• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The absurdity of climate change denialists

This is a better answer, but you do create a confusion in the way you speak of "net."
It does not help that the studies use different terminology themselves.
Observational Assessment of Changes in Earth’s Energy Imbalance Since 2000
In this study they use,
absorbed solar radiation (ASR)
outgoing longwave radiation (OLR)
net top-of-atmosphere flux (NET)
sea-surface temperature (SST)
Earth’s radiation budget (ERB)
Earth’s Energy Imbalance, or EEI)
What seems to be missing is the other side of OLR.
 
What is they correct the meteorological data to reflect what they want it to be? There is no accuracy to get that for numbers. It wouldn't be the first time "fudging" the numbers was done. It is always done in earth energy budget numbers. They even say so in the studies.
You really do think this thread is an audition thread, dontcha?
 
From What I have been reading we are causing the reduction in cloud cover.
Changing the sky: FSU researchers examine how aerosols from ships affect cloud formation, climate change
I think the ship track clouds are a minor representative of what air pollution controls in the 1970's did.
Yep.

How long now have I been pointing out that we know without doubt that aerosols affect cloud formation and precipitation?

We know certain factors affect the climate that are so much easier to mitigate than CO2, but the cult members are ignorant and deny anything that is not part of their dogma.
 
It does not help that the studies use different terminology themselves.
Observational Assessment of Changes in Earth’s Energy Imbalance Since 2000
In this study they use,

What seems to be missing is the other side of OLR.
I think they purposely convoluted the conversation at times. What you listed however do have specific meanings. Something more specification is needed. Insolation for example is specific to solar radiation, but is normally specified as either the TOA or surface. But is can be the cloud insolation also.
 
No what is missing is any evidence and sources from you deniers. So you just make things up.
How is the satellite data recording that the Outbound Longwave Radiation is increasing, Made up?
 
Back
Top Bottom