[W:#101]Climate Change Rapidly Intensified Hurricane Ian Before Landfall

[bubbabgone]

You are simply confirming my post #559. Sorry, I don’t do videos and I am certainly not going to read a whole book based only on your say-so. This is a DISCUSSION forum. If you can’t summarize either of these books in your own words, then I guess that we are at an end.

You sound uninformed and you see no reason to change that condition by reading.
Maybe this thread will give you some idea of some things you're not aware of.

Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

Now we are getting to the long-awaited fundamental debate. Henrik Svensmark, Nir Shaviv and others have identified the mechanism by which solar interaction with galactic cosmic rays (GCR) influences Earth's climate. Their research strikes at the core of AGW orthodoxy, and will surely provoke a...

debatepolitics.com

"I just saw something very recently that showed the sun has been entering a weaker phase.
Weaker sun, more cosmic ray penetration to earth, more cosmic ray influence on cloud formation, cooler climate.
Since solar strength is and has always been cyclical (over short & long periods) and historically correlate to temperature fluctuation better than CO2, it does indicate that we're likely entering a period of cooling.
In "The Neglected Sun" Shaviv noted that between 2001 to 2007 the IPCC models halved the amount of impact from the sun ... they really don't consider amplification.
I'm afraid the IPCC is unshakably committed to CO2 and because of that, a few here on DP are too ... the WUWT link will only reinforce their determination to remain flat-earthers.
For those deniers I link to the actual paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2"

And "Unsettled" was mentioned in https://debatepolitics.com/threads/...eport-published.456661/page-2#post-1074418047

"And—a very key point—the IPCC’s ‘Summaries for Policymakers’ are heavily influenced, if not written, by governments that have interests in promoting particular policies. In short, there are many opportunities to corrupt the objectivity of the process and product.”" - Steven E. Koonin - Page 200 of "Unsettled"
Koonin was Obama's Department of Energy Undersecretary for Science.

 

[bubbabgone]

Still afraid to answer a basic question about the situation, I see.

I don't know what you're referring to.
A basic question would be what has caused decade long warming pauses over a century when CO2 has constantly been rising.
I asked you that and you never answered because the answer would confirm that the climate system is too complex to be driven by CO2.
Can you answer now?

 

[bubbabgone]

That makes no sense as an example. Please stick to the topic.

CO2 as a primary climate driving additive is your analogy and now you're running from it.
And you won't read books.
Gotta tell ya, you're not coming off too well here.

 

[watsup]

CO2 as a primary climate driving additive is your analogy and now you're running from it.
And you won't read books.
Gotta tell ya, you're not coming off too well here.

So I see that you have taken lessons from Lord and Glitch and have transitioned to personal insult mode rather than sticking directly to the topic. Why is that tactics so common among tje deniers?

 

[watsup]

CO2 as a primary climate driving additive is your analogy and now you're running from it.
And you won't read books.
Gotta tell ya, you're not coming off too well here.

Not running from anything. I am in complete concurrence with the mainstream climate scientists of the world over.

 

[watsup]

I don't know what you're referring to.
A basic question would be what has caused decade long warming pauses over a century when CO2 has constantly been rising.
I asked you that and you never answered because the answer would confirm that the climate system is too complex to be driven by CO2.
Can you answer now?

The basic question in any discussion about the present climate situation is: what is the trait of CO2 that can affect the atmosphere, and can the addition of more than 2000 billion metric tons added to it by human production cause a change in it? Can you answer that basic question?

 

[watsup]

You sound uninformed and you see no reason to change that condition by reading.
Maybe this thread will give you some idea of some things you're not aware of.

Svensmark Closes the Loop -- The Missing Link Between GCR's, Clouds and Climate

Now we are getting to the long-awaited fundamental debate. Henrik Svensmark, Nir Shaviv and others have identified the mechanism by which solar interaction with galactic cosmic rays (GCR) influences Earth's climate. Their research strikes at the core of AGW orthodoxy, and will surely provoke a...

debatepolitics.com

You want to re-hash a five-year-old thread that has already been discussed for 75 pages in which the OP has been thoroughly discredited? Really? Is that the best you can do?

