HA!!
Posted on 11/09/2017 11:40:58 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
If observed climate variables such as temperature or precipitation change over time, it raises the question as to whether human influence plays a role. To investigate this, scientists are applying a method for estimating causal relationships.
The fact that greenhouse gases emitted by humans are changing the global climate system is scientifically undisputed. Climate researchers often look to the future with their models and try to calculate how the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will affect various climate variables.
To test whether these climate variables are influenced by rising greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, scientists have developed the detection and attribution method.
The method involves a combined analysis of long observation series and simulation experiments in which climate models are calculated both with and without human influence in order to compare them with the actual observations. If the latter are only reproduced by the simulations with emissions, it can be concluded that man-made climate change is demonstrable in the observations.
The detection and attribution method is an important instrument for climate research and was used in the last UN climate report in the chapter on the evidence of man-made climate change.
(Excerpt) Read more at phys.org ...
It’s really a simple math formula. Take an eye dropper of ink and squirt one drop into a swimming pool the size of 100 Olympic sized pools. No wait, that was the oil spill in the Gulf.
Never mind
The fact that greenhouse gases emitted by humans are changing the global climate system is scientifically undisputed
Just like in the 70’s when the Ice Age was here and we were all going to freeze to death, or how about Acid Rain, Allar, the Ozone hole and CFC’s and of course the $2500 reduction in Health Insurance Premiums per year, ALL GUARANTEED AND UNDISPUTED FACTS.
PUT THE PIPE DOWN UNTIL AFTER WORK, OK.
How can man-made climate change be proven?
It can’t. That is what makes it a perfect tool of the Left!
But I don't see any units on that graph. And the words below describing it seem to imply it is just a conceptual graph to get the idea across of what it would be like if the data favored the climate alarmist position...in other words fiction...but not clearly labeled as fiction...while all the actual factual graphs I have seen have it the other way.
Seems highly dishonest to me.
"The fact that greenhouse gases emitted by humans are changing the global climate system is scientifically undisputed [??? emphasis added]."
On the other hand, note that Phys.Org shows that scientists aren’t scared to challenge other scientific “absolutes,” questioning Einstein’s ideas about the speed of light for example.
Theory that challenges Einstein's physics could soon be put to the test
Actually this statement is correct. The significance of the effect is in dispute though. Its like if you make a campfire you also certainly are warming the planet, but also nobody thinks the amount is significant. CO2 is a greenhouse gas and emitting some into the air will have some warming effect. But the debate at issue is whether its enough to bother about. I think the answer based on data since the early 2000s is no, its not enough to bother with. But the theory won't die because promoting it pays for the research due to the corrupting influence of politics.
Something I realized years ago was that water vapor is created by diffusion. Diffusion increases with heat. If Water Vapor was a positive feedback effect, the process would run away with itself.
Our mere existence proves conclusively that water vapor is not a positive feedback effect, but is instead a negative feedback effect.
To be more clear, water vapor is positive up to a certain amount of humidity, but when the atmosphere has soaked up enough to form clouds, the clouds reflect more sunlight back into space before it has a chance to warm the lower layers of atmosphere. This creates the negative feedback effect. More water vapor, more clouds, more sunlight reflected.
The system is self balancing, and a runaway greenhouse effect is impossible.
Outstanding presentation by a rational, highly respected Nobel Laureate. Scientific practicality-Occam’s Razor logic. With direct, correct analysis of the temperature models (and methods, the changing (!) thermometers/methods, locations and inclusion suddenly to monkey/massage the data points— the ocean temperatures). Models constructed from assumptions and ridiculously small number of comparative data points to arrive conclusively at a “fraction of a degree” average for the entire WORLD over 100 years.
