Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"[W:1000, 1660]

[Phys251]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

That's my point.

There is no legitimate source that shows the warming of CO2 in an atmospheric mix.

Please, if I'm wrong, find it. I have looked, and cannot find it. All I see are studies that reference past studies, and the root study referenced uses assumed warming of CO2 over the years to quantify it.

Again, if I am wrong. Please show me.

You're pulling a Ken Ham here. He, like you, chose not to understand that you can't just make a claim that boils down to "I don't like it" and expect that to somehow count for as least as much as all the thousands or even millions of hours of rigorous research devoted to the subject. If the claim is so false, then what's keeping you from finding a source to falsify it??

 

[flogger]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

That's my point.

There is no legitimate source that shows the warming of CO2 in an atmospheric mix.

Please, if I'm wrong, find it. I have looked, and cannot find it. All I see are studies that reference past studies, and the root study referenced uses assumed warming of CO2 over the years to quantify it.

Again, if I am wrong. Please show me.

And that's the whole issue right there. There is no empirical value for the climate sensitivity of CO2 anywhere within published literature so any hypothesis based upon it is therefore entirely speculative. That those arbitrarily ascribed values for it have obviously been far too great is borne out by the failure of the climate modelling to date all of which run far too hot

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

You're pulling a Ken Ham here. He, like you, chose not to understand that you can't just make a claim that boils down to "I don't like it" and expect that to somehow count for as least as much as all the thousands or even millions of hours of rigorous research devoted to the subject. If the claim is so false, then what's keeping you from finding a source to falsify it??

I see you fail to understand.

Please...

Show me a study that quantifies CO2 without saying "oh... co2 levels increase by X, and temperature increased by Y, so warming = (insert formula.)"

That's what they did!

I traced the sources.

Again, if i am wrong, please show me.

 

[blackjack50]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Climate change is real.

Our effect...unknown.

That is how I had a teacher explain it. The unknown is how much of climate change is man made, and how much is caused by changing climate that is normal?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

And that's the whole issue right there. There is no empirical value for the climate sensitivity of CO2 anywhere within published literature so any hypothesis based upon it is therefore entirely speculative. That those arbitrarily ascribed values for it have obviously been far too great is borne out by the failure of the climate modelling to date all of which run far too hot

Exactly.

they make these claims. In the IPCC's earlier works, the constant for the log formula (if i correctly remember) was something like 6.3. they referenced a study, that referenced another... etc... Later, Hansen changed it to I believe 5.35, with no rhyme or reason, excpet the original was obviously too high.

Guess what people... the 5.35 is still too high! see the top COP2 formula:

Not only did Hansen change the original 6.3 value to 5.35 from a different paper, but the third CO2 formula is his baby. Maybe I should have looked for his paper that it comes out of, and what he used for methodology.

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Exactly.

they make these claims. In the IPCC's earlier works, the constant for the log formula (if i correctly remember) was something like 6.3. they referenced a study, that referenced another... etc... Later, Hansen changed it to I believe 5.35, with no rhyme or reason, excpet the original was obviously too high.

Guess what people... the 5.35 is still too high! see the top COP2 formula:

Not only did Hansen change the original 6.3 value to 5.35 from a different paper, but the third CO2 formula is his baby. Maybe I should have looked for his paper that it comes out of, and what he used for methodology.

Love how you get these numbers from scientists (because we know you didnt do the original research your self) but when the scientists who study this stuff tell you unequivovally that AGW is real and is a problem, you object because you cant find the original studies that prove it. I'm sure a run of the mill chemist or physicist who knows this literature would totally blow you out of the water with this claim.

You say there is no proof of AGW forcing, and that you have calculated that it is not real. I cant determine the truth...its not really my area (much like steel stressors and high temperature fires arent my area with 911 truthers)

This is either absolutely absurd, or it is genius level thinking. I'm betting on absurd.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

The only studies i could trace, souce by source by source, lead to an 80's study that quatifies the atmospheric effect of CO2 useing correlation equaling causation.

I have been unable to find any studies that quantify the warming of CO2 in the atmosphere that are not speculation.

These people are claiming that CO2 has specific warming that is scientifically quantified... nowhere.

I suggest you find a study that quantifies CO2, and find their methodology. They are making claims that are showing to be impossible, because we have not been warning in sync with CO2.

This is so bizarre as to wonder if it is terrestrial or not. One has to have avoided most every climate science source on the planet to conclude this.

If you want one source with a great deal of explanation that might make up for shortages in your science education go to skepticalscience.com. If you want straight forward presentation of the science go to the IPCC site. If you want the most detailed step by step explanation attend the University of Chicago climate change lectures on YouTube.

But please don't just make up stuff because you wish that it was true.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

This is so bizarre as to wonder if it is terrestrial or not. One has to have avoided most every climate science source on the planet to conclude this.

OK, please provide me with the source.

If you want one source with a great deal of explanation the might make up for shortages in your science education go to skepticalscience.com.

Where do they link the study that quantifies CO2?

If you want straight forward presentation of the science go to the IPCC site.