 

[bubbabgone]

The basic question in any discussion about the present climate situation is: what is the trait of CO2 that can affect the atmosphere, and can the addition of more than 2000 billion metric tons added to it by human production cause a change in it? Can you answer that basic question?

You're running away again.
I asked you more than once what has caused decade long warming pauses over a century when CO2 has constantly been rising.
What's your answer?

 

[bubbabgone]

So I see that you have taken lessons from Lord and Glitch and have transitioned to personal insult mode rather than sticking directly to the topic. Why is that tactics so common among tje deniers?

I'm merely reporting what can be seen.
I guess it feels an insult.

 

[bubbabgone]

You want to re-hash a five-year-old thread that has already been discussed for 75 pages in which the OP has been thoroughly discredited? Really? Is that the best you can do?

You asked for help to understand the subject matter since "I [you] don’t do videos and I [you] am certainly not going to read a whole book" so I [me] helped.

Weaker sun, more cosmic ray penetration to earth, more cosmic ray influence on cloud formation, cooler climate.
Since solar strength is and has always been cyclical (over short & long periods) and historically correlate to temperature fluctuation better than CO2, it does indicate that we're likely entering a period of cooling.
In "The Neglected Sun" Shaviv noted that between 2001 to 2007 the IPCC models halved the amount of impact from the sun ... they really don't consider amplification.
I'm afraid the IPCC is unshakably committed to CO2 and because of that, a few here on DP are too ... the WUWT link will only reinforce their determination to remain flat-earthers.
For those deniers I link to the actual paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2

Since you weren't aware of the strength of those interacting influences on climate I trust you took the time to read the link to the source? Did you?

 

[watsup]

You're running away again.
I asked you more than once what has caused decade long warming pauses over a century when CO2 has constantly been rising.
What's your answer?

Any deflection at all to avoid answering THE basic question regarding CO2 in the atmosphere, I see.

As for your question, surely you understand that the steady rise in warming over the decades is a TREND and not a straight-line event. This is just basic science, so I’m not sure why there’s even a question, since it shows a misunderstanding of said basic science. The present year is not always going to be warmer than the previous year, but the overall trend has indeed been towards more atmospheric warmth since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. For instance, look up the temperature records of the last decade and see how many of them fall in record setting areas.

 

[watsup]

I'm merely reporting what can be seen.
I guess it feels an insult.

Thank you for proving my post #579.

 

[watsup]

You asked for help to understand the subject matter since "I [you] don’t do videos and I [you] am certainly not going to read a whole book" so I [me] helped.

Since you weren't aware of the strength of those interacting influences on climate I trust you took the time to read the link to the source? Did you?

It says that my browser is not up-to-date enough to show it. And what do you mean by “read the link”? There are 75 pages in that “link”. Yes, I see the few paragraphs that you posted, but they don’t mean much in a stand-alone mode.
Although I do note that you have the very same methodology of posting as do Lord and Glitch, which is heavy on generalized ad hom which basically adds NOTHING to serious and thoughtful discussion, as per “the WUWT link will only reinforce their determination to remain flat-earthers.”

 

[Peacenik]

Pure doomsayer gospel straight from the WEF hymsheet. Anything might happen at any time however improbable. Does that mean we must voluntarily impoverish ourselves just in case it does ?

Why would seeking unlimited free clean energy impoverish you? Have your personal taxes been raised because the government is subsidizing clean energy? Seems to me the last thing that happened with taxes was a tax cut, not a tax increase. Most of it went to the rich. The rest got a temporary cut, but that soon runs out. The cut the rich got was permanent. If you're in the temporary tax cut block like 99% of us are, and you're voting with Republicans, you're voting against your own better interests, voting with big money and you have to accept the big lie. You're also voting with racists and fascists. Cruel haters, mean selfish people who hate immigrants for no reason.

That's ridiculous. Immigrants built this country and immigrants are our future. The best thing we can do is to embrace that concept, let far more in, build up our workforce, ensure worker rights, get more people paying into Social Security and Medicare, build communities, build America back better!