Things ignored— population shrinkage worldwide, natural and man-made:
Two somethings ignored in those 100 years is what happened historically. 1) Actual loss of human life (natural and manmade losses) and 2) War which WAS clearly man made and SHOULD (accepting their assumptions on CO2) have increased the warming if you accept the notion that man’s activities to generate CO2 are directly linked vs. the actual temperature change in the “models”. Wars... lots of them, including two World Wars (worldwide, WWII more so than WWI but both involving massive use of petroleum fuels). This is taken from a website on timelines pasted in at the end for reference:
1879-1880 Victorio’s War
1899-1901 Boxer Rebellion
1899-1902 Second Boer War
1905 1rst Russian Revolution
1910 1921 Mexican Revolution
1914 1918 World War I (18 Million deaths, 41 MM casualties)
Spanish Influenza Epidemic Worldwide (20-50 Million deaths)
1917 1923 Russian Bolshevik Civil War
1919 1923 Turkish War of Independence
1919 1921 Irish War of Independence
Russian/Ukraine Famine-Holodomor 10 million dead *
1927 1949 Chinese Civil War
1936 1939 Spanish Civil War
1939 1945 World War II (world wide, > 80 MM dead,China civilian deaths not included est. to be > 50 MM alone)
1946 1949 Greek Civil War
1948 1949 Arab Israeli War
1950 1953 Korean War (UN, multi nation)
1952 1960 Mau Mau Uprising
1953 1959 Cuban Revolution
1954 1962 Algerian War
1955 1975 Vietnam War ANZUS& USAvs.proxywar Soviets/Chicoms
1961 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion
1979 1989 Soviet war in Afghanistan
1980 1988 Iran Iraq War
1982 1982 Falklands War
1990 1991 Gulf War
1991 1995 Croatian War of Independence
1992 1995 Bosnian War
1998 1999 Kosovo War
2001 War in Afghanistan
2003 2011 Iraq War (US/Coalition/US)
2006 2009 Somalia War (US)
2008 2009 Gaza War
1917— 2017 100 years of Communism-minimum 100 million killed *includes Holodomor and Mao Great Leap Forward.
http://www.datesandevents.org/events-timelines/24-timeline-of-war.htm
Who needs proof?
Oh goody!
Now their super computers can manipulate millions of terabytes of new data!
“How can man-made climate change be proven?”
Yup, start with a conclusion and try to prove it.
No science here. Move along.
They finally realize than climate change can occur without human activity, mainly because it has in the past. Not rocket science.
Didn't take long to get to a bald-faced lie.
Global Warming Skeptics Question Authority
Princeton Professor Denies Global Warming Theory Jan. 12, 2009
Princeton Physics Professor Discredits Anthropogenic Climate Change Theory Dec. 21, 2016
German scientists reject man-made global warming
Real Scientist Uncover Serious Flaw In Global Warming Data
Physicist Howard Hayden's one-letter disproof of global warming claims [pre-Climategate]
'Consensus' On Man-Made Global Warming Collapses in 2008
Perth electrical engineer's discovery will change climate change debate October 04, 2015
Top Physicist Freeman Dyson: Obama 'Took the Wrong Side' on Climate Change October 14, 2015
Global Warming Petition Project Scientists who reject AGW
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs
Prominent Scientists Declare Climate Claims Ahead of UN Summit 'Irrational' * 'Based On Nonsense' * 'Leading us down a false path' November 19, 2015
Thank you, that was very informative.
The hallmark of all skeptical and disproveable scientific postulations is to forecast them so far in the future that no one can hold you accountable. Eventually the scientist and his predictions will be forgotten.
If the humans are removed, who or what will measure the after? Who or what will do the comparison?
HA!!
That’s what they should be showing the kids in school. If I was in academia, I would make sure it happened.
The effect is completely negligible and there insignificant. No one can even prove it CO2 makes the temperature go up or down as the accepted science is all faked.
One supervacano Blows and it will put out multitudes more CO2 than every spec of pollution Man has ever created on this earth.
And they still cannot model water vapor ... clouds, rain ... the largest greenhouse gas of all. Not in their models.
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.