of the article must have misunderstood what Trenberth was saying. (I wonder what happened to Steve.) Now, of all people, Gavin Schmidt, a warmist icon, seems to be publicly moving toward acceptance that the flat global temperature pause still has considerably more time to run and the pause is due to natural causes offsetting any greenhouse gas effects. From this linkNASA's Gavin Schmidt: the pause will not persist and in five to 10 years time - it is changes in greenhouse gases that will dominate.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 21, 2015 5:27:31 GMT
You are a leading analyst Duwayne!
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Jan 21, 2015 5:50:59 GMT
I try to follow up on the various predictions I make here and as soon as the Hadcrut4 anomaly is available for December 2014, I'll report on my long-term global temperature prediction. Today, I wanted to report on my prediction from a few years ago that the warmists will before too long begin to "discover" the natural 30-year "Ocean Current" cycle. Several months after I made the prediction, Kevin Trenberth, a warmist scientist, was quoted as saying there was a 30-year natural cycle which affected global temperatures. When I posted a link to this quote, "Steve", a warmist poster here, went ballistic and claimed that Trenberth was misquoted in the source because the writer of the article must have misunderstood what Trenberth was saying. (I wonder what happened to Steve.) Now, of all people, Gavin Schmidt, a warmist icon, seems to be publicly moving toward acceptance that the flat global temperature pause still has considerably more time to run and the pause is due to natural causes offsetting any greenhouse gas effects. From this linkNASA's Gavin Schmidt: the pause will not persist and in five to 10 years time - it is changes in greenhouse gases that will dominate. Apparently, the natural solar cycle only has the ability to check or cool global temperatures not to raise. UPDATE: 24hrs later, "The Pause Is Dead" Looks like Mikey & Gav don't have a 97% consensus between them!
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 21, 2015 11:42:48 GMT
Two things are worth commenting on that:
1. Gavin admits that there IS a pause. There are many in his church that howl down any suggestion of a pause and claim that global warming (they forget to call it climate (change) when they get excited) is continuing unabated. This Gavin quote ought to be sent to them
2. I find it strange that Gavin (and others) can accept that natural forces are holding the system in stasis - a pause - with precisely the right amount of feedback to balance the CO2 rise for 18 years despite its fluctuations and different levels around the globe. That extended coincidence of negative natural forcing against claimed CO2 positive forcing must be an exceptionally low probability, as in being unbelievable. I would surmise from that the effect of CO2 is indistinguishable from zero.
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Jan 21, 2015 15:48:02 GMT
but you don't get policy changes with natural fluctuations in climate. scaremongering must continue.
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jan 25, 2015 18:22:05 GMT
Here's evidence of another CAGW alarmist beginning the journey toward recognition of the 60-year Ocean Current cycle and its importance. From Bob Tisdale's post at WUWT"Skeptics have been preaching for years that natural variability can contribute to the long-term global surface warming trend…and suppress it, in effect stopping it. It was quite amazing to finally see one of the key members of the alarmist blog SkepticalScience (and global-warming reporter at The Guardian) finally admitting the same. Of course, Dana Nuccitelli forgot to advise his readers that “a preponderance of El Niño events” had “sped up” global surface warming from the mid-1970s through the 1990s, not just “during the 1990s”. He also forgot to mention that another mode of natural variability, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, had also contributed to the warming then."
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 25, 2015 18:27:45 GMT
Dana Nutticeli is a poor source of anything. His denial of reality has helped many gullible people develop Skeptical Science Syndrome. Maybe he will uncover a cure since he has such a serious case of this debilitating illness where your brain turns to mush.
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jan 26, 2015 22:37:43 GMT
Why the IPCC and the models are clearly wrong....
The IPCC claims growth in atmospheric CO2 causes warming of 1.0C per doubling of CO2 due to the direct greenhouse gas effect. They also estimate an additional “feedback effect” of 0.5 to 3.5C per doubling. The size of this error range where the high number is 7 times the low number indicates they are extremely uncertain about feedbacks. They estimate total CO2 warming as the total of base effect the plus feedback effect or 1.5 to 4.5C per doubling.
We can check this number easily since we have 55 years of history where atmospheric CO2 has been growing significantly as measured at the Mauna Loa sampling site in Hawaii.
Using the Hadcrut4 global temperatures and the Mauna Loa CO2 data which begins in 1959, and using the assumption that the CO2 warming effect is logarithmic as stated by the IPCC, a simple calculation shows that the warming was 2.1C per doubling of CO2 over the 1959-2014 period - if all the warming is attributed to CO2.
It’s easy to make the case that the all the warming wasn’t due to CO2 and that the CO2 sensitivity is therefore less than 2.1C per doubling. 1) There were other greenhouse gases that contributed to the warming during this period, including methane. 2) Urbanization and deforestation added extra heat. 3) The satellite global temperature records indicate that global warming was only 75% of the Hadcrut4 figures during the period when satellite temperatures were recorded. And, moreover, the satellites measure temperatures in the troposphere where temperatures are predicted to rise 20% faster than the surface. 4) Natural ocean currents such as the AMO likely added to the warming during this period. 5) A more active sun than normal likely added to warming during this period. 6) Warming estimates based on earlier beginning dates yield lower sensitivity numbers. For example, using an estimate of 290ppm CO2 for 1850 the warming has been only 1.7C per doubling if all of the warming was due to CO2 and the Hadcrut4 numbers are to be believed.
Despite IPCC’s lowering the bottom of the CO2 sensitivity range from 2.0 down to 1.5 in their latest report, the actual sensitivity is still probably below the bottom of the range.
By the way the CO2 sensitivity this century using Hadcrut4 and assuming all warming is due to CO2 is 0.3C per doubling of CO2.
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on Jan 28, 2015 0:07:03 GMT
-End of year update for my 2007 predictions for global temperatures, Multivariate ENSO (MVENSO) and the PDO Average for 2007 through 2014 Predicted Actual Global Temperature (Hadcrut4) 0.52 0.49 MVENSO -0.3 -0.2 PDO -0.6 -0.5
The Hadcrut4 average global temperature remains a little below my predicted level. The PDO and MVENSO were both on the warm side last quarter and whereas both predictions were spot on last quarter, they are now both 0.1 above my prediction.
|
|
zaphod
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 210
|
Post by zaphod on Feb 4, 2015 20:36:24 GMT
I think this item probably fits best on this thread. "Ancient climate records 'back predictions'" www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31131336Excellent. Supports the fact that climate change has happened and will happen. And CO2 reached similar levels in the past with no human input. Blasphemy!
|
|
birder
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 223
|
Post by birder on Feb 4, 2015 22:40:17 GMT
I think this item probably fits best on this thread. "Ancient climate records 'back predictions'" www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31131336Excellent. Supports the fact that climate change has happened and will happen. And CO2 reached similar levels in the past with no human input. Blasphemy! I think that it also proves that increases in CO2 follows temperature increases caused by the Sun.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 4, 2015 22:51:01 GMT
Amazing how that 800+ year lag keeps getting forgotten isn't it Birder?
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Feb 13, 2015 10:01:36 GMT
vision from god .. or just to much lsd ? I do believe in seeing things but theres only 7 billion problems. no one mans future is made of stone ..it's always a glimpse of what may be.. chaos theory has a better chance .Something as small as the flutter of a butterfly's wings can cause a Typhoon halfway around the world
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 13, 2015 17:17:59 GMT
Flea, What? You don't once a week go down the to the local tarot card reader and plunk down a c note? A discount tarot reader? Isn't it usually 2 C notes?
|
|