CO2 and the climate

[nautonnier]

"When Will IPCC End Its Scientific Denial: How Long Can UN Body Ignore Thousands Of Publications Disputing CO2
By P Gosselin on 31. January 2021

Share this...
Despite the thousands of scientific publications refuting alarmist climate change scenarios, governments, activists and the IPCC continue to insist that we’re headed for climate catastrophe when we clearly are not.

Thanks to Kenneth Richard’s Herculean efforts and the Google Medieval Warm Period Map, we have these publications readily available.

There are reasons why in 2019 renowned astrophysicist Nir Shaviv told a Swiss news magazine that the warnings of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) could not be taken seriously. The government-funded body relies on faulty models and alarmist publications, and continues to ignore a huge portion of the published rational science.

There is also the ongoing campaign aimed at preventing scientists from publishing non-alarmist findings.

One man’s Herculean effort: List of skeptic papers

One major part of the science the IPCC ignores are the long lists of “skeptic” papers we’ve been publishing here at NoTricksZone over the past years (see right side bar under “Pages”)."

More Here:


notrickszone.com/2021/01/31/when-will-ipcc-end-its-scientific-denial-how-long-can-un-body-ignore-thousands-of-publications-disputing-co2/

[blustnmtn]

Jan 31, 2021 17:06:17 GMT nautonnier said:

"When Will IPCC End Its Scientific Denial: How Long Can UN Body Ignore Thousands Of Publications Disputing CO2
By P Gosselin on 31. January 2021

Share this...
Despite the thousands of scientific publications refuting alarmist climate change scenarios, governments, activists and the IPCC continue to insist that we’re headed for climate catastrophe when we clearly are not.

Thanks to Kenneth Richard’s Herculean efforts and the Google Medieval Warm Period Map, we have these publications readily available.

There are reasons why in 2019 renowned astrophysicist Nir Shaviv told a Swiss news magazine that the warnings of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) could not be taken seriously. The government-funded body relies on faulty models and alarmist publications, and continues to ignore a huge portion of the published rational science.

There is also the ongoing campaign aimed at preventing scientists from publishing non-alarmist findings.

One man’s Herculean effort: List of skeptic papers

One major part of the science the IPCC ignores are the long lists of “skeptic” papers we’ve been publishing here at NoTricksZone over the past years (see right side bar under “Pages”)."

More Here:


notrickszone.com/2021/01/31/when-will-ipcc-end-its-scientific-denial-how-long-can-un-body-ignore-thousands-of-publications-disputing-co2/

Dr. Judith Curry is by no means what I would call a denier, yet she has basically been hounded out of academia by the groupthink fascists.  This is worth a read particularly for her take on the state of climate modeling.

judithcurry.com/2021/01/30/interview-climate-change-a-different-perspective-with-judith-curry/

[missouriboy]

Like with stolen elections, if they can get away with it they will.  And so far they have.  This was never about science.  It is and has always been about a political-criminal world view / philosophy and power.  Non was right.  You may vote them in ... but you'll have to shoot them out.  I like Judith Curry and her approach makes sense in a rational, scientific world.  But we're not in 1950s Kansas anymore and this is not a rational, scientific world.  The Dark Side has the keys to the outhouse.

[nautonnier]

I think we have seen Tim Ball's paper before but there is no harm in showing it again...

[walnut]

But they quote percentage changes on a minor constituent gas and make it sound more significant that it is.

[nautonnier]

[sixpac]

Jan 4, 2021 3:30:41 GMT missouriboy said:

Jan 4, 2021 1:02:10 GMT nonentropic said:

Texas can go as of per their union agreement and will be the nucleus for others.

Actually quite an interesting proposition all in all.

GLENN.  How are the ticks in Texas?  Nasty little bastards.

Both the ticks and the poli-ticks are out of control here.

'Nasty little bastards', an understatement down under atm.

David,
Australia......................   

[missouriboy]

Feb 5, 2021 23:57:52 GMT sixpac said:

Jan 4, 2021 3:30:41 GMT missouriboy said:

GLENN.  How are the ticks in Texas?  Nasty little bastards.

