Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

How Scientists Got Climate Change So Wrong

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
    I've seen the forcing tables in the IPCC reports, but I haven't seen this before. I want it. Sounds like a journal article. Give a guy a hand?
    There's a good summary of this information here:
    https://skepticalscience.com/Milankovitch.html

    Key paragraph is:
    Eccentricity is the only Milankovitch cycle that alters the annual-mean global solar insolation (i.e., the total energy the planet receives from the sun at the top of the atmosphere). For the mathematically inclined, the annually-averaged insolation changes in proportion to 1/(1-e2)0.5, so the solar insolation increases with higher eccentricity. This is a very small effect though, amounting to less than 0.2% change in solar insolation, equivalent to a radiative forcing of ~0.45 W/m2 (assuming present-day albedo). This is much less than the total anthropogenic forcing over the 20th century. However, eccentircity does modulate the precessional cycle, as we shall see.
    So, the total energy balance difference is way short of being able to even drive a 1ºC change. But, as the graph up top shows, the regional differences can be up to 100W/m2, which is enormous. So, the regional difference has to drive effects that greatly amplify what's a tiny difference in total energy. The obvious two cases of this are ice/albedo changes driven by far northern hemisphere insolation, and CO2 feedbacks, which appear to be primarily driven by atmosphere/ocean exchange in the Southern Ocean, as influenced by sea ice cover (which traces it back to far southern hemisphere insolation). I'm not sure i've seen numbers that break out the relative contributions of those two effects.
    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      He would say "Grow thread, grow" but it was someone else who would respond with "soooooo" whenever he couldn't refute something.
      yo lunch
      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
      sigpic
      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

      Comment


      • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
        yo lunch
        00000000000000a00aa1a.gif

        That's the guy!

        Thanks

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
          Ok, i'm giving up on discussing this with you for three reasons.

          1) I included the link specifically because it lays out the evidence - conveniently, in graphical form right at the top of the page. So, you clearly can't be bothered to even engage with what i'm saying.
          2) You keep denigrating the evidence and explanations i provide without bothering to back up any of your claims at all, thereby ensuring i'm the only one who has to make any effort here.
          3) You make blatantly false statements - "There's little empirical support for CO2 driving current warming" being a prime example - but then dismiss the scientific evidence that shows them to be false.

          It's clear that there's absolutely no evidence i could provide that will shift you out of your position, in part because you won't do me the respect of even looking at the evidence i'm providing anyway. So, i see no point in wasting my time.
          Uh huh. But I never offered to debate climate change - I only addressed your one, specific question. You then try to broaden the question to the scientific debate - little surprise, that's where you're comfortable. But I stayed on point - you didn't.

          1) You dumped a bunch of lazy crap that I am expected to sift though after I already specified that sample size was the problem - yet you made no effort to find sample sizes of 10,000 or more. No doubt because they don't exist in sizable numbers and you aren't confident that a real study will support your assumption - or you just ignored what I'd written, one.

          2) You keep shifting the argument - you want a nice, easy to defend argument about CO2 - but that won't answer your question.

          3) There hasn't been much warming in 15+ years and no reduction of CO2 to explain it - the empirical evidence that I'm aware of supports this conclusion - and this is what we see argued in the public square - where IPCC is under significant scrutiny for its damningly obvious political posturing.


          Why CO2 being a greenhouse gas isn't compelling to the public is simple - the science industry has lost their unquestioning trust. It's not as simple as CO2 causes warming (in 800 years? ) or 'lookie, we do too have data' - a mountain of politicized garbage from a variety of scientific fields has been dumped on John Q Public's lawn and clean up won't go well.
          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

          My Personal Blog

          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

          Quill Sword

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
            3) There hasn't been much warming in 15+ years and no reduction of CO2 to explain it - the empirical evidence that I'm aware of supports this conclusion - and this is what we see argued in the public square - where IPCC is under significant scrutiny for its damningly obvious political posturing.
            What planet are you living on? The last 15 years has seen about as rapid a rise in temperatures as is present in the instrument record.



            Wait, let me guess - NASA can't be trusted, you don't believe the data, etc.
            "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
              3) There hasn't been much warming in 15+ years and no reduction of CO2 to explain it - the empirical evidence that I'm aware of supports this conclusion - and this is what we see argued in the public square - where IPCC is under significant scrutiny for its damningly obvious political posturing.
              Seriously? You think the evidence and data available shows there hasn't been much warming in the last 15 years?

              The brief levelling off of global mean surface temperatures between 2005-2010 has been eclipsed by rises in the current decade, and more than half of countries have had their the highest ever recorded temperatures during the last 15 years.
              Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

              MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
              MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

              seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

              Comment


              • Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                What planet are you living on? The last 15 years has seen about as rapid a rise in temperatures as is present in the instrument record.



                Wait, let me guess - NASA can't be trusted, you don't believe the data, etc.

                So, you never wanted an answer - you just want to brow beat anyone who dares question orthodoxy.

                This kind of backhanded cheating is exactly why no rational people trust scientists anymore. You knew damn good and well what I was referring to but here - at least Wiki is better than a google search page.

                So, in about five years when funding starts drying up just remember, this is why. You 'won' a skirmish (NASA and data aren't what I don't trust - YOU personally are. Now why should I believe you? Why shouldn't I assume you're just manipulating data when you pull this?) - and lost a war.

