Global Warming on Free Republic
Posted on 09/15/2014 6:16:41 AM PDT by Moseley
In Alice in Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll, Alice says she cannot believe impossible things. The Queen of Hearts is surprised: “When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
Therefore, suppose we compare two events:
1.Global warming advocates argue that the oceans are absorbing the extra heat that their computer models predicted, which has mysteriously vanished. The missing heat over the last 18 years has been going into the oceans.
2.Yet, the Arctic Sea Ice Cap aound the North Pole has grown by 43% since 2012. As confirmed by satellites from orbit, the Arctic ice pack has grown by 1.715 million square kilometers in the last two years, as reported in England’s Daily Mail. That is the size of the truly massive state of Alaska.
So, might we ask a question? Yes, you with your hand up.
If the Earth hasn’t warmed for the last 18 years because the predicted heat is going into the oceans, then why is there 43% more ice in the last two years? If you add heat to water containing ice, doesn’t the ice normally melt? Does it normally freeze over, creating more ice?
The Economist confidently waffles that “The mystery of the pause in global warming may have been solved,” in “Davy Jones’s heat locker”. The oceans “may be” absorbing the warming.
But wait: Why didn’t the oceans absorb the previous warming first in the past? Why was there a 20-year period of warming without the oceans sponging any of it up back then?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
...and: What goes up (in a gravity field, relative to the center of mass)...
Global Warming on Free Republic
True, one such predicted effect was the hotspot in the upper tropical troposphere. It has not appeared and is now mostly buried in the memory hole. The climate models have changed in the meantime and the hotspot has mostly disappeared from the model output.
My entire point with that post was to point out that no known model has been able to even remotely reflect observations as far as “Climate Change” (AGW) is concerned, and that is a known fact for anyone who is paying attention, and it seems you are one of those paying attention.
Nonetheless, eventually mankind may be able to finally account for all of the variables that are needed to somewhat accurately reflect reality as far as predicting climate trends over the long term, and are fairly good with very short term (several days) at this time, but we are not at that level of intelligence at this time.
That is accurate. Also consider that Earth accumulate more matter from space on a daily basis. I have no doubt that the CO2 that falls to Earth from space is negligible, but it is something that needs to be factored in.
As far as the rise in sea levels, is the amount of groundwater extracted by Mankind from the underground water table on land factored into these equations as well?
So many variables...
About 6% of mass of falling meteors is out gassed as CO2 and 12% of their mass is water vapor. Methane is also produced.
I thought the dog ate it.
Have you ever gone up in an open cockpit airplane? What happens when you get away from the heat sink known as Earth? It gets cooler rapidly, right? As you go higher it gets dryer and the atmosphere has an even harder time holding heat. Ever been in the desert at night in July? You’ll freeze your ass off. Our atmosphere is a terrible heat sink. Trying to heat it up with our little activities on less than 15% of the planet’s surface simply isn’t going to happen. It’s all about economies of scale. I think a lot of people forget how small inhabited earth is compared to the size of the planet as a whole. What amazes me in all of this is how everyone assumes the output of our star is static. That is complete and utter nonsense.
We have records going back to the time of Galileo that show regular cycles in the output of the Sun. The Sun’s variances cause what is known as “Solar Minimums” and “Solar Maximums”. If you pay attention to space weather at all you will see that there has been much banter lately about the lack of sunspot activity over the past 2, eleven year cycles, and how we very well may be exiting the Modern Maximum, a warm cycle that began about 1900. If you look at the temperature plots for the period 1900-1996, ignoring the outliers, you will notice the graph resembles an inverted bell curve. The slope of that curve is negative now and we are very likely in for a century or more of cooler than “normal” temps. We’re about 18 years into it now. I wouldn’t toss out your winter coat quite yet.
What amazes me in all of this is how everyone assumes the output of our star is static. That is complete and utter nonsense.
I certainly assume no such thing. The star put out an extra 1.5W/m2 during the Medieval Warm Period and again in the second half of the 20th century. More importantly the frequency spectrum shifted to higher frequencies with various effects on weather and climate.
we are very likely in for a century or more of cooler than “normal” temps
Maybe. The sun is hard to predict but we will have lower solar activity for at least 20 years, and probably more. The thing about it is that it will be somewhat offset by increased CO2 warming. The concentration is now 400 ppm, up from 270-280. The extra CO2 is generally a good thing to have around right now even if the warming from it is only modest.
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.