Page 36 of 46 FirstFirst ... 263435363738 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 452

Thread: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent [W:437]

  1. #351
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    05-25-17 @ 02:43 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,578

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Wait, you mean all the frothing, and foaming over "global warming" was based on manipulated, or incomplete data, and flawed models? I......AM.......SHOCKED!!!!!!
    Thanks for brining this up! This is certainly a very important study.
    https://nicholas.duke.edu/news/globa...st-case-models

    Of particular note is this graph.


    The biggest takeaways are:
    1). There are 180 different climate models listed here. All of them are getting warmer. And the global temperate has consistently fallen within the bounds of these models.
    2). In the 1990's, global temperature tended toward the upper extremes of these models. In the 2010's it's been more toward the lower extremes. While the climate models failed to predict this, the duke study calculated a 70% likelihood of seeing these anomalies given a middle of the road warming scenario. But it is highly unlikely that we would have seen these same anomalies if either of the extreme ends of the models were correct.
    3). And most importantly... The study showed that climate models by in large GET IT RIGHT.. but they tend to underestimate short term (decade long) climate variability.

    In short, this study is a near airtight validation of human induced global warming with the most likely outcome being about a 1 deg c temperature rise by 2050.

    (also.. while I applaud your enthusiasm, there's a reason scientists don't read about science in places like the Guardian. Lets just say that Journalists and Physicists don't take very many classes together. And from personal experience, having had various things covered by the press.... it's always been painful to read their descriptions of what we've done. 50% of the coverage tends to be a complete fabrication, the other 50% poorly understood and misstated.
    Last edited by Mithros; 04-28-15 at 09:57 AM.

  2. #352
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Last Seen
    02-08-17 @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,639

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    The energy state of a molecule does in fact decay, in that it transitions from higher to a
    lower energy state. The translation (decay) can ether be spontaneous, or stimulated.
    yay, you FINALLY actually backpedalled and corrected yourself on something.
    the ENERGY LEVEL does in fact decay. Note however, I objected to you saying the molecule decays. KUDOS .

    I am guessing your comment about Maxwell–Boltzmann is in regards to aerosol distribution,
    This incredible image from NASA portrays global...
    aerosols are not evenly distributed.
    Nope, I am commenting on the fact that you claimed that all CO2 exist in an excited state; a fact that

    1) invalidates M-B statistics/partition functions
    or
    2) the laws of thermodynamics
    or
    3) both

  3. #353
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Last Seen
    02-08-17 @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,639

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    What's disingenuous in pointing out that both the warming since 1998, and the ability of climatologists to predict temperatures to within 1% are both statistically meaningless?
    Um, the whole thread (OP and some 200+ of the following posts) is devoted to the the exact opposite- worshiping "the hiatus {sic}". DO TRY, to keep up.

  4. #354
    Sage
    flogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,011

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    You're always a ****ing waste of my time. Go bother somebody else dude, I'm tired of you and your arrogance already.
    Wow ! I really got you on the run there didn't I ?

  5. #355
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Last Seen
    02-08-17 @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,639

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    Good ... lord ... are you trying to be a boor or does it come naturally.
    Arguing with people who are talking out of their rear end 99% of the time might tend to bring it out

  6. #356
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,679

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    Thanks for brining this up! This is certainly a very important study.
    https://nicholas.duke.edu/news/globa...st-case-models

    Of particular note is this graph.


    The biggest takeaways are:
    1). There are 180 different climate models listed here. All of them are getting warmer. And the global temperate has consistently fallen within the bounds of these models.
    2). In the 1990's, global temperature tended toward the upper extremes of these models. In the 2010's it's been more toward the lower extremes. While the climate models failed to predict this, the duke study calculated a 70% likelihood of seeing these anomalies given a middle of the road warming scenario. But it is highly unlikely that we would have seen these same anomalies if either of the extreme ends of the models were correct.
    3). And most importantly... The study showed that climate models by in large GET IT RIGHT.. but they tend to underestimate short term (decade long) climate variability.

    In short, this study is a near airtight validation of human induced global warming with the most likely outcome being about a 1 deg c temperature rise by 2050.
    t
    (also.. while I applaud your enthusiasm, there's a reason scientists don't read about science in places like the Guardian. Lets just say that Journalists and Physicists don't take very many classes together. And from personal experience, having had various things covered by the press.... it's always been painful to read their descriptions of what you've done.
    So, if I ask 180 people to pull predictions out of their asses, and the actual trend falls within the bounds of those predictions, can I similarly claim that people who pull numbers out of their asses by in large get it right?