Both the ticks and the poli-ticks are out of control here.

'Nasty little bastards', an understatement down under atm.

David,
Australia......................   

I stand corrected.  I thought all Australian blood suckers were polyticians.  

[nautonnier]

This Stephen McIntyre thread is worth reading measurement of CO2 absorption spectra shows it is not what the IPCC assumes

[nautonnier]

[Ratty]

I asked someone for a reference when he posted this on FarceBook:

It's unfortunate that it might take 100 years to teach people that "global warming" means there's more energy. More energy also means a higher deviation from the mean (higher highs, lower lows).

It's thermodynamics, what is taught in physics.
If you add energy into a system, you increase the entropy in the system.
<
Several factors affect the amount of entropy in a system. If you increase temperature, you increase entropy.
(1) More energy put into a system excites the molecules and the amount of random activity.
www.physics4kids.com/files/thermo_entropy.html
>
Higher entropy means you have a higher deviation from the mean (more randomness).
<
entropy
NOUN
physics
a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.
>
More directly what we are seeing here is entropy in weather patterns. More movement, more swirling. The result of that brings more cold from the north more often, more and higher intensity hurricanes and more heat in the summer.
Note that these definitions employ the word "higher" and "more," which are relative. That is to say, something happening on the higher side of average, and "average" is what people get into their minds as what is expected for a region. And "average" is what our infrastructure is designed for (or we'd be wasting money). Negative degrees in Fairbanks is not an issue for them. Downtown Rochester and most Canadian cities have fully indoor or underground cities. They have clothes for the weather; their wires and such are underground. 100 degrees is not an issue for Saudi Arabia. They wear light white robes and sandals. But when we have weather that deviates from our norm, we have issues. And when we have them more frequently, we get constant disasters. And we get reoccurring disasters because people refuse to accept what has become the new normal.
That started to get a little off your basic question.
The problem we have in people understanding "climate change" is not in just the climate change itself. It's that people don't understand the definitions of the terms being used. There are scientific definitions of terms and there are colloquial definitions. "Temperature" is the measure of kinetic energy in the system. But normal people think of temperature as how it feels when you stick your hand out the window. So, when the reports say that the average temperature of the Earth is increasing, it says there's more energy in the Earth's closed system.
<
Temperature is a measure of average kinetic energy of particles in an object.
www.enotes.com/.../what-measure-average-kinetic...
>
It doesn't mean it's getting warmer everywhere in terms of what you can feel on your skin. It means there's more movement of particles. And we just had a huge movement of a polar mass of air down into Texas.
I hope that was helpful.

I really appreciated that he referred me to: www.physics4kids.com

Is there something (simple) that I can use as a response?

[nautonnier]

Feb 16, 2021 21:48:51 GMT Ratty said:

I acked someone for a reference when he posted this on FarceBook:

It's unfortunate that it might take 100 years to teach people that "global warming" means there's more energy. More energy also means a higher deviation from the mean (higher highs, lower lows).

It's thermodynamics, what is taught in physics.
If you add energy into a system, you increase the entropy in the system.
<
Several factors affect the amount of entropy in a system. If you increase temperature, you increase entropy.
(1) More energy put into a system excites the molecules and the amount of random activity.
www.physics4kids.com/files/thermo_entropy.html
>
Higher entropy means you have a higher deviation from the mean (more randomness).
<
entropy
NOUN
physics
a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.
>
More directly what we are seeing here is entropy in weather patterns. More movement, more swirling. The result of that brings more cold from the north more often, more and higher intensity hurricanes and more heat in the summer.
Note that these definitions employ the word "higher" and "more," which are relative. That is to say, something happening on the higher side of average, and "average" is what people get into their minds as what is expected for a region. And "average" is what our infrastructure is designed for (or we'd be wasting money). Negative degrees in Fairbanks is not an issue for them. Downtown Rochester and most Canadian cities have fully indoor or underground cities. They have clothes for the weather; their wires and such are underground. 100 degrees is not an issue for Saudi Arabia. They wear light white robes and sandals. But when we have weather that deviates from our norm, we have issues. And when we have them more frequently, we get constant disasters. And we get reoccurring disasters because people refuse to accept what has become the new normal.
That started to get a little off your basic question.
The problem we have in people understanding "climate change" is not in just the climate change itself. It's that people don't understand the definitions of the terms being used. There are scientific definitions of terms and there are colloquial definitions. "Temperature" is the measure of kinetic energy in the system. But normal people think of temperature as how it feels when you stick your hand out the window. So, when the reports say that the average temperature of the Earth is increasing, it says there's more energy in the Earth's closed system.
<
Temperature is a measure of average kinetic energy of particles in an object.
www.enotes.com/.../what-measure-average-kinetic...
>
It doesn't mean it's getting warmer everywhere in terms of what you can feel on your skin. It means there's more movement of particles. And we just had a huge movement of a polar mass of air down into Texas.
I hope that was helpful.

