Carbon dioxide causes 80% of global warming

[longview]

You first. You are the one who claims “subtractive method”. Show your source for making such a statement.

I already did with a statement from the American Geophysical Union, and from your citation from National Academy of Science.
When they say something like " but measurements of those changes today cannot explain the current levels of warming that we are experiencing "
they are saying they have subtracted out all the other known changes.

 

[Steve Case]

You never did provide one of your excellent graphs of the changes to the GISS temperature records that doesn't include a version change. Is it because it would prove your claim that all the monthly recalculations are always biased warm is wrong?

Here are the changes made to version 2, the earliest one that I have 1st and last files for:

 

[watsup]

I already did with a statement from the American Geophysical Union, and from your citation from National Academy of Science.
When they say something like " but measurements of those changes today cannot explain the current levels of warming that we are experiencing "
they are saying they have subtracted out all the other known changes.

Whatever. So what? They can also measure the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, which is what they do. Where did the excess CO2 over “natural” come from?

 

[longview]

Whatever. So what? They can also measure the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, which is what they do. Where did the excess CO2 over “natural” come from?

Humans are emitting CO2, and contributing the the increase in atmospheric CO2 level, I was not saying we were not!
The does not change the question about how we know how much of the observed warming can be attributed to human
emitted CO2, or the increase in CO2 in general.
Your own quote supported my assertion that they are basing the attribution on the remainder after the known
causes of warming have been subtracted off!

 

[watsup]

Humans are emitting CO2, and contributing the the increase in atmospheric CO2 level, I was not saying we were not!
The does not change the question about how we know how much of the observed warming can be attributed to human
emitted CO2, or the increase in CO2 in general.
Your own quote supported my assertion that they are basing the attribution on the remainder after the known
causes of warming have been subtracted off!

Again, so what? They can know for certain how much is in the atmosphere. They can know from historical records how much there normally should be, so where does the excess come from? There is only one scientific answer.
You

 

[longview]

Again, so what? They can know for certain how much is in the atmosphere. They can know from historical records how much there normally should be, so where does the excess come from? There is only one scientific answer.
You

You say "so what" but it is the critical question of AGW, how much of the observed warming can be attributed
to the observed increase in CO2 levels?
From the position of knowing how much warming is from increases in CO2, we could predict what future
CO2 level increases would cause.

 

[Buzz]

Here are the changes made to version 2, the earliest one that I have 1st and last files for:

O.k... two things. First, your graph lists three sources. And knowing your past erroneous calculations concerning the monthly updates, I would like to see the raw data. Do you have any links?

 

[Media_Truth]

Humans are emitting CO2, and contributing the the increase in atmospheric CO2 level, I was not saying we were not!
The does not change the question about how we know how much of the observed warming can be attributed to human
emitted CO2, or the increase in CO2 in general.
Your own quote supported my assertion that they are basing the attribution on the remainder after the known
causes of warming have been subtracted off!

I don't know why you are getting all bent out of shape about the effects of feedbacks. Even IPCC-cited research scientists have different RCP scenarios. Some think the feedbacks are going to be worse than others;

 

[Steve Case]

O.k... two things. First, your graph lists three sources. And knowing your past erroneous calculations concerning the monthly updates, I would like to see the raw data. Do you have any links?

The three sources are the current internet page to NASA’s Land Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI), and headers for the first and last publications of LOTI’s Version 2. The link to the current version is just so you can see what the data format looks like. Direct links to the Internet Archives Wayback Machine for the two links to version 2 will have to wait until Thursday as I am away from home on an IPad.

In the mean time if you Google “gistemp” you should be able to find the current version of LOTI. All I am ding is plotting the difference between Jan/Dec average from the two version 2 publications.

 

[longview]

I don't know why you are getting all bent out of shape about the effects of feedbacks. Even IPCC-cited research scientists have different RCP scenarios. Some think the feedbacks are going to be worse than others;

If the feedback are minimal as they are with the observed data, then the IPCC's basis for alarm is defective!

 

[Media_Truth]

If the feedback are minimal as they are with the observed data, then the IPCC's basis for alarm is defective!

You'll have to provide a link for that whopper. And please provide from a reputable scientific organization.

 

[Robertinfremont]

“Radiative forcing increased by 32 per cent between 1990 and 2012, of wich 25 per cent is due to carbon dioxide. The remaining is from other greenhouse gases.
Carbon dioxide, mainly from fossil-fuel-related emissions, accounted for 80 per cent of global warming since 1990 according to the World Meteorological Organization’s (WMO) latest report from November 2013. Between 1990 and 2012 there was more than a 25 per cent increase in radiative forcing – the warming effect on our climate – because of carbon dioxide (CO2).

Carbon dioxide is the single most important greenhouse gas emitted by human activities such as fossil fuel burning and deforestation. CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for hundreds if not thousands of years and so will determine global mean surface warming by the late 21st century and beyond, states the WMO. “Most aspects of climate change will persist for centuries even if emissions of CO2 are stopped immediately.”