Been there, done that. They reference a study that does not work on quantifying the sensitivity. It references another study, which again references another. The root source does not empirically quantify Co2.

If you want the most detailed step by step explanation attend the University of Chicago climate change lectures on YouTube.

Do they show the methodology for quantifying CO2 sensitivity?

Link please.

But please don't just make up stuff because you wish that it was true.

I'm not making any of this up. I have never seen a study that quantifies the sensitivity of CO2 in an atmosphere with any empirical evidence beyond correlation = causation.

If yo think I'm making it up, that such a study does not exist, then I would think you would jump on the chance to prove me wrong.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Climate change is real.

Our effect...unknown.

That is how I had a teacher explain it. The unknown is how much of climate change is man made, and how much is caused by changing climate that is normal?

We have an excellent handle on what causes climate to change. The one variable that explains the observed change in the current climate is the change that mankind has made in the concentrations of atmospheric green house gases due to the burning of fossil fuels. It matches the effects that are easily calculated and therefore expected.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

You say there is no proof of AGW forcing, and that you have calculated that it is not real. I cant determine the truth...its not really my area (much like steel stressors and high temperature fires arent my area with 911 truthers)

This is either absolutely absurd, or it is genius level thinking. I'm betting on absurd.

There you go lying again. Or... are you too daft to comprehend my words?

I have not calculated that CO2 forcing is not real. CO2 forcing is real. I am saying the forcing claimed by the alarmists is too high.

Serious... Are you a liar or are you that stupid? I wouldn't be so direct and impolite if this was uncommon, but you do this to damn frequently to not address your behavior on this.

Why do I have to keep correcting you on what I have said repeatedly? Seriously. How many times have I had to point this out?

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

OK, please provide me with the source.


Where do they link the study that quantifies CO2?


Been there, done that. They reference a study that does not work on quantifying the sensitivity. It references another study, which again references another. The root source does not empirically quantify Co2.


Do they show the methodology for quantifying CO2 sensitivity?

Link please.


I'm not making any of this up. I have never seen a study that quantifies the sensitivity of CO2 in an atmosphere with any empirical evidence beyond correlation = causation.

If yo think I'm making it up, that such a study does not exist, then I would think you would jump on the chance to prove me wrong.

Read the references that I posted. You can, of course continue to ignore the truth, but why would you?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Read the references that I posted. You can, of course continue to ignore the truth, but why would you?

Which reference? Which post is it in?

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

There you go lying again. Or... are you too daft to comprehend my words?

I have not calculated that CO2 forcing is not real. CO2 forcing is real. I am saying the forcing claimed by the alarmists is too high.


Why do I have to keep correcting you on what I have said repeatedly? Seriously. How many times have I had to point this out?

Great. In your conversations with climatologists, what have they said about this apparent discrepancy?

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Which reference? Which post is it in?

#907 is the post number.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

#907 is the post number.

I'm not going to search for links. I thought I missed a link you posted.

If you have a study that empirically quantifies CO2 sensitivity in the earth's atmosphere, I would love to see it.

Not a model mind you.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

I'm not going to search for links. I thought I missed a link you posted.

If you have a study that empirically quantifies CO2 sensitivity in the earth's atmosphere, I would love to see it.

Not a model mind you.

How do you predict the future without numerical experiments?

 

[theaterofdreams]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

So? Nice how it lacks what the debate is about...

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

How do you predict the future without numerical experiments?

Trying a trick question?

Well, first of all, you have to have confidence the predictions are based of empirical evidence.

Look...

I did spend several hours attempting to find any study that uses an empirical method to quantify Co2 sensitivity in the atmosphere. If you think of the numerous variables, it is next to impossible, if not... impossible.

I am waiting for a link to a paper to prove me wrong.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Trying a trick question?

Well, first of all, you have to have confidence the predictions are based of empirical evidence.

Look...

I did spend several hours attempting to find any study that uses an empirical method to quantify Co2 sensitivity in the atmosphere. If you think of the numerous variables, it is next to impossible, if not... impossible.

I am waiting for a link to a paper to prove me wrong.

What is your definition of an empirical method?

 

[flogger]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

What is your definition of an empirical method?

Good grief ! :shock: I can't believe you the alleged 'scientist' just posted that !

Thanks for the comic relief ! :lamo

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Good grief ! :shock: I can't believe you the alleged 'scientist' just posted that !

Thanks for the comic relief ! :lamo

I suspect that his definition, and probably yours, is different than sciences.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

This is one page from a useful hyperlinked site for learning about how physics explains AGW and has eliminated causes other than anthropogenic as significant contributors of what has been observed in the last 100 years.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/radfor.html#c1

 

[flogger]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

This is one page from a useful hyperlinked site for learning about how physics explains AGW and has eliminated causes other than anthropogenic as significant contributors of what has been observed in the last 100 years.

Radiative Forcing of Earth's Atmosphere

Its how such values are arrived at using (of necessity) non empirical methodologies that's the point in question.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Its how such values are arrived at using (of necessity) non empirical methodologies that's the point in question.

One could look that up, couldn't one.