|
Post by nautonnier on May 15, 2020 15:03:25 GMT
So anthropogenic CO2 is what causes the rise and 44% drop would stop the rise; but if 11%, a quarter of the output required to provide the rise, is stopped the rise continues with NO CHANGE? Is that really logical or even mathematical?
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 15, 2020 16:24:56 GMT
So anthropogenic CO2 is what causes the rise and 44% drop would stop the rise; but if 11%, a quarter of the output required to provide the rise, is stopped the rise continues with NO CHANGE? Is that really logical or even mathematical? I think he means 11% renders the influence invisible due background noise. Edit: undetectable is a better choice of words then invisible 🤔
|
|
|
Post by duwayne on May 15, 2020 16:32:47 GMT
"Why the current economic slowdown won't show up in the atmospheric CO2 record" is a poor "headline". The headline should have been something like "Why the current economic slowdown isn't large enough to cause a drop in the annual atmospheric CO2 levels." The CO2 emissions are still large enough to cause the atmospheric CO2 to rise, but at a reduced rate.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 15, 2020 17:19:24 GMT
"Why the current economic slowdown won't show up in the atmospheric CO2 record" is a poor "headline". The headline should have been something like "Why the current economic slowdown isn't large enough to cause a drop in the annual atmospheric CO2 levels." The CO2 emissions are still large enough to cause the atmospheric CO2 to rise, but at a reduced rate. Tho currently the recorded rate isnt reduced...
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on May 15, 2020 21:54:47 GMT
According to Dr Spencer, an 11% drop in human emissions is undetectable in the CO2 record.
This level of drop has been created by Great Depression conditions around the world. A 43% drop in emissions would apparently be required to stabilise CO2 concentration.
I suspect that a 43% drop would represent economic wipeout for most of the significant economies. And mass starvation.
Not going to happen, I hope.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on May 15, 2020 22:37:25 GMT
According to Dr Spencer, an 11% drop in human emissions is undetectable in the CO2 record. This level of drop has been created by Great Depression conditions around the world. A 43% drop in emissions would apparently be required to stabilise CO2 concentration. I suspect that a 43% drop would represent economic wipeout for most of the significant economies. And mass starvation. Not going to happen, I hope. Never underestimate a "herd" of lemmings when they get a run on. Compare Islamist suicide bombers.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on May 21, 2020 15:01:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on May 21, 2020 17:38:11 GMT
There are geniuses at Imperial College? ? When will they make their appearance?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on May 21, 2020 20:04:40 GMT
There are geniuses at Imperial College? ? When will they make their appearance? It depends how you measure 'genius' Perhaps their task was to use some amateur C code to get the western world to shut down their economies -- and they have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams
|
|
|
Post by douglavers on May 22, 2020 13:11:44 GMT
University of East Anglia, of climate emails fame, thinks the human controlled drop in CO2 is 17%.
As this apparently remains undetectable, the question remains; Would even going to "zero emissions" make any difference in the real world?
Apart from trashing the world's economy and causing mass starvation.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on May 22, 2020 14:04:49 GMT
University of East Anglia, of climate emails fame, thinks the human controlled drop in CO2 is 17%. As this apparently remains undetectable, the question remains; Would even going to "zero emissions" make any difference in the real world?Apart from trashing the world's economy and causing mass starvation.It's all an exercise in mass hypnosis, and faith. Like the ghost dancers on the plains ... or the last line dance at Goblekli Tepe (OK, I made that up ) ... it is a desperate attempt to preserve faith in the failing paradigm.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on May 23, 2020 20:31:55 GMT
If the data doesn't match the models - lose the data, obfuscate, adjust the data and republish.....? "There are 4 stations typically listed as keys to the system. These are –
Barrow, Alaska
Mauna Loa, Hawaii
Cape Grim, Tasmania
The South Pole, Antarctica
There are many secondary stations such as these in the AGAGE (Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment agage.mit.edu/global-network
About 23rd March 2020 I started to download files of CO2 in air from some of these stations. There were problems. Almost none of them had daily data for year 2020, some had no 2020 data at all. NOAA, for example, had daily South Pole data to only 31st December 2019. Mauna Loa was the exception. It had data from two sets of instruments, one under the NOAA banner, the other from Scripps. I managed to download some NOAA daily data ending in March 2020, but when I tried again I could not find the original source. If I try the following URL, the data stop at 31st December 2019."wattsupwiththat.com/2020/05/22/the-global-co2-lockdown-problem/As the most important metric of the age - one would have thought that a Greta Doomsday Clock with all the supporting information would be easily available... it seems not.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on May 25, 2020 3:39:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on May 31, 2020 13:50:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jun 13, 2020 5:59:40 GMT
|
|