I really appreciated that he referred me to: [a href="www.physics4kids.com"]www.physics4kids.com

[/a]

Is there something (simple) that I can use as a response? [/quote]

A lot of that comes under the heading of: 'Waffle waffle bullshit bullshit waffle waffle ..."

More to come in a later edit :-)

[nautonnier]

[walnut]

Does anyone remember the name of that little website that keeps a running count of global un-adjusted surface temps anomaly? I lost lots of links when computer went out temp.x

[sigurdur]

Feb 16, 2021 21:48:51 GMT Ratty said:

I acked someone for a reference when he posted this on FarceBook:

It's unfortunate that it might take 100 years to teach people that "global warming" means there's more energy. More energy also means a higher deviation from the mean (higher highs, lower lows).

It's thermodynamics, what is taught in physics.
If you add energy into a system, you increase the entropy in the system.
<
Several factors affect the amount of entropy in a system. If you increase temperature, you increase entropy.
(1) More energy put into a system excites the molecules and the amount of random activity.
www.physics4kids.com/files/thermo_entropy.html
>
Higher entropy means you have a higher deviation from the mean (more randomness).
<
entropy
NOUN
physics
a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.
>
More directly what we are seeing here is entropy in weather patterns. More movement, more swirling. The result of that brings more cold from the north more often, more and higher intensity hurricanes and more heat in the summer.
Note that these definitions employ the word "higher" and "more," which are relative. That is to say, something happening on the higher side of average, and "average" is what people get into their minds as what is expected for a region. And "average" is what our infrastructure is designed for (or we'd be wasting money). Negative degrees in Fairbanks is not an issue for them. Downtown Rochester and most Canadian cities have fully indoor or underground cities. They have clothes for the weather; their wires and such are underground. 100 degrees is not an issue for Saudi Arabia. They wear light white robes and sandals. But when we have weather that deviates from our norm, we have issues. And when we have them more frequently, we get constant disasters. And we get reoccurring disasters because people refuse to accept what has become the new normal.
That started to get a little off your basic question.
The problem we have in people understanding "climate change" is not in just the climate change itself. It's that people don't understand the definitions of the terms being used. There are scientific definitions of terms and there are colloquial definitions. "Temperature" is the measure of kinetic energy in the system. But normal people think of temperature as how it feels when you stick your hand out the window. So, when the reports say that the average temperature of the Earth is increasing, it says there's more energy in the Earth's closed system.
<
Temperature is a measure of average kinetic energy of particles in an object.
www.enotes.com/.../what-measure-average-kinetic...
>
It doesn't mean it's getting warmer everywhere in terms of what you can feel on your skin. It means there's more movement of particles. And we just had a huge movement of a polar mass of air down into Texas.
I hope that was helpful.

I really appreciated that he referred me to: www.physics4kids.com

Is there something (simple) that I can use as a response?

Higher energy should result in higher highs, and slightly higher lows. That applies to a closed system. Earth is NOT a closed system, it is a chaotic system with unexpected deviations, whether warm OR cold.

Another factor is establishing a mean from which deviations are recorded. The mean certainly is more complicated than a simple "temperature" reading.