Page 16 of 37 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 367

Thread: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

  1. #151
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,214

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    I wish more people on this board would debate more in this manner of actually providing some kind of substance, plausible arguments that may be valid.
    That is my intent. To speak in my own words, knowledge, and experience instead of relying on others.

    I really get frustrated at these people who debate with the links of other peoples works, especially when they do not understand what they are posting.

  2. #152
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    If you were smart and read the literature you would know the evidence strongly supports AGW and you would know the snake oil salesmen are the fossil fuel corporations and their bought off politicians.
    Evidence? LOL.

    The flat earth types selling the snake oil of man caused global warming have told and published so many lies on the subject they can't even keep their own stories straight.

    Are you another one somehow in on the scam? The scam artists get big bucks through education, government grants, shakedowns, government bids and on and on. Are you in on it?

  3. #153
    Guru
    Carleen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,613

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Must me Sasquatch, seeking relief from the heat, swimming in your pond. It's the only logical conclusion.

    Anyone who disagrees is obviously an algae denier.
    So instead of trying to come up with a logical explanation you make jokes? I don't see the humor.
    "Being President doesn't change who you are, it reveals who you are"

  4. #154
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,708

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    OMG...

    Why can't people understand why we can be at a decade+ flat period, and still see record temperatures? If after I explain this, and you still use that lame argument, I will just have to shake my head.
    I don't know, why can't people see that we can be at a decade+ of flat temperatures and still be in an overall warming trend?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  5. #155
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,214

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    I don't know, why can't people see that we can be at a decade+ of flat temperatures and still be in an overall warming trend?
    And if the trend doesn't continue, what say you then?

  6. #156
    Tavern Bartender
    Pussy Grabbin' Beaver
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,449
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    OMG...

    Why can't people understand why we can be at a decade+ flat period, and still see record temperatures? If after I explain this, and you still use that lame argument, I will just have to shake my head.
    Why don't you admit that you have used the "flat period" to poo-poo actual reality? But I am at least happy I finally got you to admit that we are seeing record temperatures. And, it seems, with each decade since the industrial age, we have not only grown warmer, but at a continuous faster rate.

    Each of those periods you listed are averages. Averages include values greater than and values less than the average. Any decade with the highest average, will statistically have most of the highest temperatures as well.
    Ahem... m'kay? Let's file this statement under the files "no ****, Sherlock."

    The stock market often uses language like "past performance does not guarantee future performance." Well guess what. Typically, we can expect such trends to continue, but only if we understand the trend we are looking at.
    Each decade since the dawn of the industrial age has proven to not only be warmer, but doing so at a faster rate. I know I am sounding like a broken record, but I don't know how to put it any simpler. Facts are facts, not matter how much you try to deflect.

    There have been three distinct increases on solar activity. I normally only mention two, the ones from about 1713 to 1780, and from about 1900 to about 1950. however, following the first increase, was a decrease from about 1790 to about 1810, and another increase from about 1820 to about 1840. Now any effects the sun has also has lag times of at least 4 decades to see the majority of change it causes. I will suggest you do not discount the possibility that the last increase ending about 1950 has finally run it's course. The whole basis that temperatures will continue is based on the fantasy that CO2 is the primary driver of temperature change. If the primary driver of temperature change is the sun, then counting on CO2 increases is wrong...
    Speaking of pre-conceived notions. Why is it you think it's a fantasy? What makes you so conifdent you're right?
    “No men are anywhere, and I’m allowed to go in, because I’m the owner of the pageant and therefore I’m inspecting it,” Trump said... “‘Is everyone OK’? You know, they’re standing there with no clothes. ‘Is everybody OK?’ And you see these incredible looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that.”

  7. #157
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,214

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground
    Why don't you admit that you have used the "flat period" to poo-poo actual reality? But I am at least happy I finally got you to admit that we are seeing record temperatures.
    Finally admit? I have stated this same thing before, that record decade will have record spikes compared to non record decades. To claim I have changed my mind on this point I have been solidly consistent od means you are either confusing me with someone else, or you are being intellectually dishonest.