Unless your heritage is 100% Native American, you are the product of immigrants. You came from immigrants. The US birthrate is below replacement. The only way our country grows is through immigration. The best thing we can do is to realize what makes America beautiful is the diversity of our multi-cultural population, and the vast range of knowledge and wisdom all those cultures bring us. We would be less if America was reduced to one bloodline, one background, one race, one culture. FAR less. It is hypocritical to be descendant from immigrants and fear immigrants. Just because they have different appearance and speak another language doesn't mean they don't want to be good Americans and build a strong American future together.

Many immigrants depended on natural weather cycles in Central America for food. Those cycles have changed. When plants are starved for water they become weak and susceptible to disease and pests. When farming communities are starved for water they become fractured and susceptible to drugs and gang activities, the human equivalent of social disease and pests. The people leaving these places would rather stay there and have the life they once loved. Things change. Nobody chooses to be a migrant without good reason for leaving the places they lived and loved.

People who resist climate action also resist sensible immigration policy. Coincidence?

 

[Peacenik]

I wonder if the same words were spoken about Eugenics?
We do not have proof, that the inferior races will destroy the world,
but Wisdom says we should assume the worst case is coming and prepare.
Think of all the jobs acquiring "living Space" will create.

"Big money energy corporations" Always remember to dehumanize anyone who offers resistance!

It is not patriotic, to question your betters!

Inflation was coming no matter who was in power, it happens any time a Government debases it's currency.

Remember the progressives burden is to force those who do not believe as they do,
to follow progressive beliefs anyway!

Inflation is world wide. The US has a lower inflation rate than much of the rest of the world, thanks to Biden and Democrats. People who don't know what's going on, people who are not every well informed politically, take the simpleton approach. "Economy not good. Blame party in power."

I've got a message for those who don't really know if Republicans might do better or not.

Don't expect billionaires to give you a break after ripping you off made them billions. Big money is supporting the big lie.

 

[bubbabgone]

Any deflection at all to avoid answering THE basic question regarding CO2 in the atmosphere, I see.

As for your question, surely you understand that the steady rise in warming over the decades is a TREND and not a straight-line event. This is just basic science, so I’m not sure why there’s even a question, since it shows a misunderstanding of said basic science. The present year is not always going to be warmer than the previous year, but the overall trend has indeed been towards more atmospheric warmth since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. For instance, look up the temperature records of the last decade and see how many of them fall in record setting areas.

And what caused the warming before before the industrial revolution?
Climate drivers like you insist CO2 is cannot be overridden by any influence for decades at a time. You have yet to explain why without having to admit other influences are stronger. That's my polite way of saying CO2 doesn't drive climate.
Something like climate is too complex to be driven by one influence but if you were looking to pick anything it would be "the sun".

 

[bubbabgone]

It says that my browser is not up-to-date enough to show it. And what do you mean by “read the link”? There are 75 pages in that “link”. Yes, I see the few paragraphs that you posted, but they don’t mean much in a stand-alone mode.
Although I do note that you have the very same methodology of posting as do Lord and Glitch, which is heavy on generalized ad hom which basically adds NOTHING to serious and thoughtful discussion, as per “the WUWT link will only reinforce their determination to remain flat-earthers.”

Nope , the link to the source at the end ... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2

 

[watsup]

And what caused the warming before before the industrial revolution?
Climate drivers like you insist CO2 is cannot be overridden by any influence for decades at a time. You have yet to explain why without having to admit other influences are stronger. That's my polite way of saying CO2 doesn't drive climate.
Something like climate is too complex to be driven by one influence but if you were looking to pick anything it would be "the sun".

Just more deflection. I’m going to quit commenting on yours posts until you honestly answer the very basic question which you have been deflecting forever. Why are you so afraid of it?

 

[watsup]

Inflation is world wide. The US has a lower inflation rate than much of the rest of the world, thanks to Biden and Democrats. People who don't know what's going on, people who are not every well informed politically, take the simpleton approach. "Economy not good. Blame party in power."

I've got a message for those who don't really know if Republicans might do better or not.

Don't expect billionaires to give you a break after ripping you off made them billions. Big money is supporting the big lie.

Especially since it is record profits of big companies that are now a huge driver of US inflation. Keep the people stupid about that, though.