The WMO says that on the global scale, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere reached 393.1 parts per million in 2012, or 141 per cent of the pre-industrial level of 278 parts per million. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increased by 2.2 parts per million from 2011 to 2012, which is above the average 2.02 parts per million per year for the past 10 years, showing an accelerating trend.”

Carbon dioxide causes 80% of global warming | Air Pollution & Climate Secretariat

Radiative forcing increased by 32 per cent between 1990 and 2012, of wich 25 per cent is due to carbon dioxide. The remaining is from other greenhouse gases.

www.airclim.org

Do you think your messages are getting through to China or to India?

 

[watsup]

Do you think your messages are getting through to China or to India?

Ah yes, yet another standard denier talking point. You are very good at them!

 

[Robertinfremont]

Ah yes, yet another standard denier talking point. You are very good at them!

No, you diverted from a good question

 

[longview]

You'll have to provide a link for that whopper. And please provide from a reputable scientific organization.

The feedbacks from the recorded pre1950 .258C warming to 2011 is only .033C, after accounting for
all of the forcing the IPCC said happened between 1950 and 2011.
If ECS were actually 3C, it would require feedback warming of (.258 X 2.72) -,258 =.44C, over 10 times
larger than the observed feedbacks.

 

[watsup]

No, you diverted from a good question

See my post #63.

 

[Robertinfremont]

See my post #63.

See my post #62

 

[Steve Case]

O.k... two things. First, your graph lists three sources. And knowing your past erroneous calculations concerning the monthly updates, I would like to see the raw data. Do you have any links?

Here are the links:

2005:
12/1981-11/2005 Reynolds v2

2010:
12/1981-01/2010 Reynolds v2

Current 2021:
ERSST v5 1880-01/2021

Here are the column headers:
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year

If you want to duplicate the graph from my post, you need to
take the difference down the J-D column between 2010-2005
and plot it out.

So for 1880 the J-D value for 2010 is -28 and for 2005 it is -22
and it follows that (-28)-(-22)=(-6) and (-6)/100=(-0.06) and
-0.06°C is the first value on the chart.

 

[Robertinfremont]

As to Carbon Dioxide being the blame for heating,

Submarines operate at very high internal conditions of high levels of Carbon Dioxide.

This has to mean submarines are very hot, correct?

But actually Submarines to stay warm have the internal temperatures raised by heaters.

The alarmists discount totally that the ocean for Submarines plus space for Earth as well as Clouds are excellent sources of cooling.


How hot is it in a submarine?
39 degrees Fahrenheit

The temperature of the ocean surrounding the submarine is typically 39 degrees Fahrenheit (4 degrees Celsius). The metal of the submarine conducts internal heat to the surrounding water. So, submarines must be electrically heated to maintain a comfortable temperature for the crew.

Life Support - How Submarines Work | HowStuffWorks
science.howstuffworks.com › ... › Engines & Equipment

 

[watsup]

As to Carbon Dioxide being the blame for heating,

Submarines operate at very high internal conditions of high levels of Carbon Dioxide.

This has to mean submarines are very hot, correct?

But actually Submarines to stay warm have the internal temperatures raised by heaters.

The alarmists discount totally that the ocean for Submarines plus space for Earth as well as Clouds are excellent sources of cooling.


How hot is it in a submarine?
39 degrees Fahrenheit

The temperature of the ocean surrounding the submarine is typically 39 degrees Fahrenheit (4 degrees Celsius). The metal of the submarine conducts internal heat to the surrounding water. So, submarines must be electrically heated to maintain a comfortable temperature for the crew.
Life Support - How Submarines Work | HowStuffWorks
science.howstuffworks.com › ... › Engines & Equipment

What about all the human-produced CO2 that has been spewed into the atmosphere since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution?

 

[Robertinfremont]

What about all the human-produced CO2 that has been spewed into the atmosphere since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution?

For the major advances made to civilization including adding more freedom globally, I will take a few tenths of a degree temp for the benefits to civilization using fuels.

 

[watsup]

For the major advances made to civilization including adding more freedom globally, I will take a few tenths of a degree temp for the benefits to civilization using fuels.

Freedom to experience more extreme weather events such as coastal and in-country flooding? You are such an empathetic person.

 

[longview]

Freedom to experience more extreme weather events such as coastal and in-country flooding? You are such an empathetic person.

What evidence do you have that recent weather activity, would not have happened without Human emitted CO2?

 

[Robertinfremont]

Freedom to experience more extreme weather events such as coastal and in-country flooding? You are such an empathetic person.

That is not happening. But yes, the auto, the truck, the ambulance, the airplane, the passenger ships, all make life worth the effort.

 

[watsup]

What evidence do you have that recent weather activity, would not have happened without Human emitted CO2?

Again: does increased warmth in the Gulf and elsewhere in the ocean add to the strength of hurricanes? Does increased warmth in the air allow clouds to retain more moisture and thus potentially DROP more moisture in a particular area? "Triggering", per se, is not the problem, but how air and ocean warmth then affects said systems.