Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Odds that global warming is due to natural factors: slim to none [GIGO}
publications.mcgill.ca ^ | Saturday, April 12, 2014

Posted on 04/12/2014 7:01:26 PM PDT by BenLurkin

To assess the natural variability before much human interference, the new study uses “multi-proxy climate reconstructions” developed by scientists in recent years to estimate historical temperatures, as well as fluctuation-analysis techniques from nonlinear geophysics. The climate reconstructions take into account a variety of gauges found in nature, such as tree rings, ice cores, and lake sediments. And the fluctuation-analysis techniques make it possible to understand the temperature variations over wide ranges of time scales.

For the industrial era, Lovejoy’s analysis uses carbon-dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels as a proxy for all man-made climate influences – a simplification justified by the tight relationship between global economic activity and the emission of greenhouse gases and particulate pollution, he says. “This allows the new approach to implicitly include the cooling effects of particulate pollution that are still poorly quantified in computer models,” he adds.

(Excerpt) Read more at publications.mcgill.ca ...


TOPICS: Weather; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 04/12/2014 7:01:26 PM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
“multi-proxy climate reconstructions”

I have the text of the computer simulation right here:

print "It's Global Warming!"

2 posted on 04/12/2014 7:04:48 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Yeah, we know just like the world food shortage, Peak oil and acid rain. And what all else. Socialism masquerading as environmentalism.


3 posted on 04/12/2014 7:05:21 PM PDT by amnestynone (Lindsey Graham is a feckless, duplicitous, treacherous, double dealing backstabbing corksucker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Dangit, not another headache. Oh well, back to FR.


4 posted on 04/12/2014 7:06:40 PM PDT by Delta Dawn (Fluent in two languages: English and cursive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Somebody been hittin’ da happy smoke.


5 posted on 04/12/2014 7:13:29 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Obama's smidgens are coming home to roost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Anthony Watts has a summary of this paper, a link to a rebuttal, and some choice comments over at Watts up with that:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/11/claim-odds-that-global-warming-is-due-to-natural-factors-slim-to-none/


6 posted on 04/12/2014 7:20:07 PM PDT by norwaypinesavage (for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Odds that the globe is warming significantly: slim to none.


7 posted on 04/12/2014 7:21:20 PM PDT by beethovenfan (If Islam is the solution, the "problem" must be freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

There are an astounding number of factors that they deliberately ignore, I don’t know how they can take themselves seriously.

Don’t tell them that another 5% closer to the sun and we’ll be out of the habitable zone. They’ll be looking for ways to move the earth away.


8 posted on 04/12/2014 7:21:40 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All


Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


9 posted on 04/12/2014 7:24:18 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

You know summer is coming when climate change becomes global warming.


10 posted on 04/12/2014 7:25:44 PM PDT by 867V309 (Obammy = LIAR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

What caused the Ice Age? Why did the ice later melt?


11 posted on 04/12/2014 7:27:48 PM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

ANYTHING that The Mann has touched is totally bogus.


12 posted on 04/12/2014 7:33:14 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Oh it must be right because NEVER before in all of recorded history have we experienced global warming or cooling...That mini ice age in the 1700s was all made up and imaginary. Only now are we lucky enough to have one such as Al Gore to tell us the truth.

Was that snarky enough?


13 posted on 04/12/2014 7:34:16 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
McGill didn't,by any chance,explain how “Greenland” got its name,did they?
14 posted on 04/12/2014 7:34:50 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Stalin Blamed The Kulaks,Obama Blames The Tea Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I would put the sun and volcanos at the top of the list, but then I’m not a climate scientist.


15 posted on 04/12/2014 7:36:50 PM PDT by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

So how did the Medieval and Roman warming periods happen?


16 posted on 04/12/2014 7:42:43 PM PDT by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian

You nailed it morphing! Sun’s effect dwarfs any human factors, but if there is a second influence, volcanic ash would be a strong candidate. The Iceland volcanoes spilled thousands if not millions of times as much particulate matter into the atmosphere in a single year as all of human activity ever did. Media ignoring that, of course.


17 posted on 04/12/2014 7:42:57 PM PDT by Missouri gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

now I could be wrong, but I’m fairly certain all the global warminig comes from the sun and last i checked, the sun is considered ‘natural’

of course, the flaming libtards know better... via their drug induced haze... so maybe they should babble on some more

oh, I’ll never endorse ANY money for their ‘research’ but they’re more then welcome to babble away


18 posted on 04/12/2014 7:44:08 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

George Bush caused it. He did it in Texas with a fracking...thing


19 posted on 04/12/2014 7:45:29 PM PDT by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage

Love Watts. The comments are great too. David l. had it exactly correct when he quoted Rutherford


20 posted on 04/12/2014 7:46:08 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Missouri gal

It would seem that all human effort to curtail warming (when it happens) would pale in comparison to increased solar captivity or a Pinatubo or other large eruption.

I understand the control issue, but they are fighting basic intuition and logic IMO.


21 posted on 04/12/2014 7:50:13 PM PDT by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
To assess the natural variability before much human interference, the new study uses “multi-proxy climate reconstructions” developed by scientists in recent years to estimate historical temperatures, as well as fluctuation-analysis techniques from nonlinear geophysics. The climate reconstructions take into account a variety of gauges found in nature, such as tree rings, ice cores, and lake sediments. And the fluctuation-analysis techniques make it possible to understand the temperature variations over wide ranges of time scales.