                Hope you're happy - I'm far more convinced now that this is a political sham than when we started - and I wasn't actually convinced of that beforehand.
                "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                My Personal Blog

                My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                Quill Sword

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                  Seriously? You think the evidence and data available shows there hasn't been much warming in the last 15 years?

                  The brief levelling off of global mean surface temperatures between 2005-2010 has been eclipsed by rises in the current decade, and more than half of countries have had their the highest ever recorded temperatures during the last 15 years.
                  Yes, actually, I do. Scientists I trust say so - one I used to trust just convinced me not to listen to him anymore.

                  But thank you for not being a jackass about it.
                  "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                  "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                  My Personal Blog

                  My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                  Quill Sword

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                    So, you never wanted an answer - you just want to brow beat anyone who dares question orthodoxy.

                    This kind of backhanded cheating is exactly why no rational people trust scientists anymore. You knew damn good and well what I was referring to but here - at least Wiki is better than a google search page.

                    So, in about five years when funding starts drying up just remember, this is why. You 'won' a skirmish (NASA and data aren't what I don't trust - YOU personally are. Now why should I believe you? Why shouldn't I assume you're just manipulating data when you pull this?) - and lost a war.

                    Hope you're happy - I'm far more convinced now that this is a political sham than when we started - and I wasn't actually convinced of that beforehand.
                    I do not believe your any more or less convinced before or now. You just have a blind religious agenda to reject science before and now. The evidence has existed before, and you are aware of ot. The only difference is there is more evidence today.
                    Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-15-2019, 02:03 PM.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                      This kind of backhanded cheating is exactly why no rational people trust scientists anymore.
                      You made a blatantly false statement, and i'm the one engaged in backhanded cheating? Because i took two minutes to find the data that showed it was false?

                      I don't understand how that works.
                      "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                        You made a blatantly false statement, and i'm the one engaged in backhanded cheating? Because i took two minutes to find the data that showed it was false?

                        I don't understand how that works.
                        Oh, yes you do. You knew full well what I was talking about - and that the graph you were pulling used different data. Now, you could have approached it from 'look, that's based on X which is wrong because Y' but instead you just throw insults and use data you knew differed from the original - to prove a point that didn't really matter in the actual question. It was just a distraction - you simply don't like the reality that the public has good reason to doubt the science industry,

                        Don't wonder why 'science' is losing public trust - this is why. And no pronouncements from on high about CO2 will matter - if the public doesn't trust the source, it won't trust the information, even if it were correct.
                        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                        My Personal Blog

                        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                        Quill Sword

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          I do not believe your any more or less convinced before or now. You just have a blind religious agenda to reject science before and now. The evidence has existed before, and you are aware of ot. The only difference is there is more evidence today.
                          Shuny, you never believed me before - heck, you are a large part of why I went from 'willing to listen but somewhat skeptical' to 'yeah, prove it skeptical'. You guys in Nat Sci don't really hash out the evidence; you just fling crap at whoever you don't like - that's what you taught me.
                          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                          My Personal Blog

                          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                          Quill Sword

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                            Oh, yes you do. You knew full well what I was talking about - and that the graph you were pulling used different data.
                            I honestly had no idea what you were talking about. And the comments were in direct response to your own arguments, where you basically said you don't trust climate scientists because cholesterol.

                            Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                            Don't wonder why 'science' is losing public trust - this is why.
                            Again, i've seen extensive evidence that science is not losing public trust. And, given you've presented no evidence at all, i've had no reason to change my opinion there.
                            "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post

                              This kind of backhanded cheating is exactly why no rational people trust scientists anymore. You knew damn good and well what I was referring to but here - at least Wiki is better than a google search page.
                              Did you even bother to read the Wiki page you're offering as your rebuttal? It specifically states and shows with data the so-called "hiatus" was an artifact of cherry picking data and that there was no overall pause in the ongoing warming trend at all.

                              You own The Lurch an apology.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                                I honestly had no idea what you were talking about. And the comments were in direct response to your own arguments, where you basically said you don't trust climate scientists because cholesterol.
                                You did too - and while cute, this isn't my argument and you know it.

                                Again, i've seen extensive evidence that science is not losing public trust. And, given you've presented no evidence at all, i've had no reason to change my opinion there.
                                No, you haven't. Why I don't throw up polls is because I know better. When polity is stable, polls can be (mostly) safely weighted. When it is unstable as it is now (see 2016) it's impossible to reliably weight polls - we HAVE to have full sized samples.

                                Which are expensive as heck. The internet may eventually solve this - Rasmussen is getting encouraging results - but it's still too dang skewed for anything unstable. So we need reliable polling data we don't have in order to weight correctly the micropolls.

                                So what you did was the equivalent of saying 'wiki says so, so there'. I offered to look at one specifically you thought had merit - but you just keep asserting that a google search is good enough evidence - which it isn't.

                                I've trained in survey research and done some (mostly review) work professionally as well as doing epidemiological work (oh dear Lord, talk about political crap!) professionally as well. So yeah, I do know what I'm talking about and no, I'm not impressed with a google search. You never asked me what other indicators there were - but I don't think you were really interested in evidence. My evidence for that is your google search.
                                "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                                "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                                My Personal Blog

                                My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                                Quill Sword

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                135 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X