    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground
    And, it seems, with each decade since the industrial age, we have not only grown warmer, but at a continuous faster rate.
    So? It doesn't mean CO2 is the cause. we haven't even talked about the inaccuracies of land sites due to urban growth/heat islands. Have we. Nor have we talked about the changes in satellite monitoring being close or inside the error of measurements and calibration drift. That's another different discussion, but just keep in mind temperatures vary by method, and we can't even be certain of the changes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground
    Ahem... m'kay? Let's file this statement under the files "no ****, Sherlock."
    Yep...

    So why do you guys keep harping on the record temperatures, as if it's unusual?


    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground
    Each decade since the dawn of the industrial age has proven to not only be warmer, but doing so at a faster rate.
    Does correlation equal causation?


    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground
    I know I am sounding like a broken record, but I don't know how to put it any simpler. Facts are facts, not matter how much you try to deflect.
    Does correlation also equal causation?


    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground
    Speaking of pre-conceived notions. Why is it you think it's a fantasy? What makes you so conifdent you're right?
    For several reason. For one, it is accepted in physics that a doubling of CO2 equals a change in spectral absorption by 2.7 watts per square meter. However, that is in a laboratory condition with no other gasses competing for the same spectra CO2 absorbs. For the IPCC's claim that the 1750 to 2004 changes to equal 1.66 W/m^2 means that a doubling would be 3.56 W/m^2 making this impossible. They then explain this claiming positive feedback of water vapor, but such a small change would be insignificant. Water vapor is already trapping over half the spectra that CO2 can, so any increases by CO2 can be no where near the 2.7 W/m^2 for a doubling.

    Now...

    There is more, but I don't feel like typing several paragraphs right now.

  8. #158
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 04:46 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,873

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    For several reason. For one, it is accepted in physics that a doubling of CO2 equals a change in spectral absorption by 2.7 watts per square meter. However, that is in a laboratory condition with no other gasses competing for the same spectra CO2 absorbs. For the IPCC's claim that the 1750 to 2004 changes to equal 1.66 W/m^2 means that a doubling would be 3.56 W/m^2 making this impossible. They then explain this claiming positive feedback of water vapor, but such a small change would be insignificant. Water vapor is already trapping over half the spectra that CO2 can, so any increases by CO2 can be no where near the 2.7 W/m^2 for a doubling.

    Now...

    There is more, but I don't feel like typing several paragraphs right now.
    What is the maximum watt per meter squared that can be absorbed in the given spectrum? Is that what you are referring to when you stated a rate of 3.56 watts per meter squared is impossible?

  9. #159
    Curmudgeon


    LowDown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,539
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Homer. View Post
    Could you give me a detailed explanation of the computer models used by universities and meteorological facilities to predict climate patterns and where exactly in the complex computer programming they got it wrong?
    What is the point of this? Do you think you convince me that I can't think these things through on my own? Forget it.

    The complexity of global climate models or general circulation models comes from the effort to model how energy is distributed over the earth's surface with time and how this affects precipitation, temperature, and other factors.

    However, the core issue for our debates about global warming is summarized in terms of average annual global temperatures. The complexity of these models isn't needed for that. A simple summation of thermal forcings with a lag factor duplicates the models relied on by the IPCC almost exactly (see link below). (Unfortunately, this has not proven to have very good predictive power when compared to real world data, but the more complex models being run on supercomputers are no better. Agreement with real world data is much much worse when we get down to specific regions of the earth which just goes to show that the supercomputer time is mostly wasted.)

    Willis on GISS Model E « Climate Audit

    Interestingly enough, average annual global temperature is about the only thing the models agree on. Everything else, including the distribution of precipitation and changes in local climate, show wide divergences from one model to another. This issue was brought up in the journal Science recently (see link below).

    So it's pretty obvious that the models suck.

    What Are Climate Models Missing?

    Certainly, there are situations for all of us where reliance on experts is unavoidable, but I always make a note of it to know as much as I can about any issue that's important, most especially my health. Also, it is important to know something about the reliability of the experts in question.

    There is no "conspiracy", there is only the need to get funded and the constraints applied by funding agencies, which may all be well intended even if wrong.

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --HL Mencken

  10. #160
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,619

    Re: 2001-2010 was the warmest decade since records began

    Quote Originally Posted by Carleen View Post
    So instead of trying to come up with a logical explanation you make jokes? I don't see the humor.
    So you are actually looking for a reason why algae is growing in your pond otherwise it's because of global warming?

Page 16 of 37 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •