quote:I wonder if Captain Rick's usage of aerosol hairspray was the sole cause of the Holocene Climate Optimum event?
Originally posted by Fishb8Here is proof that CLIMATE CHANGE happens…
Donate to any cancer charity you wish.
The funnies part about this graph is the HIGHER the preceding “warming” period, the lesser the ice age… Hmmmm… So, the MORE ice caps we melt, the lesser the ice age… Something doesn’t sound right…
quote:
Originally posted by skinneejLet’s be honest though… We don’t need to worry about global warming anymore… We have a good answer for it:
I watched the new transformers movie this weekend… I now know what happened to the dinosaurs.
What about it OFM… what was the percentage of error for temperature measurement across the globe 80 years ago?
quote:
Originally posted by Fishb8Here is proof that CLIMATE CHANGE happens…
Donate to any cancer charity you wish.
[/quote]
So climate change happens naturally…Well, what happens when you throw gas on a fire that “happens naturally”?
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
quote:
Originally posted by skinneej
So what you are telling me is that I need 15 volcanic eruptions between now and April/May 2015 to bring the yellowfin back to their 1998 levels at the Georgetown Hole?
Do not tell fish stories where the people know you; but particularly, don’t tell them where they know the fish.
31’ Contender
“Touche”
250 HPDIs
OK OFM - the assertion is that we’re pouring gas on the fire. The foundation of that assertion is that the global climate models predict more rapid warming than would happen sans human CO2 contributions.
Please note the following. Actual, temperatures… actual measured temperature data sets show substantially less warming than the models predict. So, if we’re not warming nearly as quickly as the models predict, how can you claim that the human contribution to CO2 is significant? You can’t. Not only that, the disparity between the measured data and the model output INVALIDATES the models.
No one claims that the greenhouse effect is not real. No one claims that adding CO2 to the mix should increase that effect. We non-alarmist types, do claim that the contributed CO2 is not significant.
Below, the red line is the middle of the model prediction range. The blue line is actual measured data. The fact that the measured data falls outside of the error ranges of the models necessarily invalidates the models. Unless you have other science upon which to base your claims, you have no case.
17’ Henry O Hornet
26’ Palmer Scott
It is 79 here in Columbia today. I’m freezing. Is that global warming?
“Apathy is the Glove into Which Evil Slips It’s Hand”.
Stupid is as stupid does… and you can’t fix it !!
(should not have checked the off-topic forums, what was I thinking)
Maybe, just once, someone will call me “sir” without adding, “you’re making a scene.”
(Homer Simpson)
quote:
Originally posted by PalmerScottOK OFM - the assertion is that we’re pouring gas on the fire. The foundation of that assertion is that the global climate models predict more rapid warming than would happen sans human CO2 contributions.
Please note the following. Actual, temperatures… actual measured temperature data sets show substantially less warming than the models predict. So, if we’re not warming nearly as quickly as the models predict, how can you claim that the human contribution to CO2 is significant? You can’t. Not only that, the disparity between the measured data and the model output INVALIDATES the models.
No one claims that the greenhouse effect is not real. No one claims that adding CO2 to the mix should increase that effect. We non-alarmist types, do claim that the contributed CO2 is not significant.
Below, the red line is the middle of the model prediction range. The blue line is actual measured data. The fact that the measured data falls outside of the error ranges of the models necessarily invalidates the models. Unless you have other science upon which to base your claims, you have no case.
17’ Henry O Hornet
26’ Palmer Scott
There are always going to be extremists but that doesn’t change all the data that we have. Do I think the earth will melt tomorrow, no. Do I think we are causing damage to our environment, yes. There is no way to deny the effects of climate change. For every cause there is effect. Newton’s third law of physics, for very action there is an equal and opposite reactio
quote:
Originally posted by on a fishin missionquote:
Originally posted by PalmerScottOK OFM - the assertion is that we’re pouring gas on the fire. The foundation of that assertion is that the global climate models predict more rapid warming than would happen sans human CO2 contributions.
Please note the following. Actual, temperatures… actual measured temperature data sets show substantially less warming than the models predict. So, if we’re not warming nearly as quickly as the models predict, how can you claim that the human contribution to CO2 is significant? You can’t. Not only that, the disparity between the measured data and the model output INVALIDATES the models.
No one claims that the greenhouse effect is not real. No one claims that adding CO2 to the mix should increase that effect. We non-alarmist types, do claim that the contributed CO2 is not significant.
Below, the red line is the middle of the model prediction range. The blue line is actual measured data. The fact that the measured data falls outside of the error ranges of the models necessarily invalidates the models. Unless you have other science upon which to base your claims, you have no case.
17’ Henry O Hornet
26’ Palmer Scott
There are always going to be extremists but that doesn’t change all the data that we have. Do I think the earth will melt tomorrow, no. Do I think we are causing damage to our environment, y
I think you forgot that the heritage foundation gave him $90,000.00 to make his website.
You didn’t answer my question, what does co2 do in the atmosphere. What’s its role in greenhouse effect?
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
quote:
Originally posted by on a fishin missionI think you forgot that the heritage foundation gave him $90,000.00 to make his website.
You didn’t answer my question, what does co2 do in the atmosphere. What’s its role in greenhouse effect?
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
May be true.
I’ve never heard that.
Can you point me to some substantiation?
And, from just a couple of posts up…
quote:
No one claims that the greenhouse effect is not real. No one claims that adding CO2 to the mix should increase that effect. We non-alarmist types, do claim that the contributed CO2 is not significant.
The models severely overstate the warming.
Real measured data proves it.
Until there is some other basis for the prediction of dangerous levels of warming, you have no basis for your assert that it is dangerous.
UPDATE
I did find one reference to Watts getting money from The Heartland Institute. That was apparently to setup a completely different website that would simply make NOAA data available with some charting functionality… since, at the time, NOAA wasn’t doing it.
So, still, your assertion of Big Oil and Heartland corrupting the situation, I think the AGU is more in the tank with Big Oil than we skeptics ever could be.
17’ Henry O Hornet
26’ Palmer Scott
quote:
Originally posted by on a fishin missionquote:
Originally posted by Fishb8Here is proof that CLIMATE CHANGE happens…
Donate to any cancer charity you wish.
So climate change happens naturally…Well, what happens when you throw gas on a fire that “happens naturally”?
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
[/quote]
Still waiting on this answer…
Now please explain how greenhouse gases caused the Holocene Climate Optimum?
Also, please explain what “gas” was thrown on the fire during that period.
Look at the chart…exactly when was this gas thrown in???
quote:
Originally posted by Fishb8quote:
Originally posted by on a fishin missionquote:
Originally posted by Fishb8Here is proof that CLIMATE CHANGE happens…
Donate to any cancer charity you wish.
So climate change happens naturally…Well, what happens when you throw gas on a fire that “happens naturally”?
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
Still waiting on this answer…
Now please explain how greenhouse gases caused the Holocene Climate Optimum?
Also, please explain what “gas” was thrown on the fire during that period.
Look at the chart…exactly when was this gas thrown in???
[/quote]
The holocene climate optimum was caused by orbital rotation of the earth in which the earth’s northern hemisphere was pointed at the sun for roughly a couple hundred years. There was no human influence. The earth goes thru “natural” climate swings. My point was what would happen if these “natural” swings occurred at a point where co2 was 400ppm, as it is today. During the holocene optimim period co2 levels were 200ppm, if the same orbital rotation happened today it would have doubled the temperature rise seen in the holocene optimim period. That is the fuel I was talking about.
Now if P
“There was no human influence. The earth goes thru “natural” climate swings.”
DUH
Reposting what I’ve already reposted, because, OFM can’t find it…
quote:
And, from just a couple of posts up.....quote:
No one claims that the greenhouse effect is not real. No one claims that adding CO2 to the mix should increase that effect. We non-alarmist types, do claim that the contributed CO2 is not significant.
And,
quote:--------------------------- 17' Henry O Hornet 26' Palmer Scott
The models severely overstate the warming. Real measured data proves it. Until there is some other basis for the prediction of dangerous levels of warming, you have no basis for your assert that it is dangerous.
quote:
Originally posted by on a fishin missionThe holocene climate optimum was caused by orbital rotation of the earth in which the earth’s northern hemisphere was pointed at the sun for roughly a couple hundred years. There was no human influence. The earth goes thru “natural” climate swings. My point was what would happen if these “natural” swings occurred at a point where co2 was 400ppm, as it is today. During the holocene optimim period co2 levels were 200ppm, if the same orbital rotation happened today it would have doubled the temperature rise seen in the holocene optimim period. That is the fuel I was talking about.
Now if Palmer would answer what is co2’s part in the greenhouse effect we could get on with this lesson.
Wowweeee! Where the modern hypercomplex global climate models using thousands of parameters can’t describe our current climate dynamics, you are able to definitively and accurately describe the climate dynamics of the Holocene with 2 or 3 parameters.
Absolutely Amazing!
You’re in the wrong profession, OFM.
17’ Henry O Hornet
26’ Palmer Scott
quote:
Originally posted by Fishb8“There was no human influence. The earth goes thru “natural” climate swings.”
DUH
So as I stated earlier, what happens if co2 is at 400ppm while one of these “natural” climate swings happen?
What happens when you throw “gas” on a “fire” that has already started?
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
quote:
Originally posted by PalmerScottquote:
Originally posted by on a fishin missionThe holocene climate optimum was caused by orbital rotation of the earth in which the earth’s northern hemisphere was pointed at the sun for roughly a couple hundred years. There was no human influence. The earth goes thru “natural” climate swings. My point was what would happen if these “natural” swings occurred at a point where co2 was 400ppm, as it is today. During the holocene optimim period co2 levels were 200ppm, if the same orbital rotation happened today it would have doubled the temperature rise seen in the holocene optimim period. That is the fuel I was talking about.
Now if Palmer would answer what is co2’s part in the greenhouse effect we could get on with this lesson.
Wowweeee! Where the modern hypercomplex global climate models using thousands of parameters can’t describe our current climate dynamics, you are able to definitively and accurately describe the climate dynamics of the Holocene with 2 or 3 parameters.
Absolutely Amazing!
You’re in the wrong profession, OFM.
17’ Henry O Hornet
26’ Palmer Scott
That is a condensed version, but you know it is correct. There are several other factors that played into it but I believe everyone got my drift. If you really want me to go into detail, I can. It’s really a cool time in history and very easy to backtrack astrological data. Thru ice samples we can see exactly what happened during this time.
No one claims that the greenhouse effect is not real. No one claims that adding CO2 to the mix should increase that e
The models severely overstate the warming.
Real measured data proves it.
Until there is some other basis for the prediction of dangerous levels of warming, you have no basis for your assert that it is dangerous.
Some of the models do overstate the warming but the real measured data, as you call it, is consistent in the fact that we are warming at levels unseen in human history!
I just want to know why you won’t tell people what co2 does, I’m beginning to think you’ve been arguing against climate change and don’t even know what co2 does. Its ok though, most people that dont believe in climate change have no idea what co2 does either.
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