 

[watsup]

Nope , the link to the source at the end ... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2

Again, it says that my browser is not up-to-date enough to capture the article. You read it. I would think that you could summarize it. Or just copy the summarization and post it. Anyway, here is a rebuttal from climate scientists:

“Scientists involved in related research, however, doubt the new findings make much difference to accepted climate models.

“The authors need to quantify the effects in an atmospheric model rather than just speculating,” says Ken Carslow, of the University of Leeds, UK, who has also studied potential links between cosmic rays and aerosol formation as part of CERN’s Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD) experiment. “It’s a tiny effect and previous studies suggest it will not be important,” he states.

Terry Sloan, of the University of Lancaster, UK, whose own research has calculated the contribution of cosmic rays at less than 10% of the global warming seen in the 20th century, is also dubious. He points out that other atmospheric “impurities”, such as dust and salt particles, play more important roles as cloud-condensing nuclei.

“The effects [of ionisation] are too small to measure except in the dust- and impurity-free atmosphere such as in their experiments,” Sloan says. “Dust in the atmosphere plays a much bigger part in cloud formation.”

Steven Sherwood concurs. The paper itself, he notes, only suggests the result “may be relevant in the Earth’s atmosphere under pristine conditions”. Even if things do work in the real world the same way as in a laboratory, cloud growth due to ions would only make up “several per cent” of the total.

“Several per cent ain’t much, and the real atmosphere is not pristine,” Sherwood says. While the new research has shown that cosmic rays can produce particles big enough to seed clouds, that was never “the real problem” with Svensmark’s ideas. A bigger issue is the number of such particles, which “would be negligible compared with the background aerosol and the aerosol humans are adding by burning things, tilling soil, etc.”

“If clouds were affected by cosmic rays,” he adds, “they would have been affected a hundred times more strongly by human air pollution, and the world would have cooled over the past century, rather than warmed.”

Cosmic ray theory of global warming

Henrik Svensmark has propounded a theory of “cosmoclimatology”, which holds that cosmic rays and sunspots are the real drivers of global warming.

cosmosmagazine.com

 

[flogger]

Why would seeking unlimited free clean energy impoverish you?

Because there is no such thing. If there were we would be doing it already. Renewables have failed due to their cost everywhere they have been tried to date and they've been around for a very long time now

 

[GOP Hippo]

Sorry, but mainstream climate scientists disagree with you by noting that, at least in the present case, warming is following the relatively rapid increase in CO2 due to human engineering. This has been discussed before and your claims are just not that convincing. Would you care to add a cite beyond just your say-so?

The mainstream climate scientists are making a great living under the climate change scare.
Climate change is the largest industry in the world. Bigger than health care.
Do you think they will admit that after 4,500,000,000 billion years there is no way the earth is in trouble bc man used oil for 150 years?

 

[flogger]

The mainstream climate scientists are making a great living under the climate change scare.
Climate change is the largest industry in the world. Bigger than health care.
Do you think they will admit that after 4,500,000,000 billion years there is no way the earth is in trouble bc man used oil for 150 years?

Its now worth considerably more annually than the entire global defence budget without any taxpayer accountability whatsoever . Why would anybody benefitting want to derail that gravy train with anything like facts or empirical science

 

[watsup]

The mainstream climate scientists are making a great living under the climate change scare.
Climate change is the largest industry in the world. Bigger than health care.
Do you think they will admit that after 4,500,000,000 billion years there is no way the earth is in trouble bc man used oil for 150 years?

What is the trait of CO2 that affects the atmosphere? Would this trait have a effect on the climate due to the excess CO2 that has been transferred to the atmosphere since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution?

 

[GOP Hippo]

What is the trait of CO2 that affects the atmosphere? Would this trait have a effect on the climate due to the excess CO2 that has been transferred to the atmosphere since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution?

That's scary.
Here's a fact- Las Vegas daily average temperatures were the same in 2021 as they were in 1917. A degree more here or a degree less there. That data includes averagrs for every five years from 1917 to 2021.
Maybe that's why so many freighted Californians keep moving here. CO2 scary things also have not changed our temps.