  7. #357
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    12,280

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by SlevinKelevra View Post
    yay, you FINALLY actually backpedalled and corrected yourself on something.
    the ENERGY LEVEL does in fact decay. Note however, I objected to you saying the molecule decays. KUDOS .



    Nope, I am commenting on the fact that you claimed that all CO2 exist in an excited state; a fact that

    1) invalidates M-B statistics/partition functions
    or
    2) the laws of thermodynamics
    or
    3) both
    Once excited by the vibrational transfer from nitrogen CO2 will start it's energy decay within ms.
    The entire (roughly 27) possible steps to ground state can take up to 50 ms.
    While the energy state is in decay steps, it cannot absorb the 15 um ground emission.
    (look up population inversion).
    My theory, is that during the sunlight hours, CO2 could be continuously cycling
    through it's energy states, because the ms it hits ground state, a nitrogen is there to re-excite it.
    Even if a random 15 um photon happened to excite a CO2 molecule, it is a quick transition back to ground state.
    The question would become what is the mean free path of a 15 um photon to a CO2 Molecule
    vs the mean free path of an excited nitrogen atom to a CO2 Molecule?
    Also is there the 9.6 and 10.6 um spectra present in the daytime sky, because it would not have been caused from
    a 15 um ground emission!

  8. #358
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,681

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    Thanks for brining this up! This is certainly a very important study.
    https://nicholas.duke.edu/news/globa...st-case-models

    Of particular note is this graph.


    The biggest takeaways are:
    1). There are 180 different climate models listed here. All of them are getting warmer.
    And the global temperate has consistently fallen within the bounds of these models.
    2). In the 1990's, global temperature tended toward the upper extremes of these models. In the 2010's it's been more toward the lower extremes. While the climate models failed to predict this, the duke study calculated a 70% likelihood of seeing these anomalies given a middle of the road warming scenario. But it is highly unlikely that we would have seen these same anomalies if either of the extreme ends of the models were correct.
    3). And most importantly... The study showed that climate models by in large GET IT RIGHT.. but they tend to underestimate short term (decade long) climate variability.

    In short, this study is a near airtight validation of human induced global warming with the most likely outcome being about a 1 deg c temperature rise by 2050.

    (also.. while I applaud your enthusiasm, there's a reason scientists don't read about science in places like the Guardian. Lets just say that Journalists and Physicists don't take very many classes together. And from personal experience, having had various things covered by the press.... it's always been painful to read their descriptions of what we've done. 50% of the coverage tends to be a complete fabrication, the other 50% poorly understood and misstated.
    Sure looks like it'd be more accurate to say the global temps fall between the absolute lowest in the range of models. (thank God for those outlier models, huh)
    That gives rise to the question of why there are so many doom-and-gloom models that are so very wrong?
    And your answer to that would be ... those pesky short-term decade-long climate variabilities you mentioned.
    The question then is, why are they ignored & how many of those decade-long climate variabilities do there have to be before they're not dismissed out of hand?
    They can't have been an anomaly unique to the 21st century.
    Better never than late.

  9. #359
    Sage
    flogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,011

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    So, if I ask 180 people to pull predictions out of their asses, and the actual trend falls within the bounds of those predictions, can I similarly claim that people who pull numbers out of their asses by in large get it right?
    These people would hold our entire economic future as hostage to fortune based on this subjective nonsense. As I illustrated earlier this current warming phase is niether unprecedented nor is it in any way abnormal when viewed against the post glacial pattern of natural variation. Even if one views the ice core record of just the last 4,000 years it is clear just how inconsequential todays temperatures are

    Kobashi 2011

    Attachment 67183695

    http://www.leif.org/EOS/2011GL049444.pdf
    Attached Images Attached Images

  10. #360
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,679

    Re: Our climate models are WRONG: Global warming has slowed - and recent changes are

    Quote Originally Posted by SlevinKelevra View Post
    Um, the whole thread (OP and some 200+ of the following posts) is devoted to the the exact opposite- worshiping "the hiatus {sic}". DO TRY, to keep up.
    LOL - what?

    The exact opposite of pointing out that the warming since 1998 is statistically meaningless is that the warming since 1998 is statistically meaningful, which has absolutely nothing to do with "worshiping the hiatus."

    Yes, you can play the game too, but you really suck at it.

Page 36 of 46 FirstFirst ... 263435363738 ... 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
  •