Pseudo-science Psychobabble BS.
Translation : We got a new computer simulation, and no, you can't get the coding for it.

That's private.

Uh huh.
Same old BS.
New set of perps.

22 posted on 04/12/2014 7:59:55 PM PDT by publius911 ( At least Nixon had the good g race to resign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy; All
Regarding the title of the referenced article, while I am open to the possibility that repeatable, scientific method-based experiments will one day be designed which will reasonably show if global warming exists in the first place, I don't believe that such experiments have been demonstrated at this point in time. Corrections welcome.
Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

23 posted on 04/12/2014 8:02:49 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hugin

It was the heat of the friction caused by the clashing of swords in battle, of course.


24 posted on 04/12/2014 8:27:43 PM PDT by bobo1 (progressives=commies/fascists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
The key fallacy is the concept of 'natural variability.' That term does not mean the same thing as 'due to a natural cause.' The use of that term is an intentional attempt to deceive, because they know most people will think that a showing that "natural variability" is unlikely means that a natural (non-human) cause is therefore likely. But that is simply not true.

The term 'natural variability' refers to random fluctuations in the climate. But it leaves out non-random causes of climate change, such as the Sun, changes in volcanic activity, changes in cosmic ray density, changes in the orbit of the Earth around the Sun, and other possible causes--some of which we may in fact not even realize could be contributing factors, including human activity having nothing to do with emissions of carbon dioxide.

The Null Hypothesis with respect to AGW is not that climate change is due mostly to 'natural variability,' it is that that climate change is mostly due to natural factors of any sort, whether those are random variations/fluctuations or are something else. And the Null Hypothesis has not been disproven. Had it been, the peer-reviewed paper or papers which presented such disproof would be the most cited paper(s) in all of climate science (and perhaps in all of science for the last many decades.)

25 posted on 04/12/2014 8:37:06 PM PDT by sourcery (Valid rights must be perfectly reciprocal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

GLOBALONEY BULLSHIT is what it is!


26 posted on 04/12/2014 8:43:28 PM PDT by Taxman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beethovenfan

“Odds that the globe is warming significantly: slim to none.”

I have yet to get a straight answer as to why it is asserted that Earth’s atmosphere has warmed significantly, and is continuing to get warmer. Are there ostensibly reliable instrument-based measurements? The graphs plotted to illustrate the “estimates” based on 73 different models are all over the page. See
www.thegwpf.org/epic-fail-73-climate models vs. observations.


27 posted on 04/12/2014 8:52:02 PM PDT by Elsiejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

“According to new studies” there never was a warm period such as led to the extinction of dinosaurs. Dinosaurs are still around, just look at Democrats in politics.


28 posted on 04/12/2014 8:52:14 PM PDT by Rembrandt (Part of the 51% who pay Federal taxes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

That right there warms my global.


29 posted on 04/12/2014 9:12:39 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

In plain English, they don’t know crap about what they just said. Bury the people in psychobabble and gobbledegook, repeat it enough, and they are brainwashed beyond redemption.

Historical precedent: Joseph Goebbels and Joe Stalin’s “Big Lies” campaign. Sadly, they worked too well.

A better term for Co2 emissions should be “Red House gases”, eminating from the “Red House” in DC and the insane asylum in East Anglia and the UN.


30 posted on 04/12/2014 9:45:56 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I forgot to mention that McGill Un. has been the center of marxist thought in Canada since the late 1960’s. Seems that nothing has changed.


31 posted on 04/12/2014 9:48:30 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Someone post the “Aw Geez, not this shit again” guy.


32 posted on 04/12/2014 9:58:08 PM PDT by JaguarXKE (1973: Reporters investigate All the President's Men. 2013: Reporters ARE all the President's men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

... because for the first several BILLION years before mankind made its appearance nature kept the climate steady. ... Er, wait, no. The climate has been, is, and will continue to be in a continual state of flux. In that light the chances of climate change being caused by mankind are virtually zero. The real question is mankind altering the characteristics of this natural phenomenon?


33 posted on 04/12/2014 10:16:54 PM PDT by ThunderSleeps (Stop obarma now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

The scientific method is a way of either confirming or disproving a hypothesis. If this latest “evidence” doesn’t confirm the findings of previous models, one must conclude that previous models are invalid, or that this newest one is.


34 posted on 04/12/2014 10:34:02 PM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ThunderSleeps

Bookmark


35 posted on 04/12/2014 10:36:34 PM PDT by publius911 ( At least Nixon had the good g race to resign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: musicman

“Statistics?? Well if you have one foot in boiling water and the other in iced water, statistically you should be quite comfortable.”

I thought that was a great quote.


36 posted on 04/13/2014 12:18:33 AM PDT by bobo1 (progressives=commies/fascists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

If Glo-Bull warming can’t be because of “natural factors” then I posit that our own existence cannot be due to same natural factors....


37 posted on 04/13/2014 4:37:13 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
The anthropogenic global warming apologists draw from a seemingly bottomless well of stupidity.
Even were one to accept the illogical premise that human activity changes the climate (despite the accepted recognition that huge prehistoric climate changes caused the various ice ages and the intervening warm periods) is human activity not a natural factor?
Are we to believe that humans wield some unnatural, alien, supernatural, magical forces when they cause the climate changes that, unfortunately for the apologists, is not happening?
38 posted on 04/13/2014 5:17:13 AM PDT by Amagi (Lenin: "Socialized Medicine is the Keystone to the Arch of the Socialist State.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson