Australian Politics Forum - Embarrassment for the climate alarmists

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #60 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:41pm

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:11pm:

The triangle or delta symbol represents change. It's a comparison between data collected in 1970 and 1996. It's a measure of the change in outgoing radiation between these two points in time.

It would be helpful to include h2o so we can see if that has dropped or gained seeing as it covers all co2 wavelengths. It would also be helpful to have 2 lines. Each representative of time.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #61 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:06pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:41pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:11pm:

The triangle or delta symbol represents change. It's a comparison between data collected in 1970 and 1996. It's a measure of the change in outgoing radiation between these two points in time.

It would be helpful to include h2o so we can see if that has dropped or gained seeing as it covers all co2 wavelengths. It would also be helpful to have 2 lines. Each representative of time.

Water Vapour is not an external forcing, it is a function of temperature.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #62 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:29pm

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:06pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:41pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:11pm:

The triangle or delta symbol represents change. It's a comparison between data collected in 1970 and 1996. It's a measure of the change in outgoing radiation between these two points in time.

It would be helpful to include h2o so we can see if that has dropped or gained seeing as it covers all co2 wavelengths. It would also be helpful to have 2 lines. Each representative of time.

Water Vapour is not an external forcing, it is a function of temperature.

wow... that is just so wrong. and to add to the error in your posts. climatologists of all persuasions admit they know very little of the response of clouds and water vapour to increased warming thus making any predictive model invalid.

but keep going and dig yourself a deeper hole. Everything is a function of temperature... except CO2 because that is the CAUSE of temperature. How convenient! and yet not supported by ice-cores or even current experience.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:42pm by gold_medal »

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #63 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:40pm

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 1:56pm:

I'm interested in your answer to this question, progs.

Quote:

My question to you progresiveslol is that if you are so ignorant about how the atmosphere works then why are you spamming this forum with your propaganda?

You have very little understanding of how the atmosphere works, you know very little about statistics and one half of the stuff you post contradicts the other half. Yet you are certain you are right. Is this a paid gig, progs, or do you do this because of you want to leave a record behind that you were on the wrong side of history.

NOBODY does! the only people who claim that are the drongos who dont understand it at all and simply google something and therefore beleive that it is the entire truth. Atmospheric phsyics is an exceptionally complex area which its practictioners admite is very very poorly understood.

but you do?

wrong.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #64 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:15pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:29pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:06pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:41pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:11pm:

The triangle or delta symbol represents change. It's a comparison between data collected in 1970 and 1996. It's a measure of the change in outgoing radiation between these two points in time.

It would be helpful to include h2o so we can see if that has dropped or gained seeing as it covers all co2 wavelengths. It would also be helpful to have 2 lines. Each representative of time.

Water Vapour is not an external forcing, it is a function of temperature.

wow... that is just so wrong. and to add to the error in your posts. climatologists of all persuasions admit they know very little of the response of clouds and water vapour to increased warming thus making any predictive model invalid.

but keep going and dig yourself a deeper hole. Everything is a function of temperature... except CO2 because that is the CAUSE of temperature. How convenient! and yet not supported by ice-cores or even current experience.

Go on, goldie, explain how water vapour changes over time. This is going to be fun.

And BTW any climatologists will tell you how increases in temperature can lead to an increase in atmospheric CO2. You really have a poor understanding of what you are arguing against. I guess that comes from being exposed to so many straw men in the right wing echo chamber.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #65 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:21pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:40pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 1:56pm:

I'm interested in your answer to this question, progs.

Quote:

My question to you progresiveslol is that if you are so ignorant about how the atmosphere works then why are you spamming this forum with your propaganda?

You have very little understanding of how the atmosphere works, you know very little about statistics and one half of the stuff you post contradicts the other half. Yet you are certain you are right. Is this a paid gig, progs, or do you do this because of you want to leave a record behind that you were on the wrong side of history.

NOBODY does! the only people who claim that are the drongos who dont understand it at all and simply google something and therefore beleive that it is the entire truth. Atmospheric phsyics is an exceptionally complex area which its practictioners admite is very very poorly understood.

but you do?

wrong.

There is a big difference between complete understanding and very limited understanding. Don't pretend understanding isn't some sort of continuum. Saying someone has limited understanding isn't saying you know everything, or even close to everything. It means you believe you have a relatively deeper understanding.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #66 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:36pm

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:06pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:41pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:11pm:

The triangle or delta symbol represents change. It's a comparison between data collected in 1970 and 1996. It's a measure of the change in outgoing radiation between these two points in time.

It would be helpful to include h2o so we can see if that has dropped or gained seeing as it covers all co2 wavelengths. It would also be helpful to have 2 lines. Each representative of time.

Water Vapour is not an external forcing, it is a function of temperature.

Well one would think the cult would want to be proving their point then wouldnt you. Guess they dont.

As to proving their point, the graph would show or should show but doesnt
is, as co2 caught more energy, more water vapor was in the air with h2o catching more energy.

My request still stands. I take it the reason why they do not include it is because it would not show what the cult wanted it to.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #67 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:47pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:36pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:06pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:41pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:11pm:

The triangle or delta symbol represents change. It's a comparison between data collected in 1970 and 1996. It's a measure of the change in outgoing radiation between these two points in time.

It would be helpful to include h2o so we can see if that has dropped or gained seeing as it covers all co2 wavelengths. It would also be helpful to have 2 lines. Each representative of time.

Water Vapour is not an external forcing, it is a function of temperature.

Well one would think the cult would want to be proving their point then wouldnt you. Guess they dont.

As to proving their point, the graph would show or should show but doesnt
is, as co2 caught more energy, more water vapor was in the air with h2o catching more energy.

My request still stands. I take it the reason why they do not include it is because it would not show what the cult wanted it to.

Progs, I'm struggling to work out the exact nature of your criticism. That's the problem with Chinese whispers. Do you have a direct link.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

adelcrow Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20133 everywhere Gender:	Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists Reply #68 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:49pm Why dont you internet forum denialists get together and submit a paper...your combined knowledge on the subject of green house gases and climate change is sure to change the mind of the worlds scientific community and the majority of the worlds respected leaders
Back to top	Go the Bunnies IP Logged

adelcrow Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20133 everywhere Gender:	Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists Reply #69 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:50pm Why dont you internet forum denialists get together and submit a paper...your combined knowledge on the subject of green house gases and climate change is sure to change the minds of the worlds scientific community and the majority of the worlds respected leaders
Back to top	Go the Bunnies IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists Reply #70 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:57pm Further evidence to support a 16 year pause in global warming.
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #71 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 10:34pm

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:21pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:40pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 1:56pm:

I'm interested in your answer to this question, progs.

Quote:

My question to you progresiveslol is that if you are so ignorant about how the atmosphere works then why are you spamming this forum with your propaganda?

You have very little understanding of how the atmosphere works, you know very little about statistics and one half of the stuff you post contradicts the other half. Yet you are certain you are right. Is this a paid gig, progs, or do you do this because of you want to leave a record behind that you were on the wrong side of history.

NOBODY does! the only people who claim that are the drongos who dont understand it at all and simply google something and therefore beleive that it is the entire truth. Atmospheric phsyics is an exceptionally complex area which its practictioners admite is very very poorly understood.

but you do?

wrong.

There is a big difference between complete understanding and very limited understanding. Don't pretend understanding isn't some sort of continuum. Saying someone has limited understanding isn't saying you know everything, or even close to everything. It means you believe you have a relatively deeper understanding.

that is nothing more complex than saying that I, as an expert in this field know 0.002% of the subject whiel you as a novice know 0.0001% about it.

yeah that 0.002% really impresses me.

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #72 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 10:35pm

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:49pm:

Why dont you internet forum denialists get together and submit a paper...your combined knowledge on the subject of green house gases and climate change is sure to change the mind of the worlds scientific community and the majority of the worlds respected leaders Grin

they have - multiple times. do try and keep up. your religious beliefs are not keeping up with what is happening in the REAL work aka science.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #73 - Jan 1^st, 2013 at 11:09pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 10:34pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 5:21pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:40pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 1:56pm:

I'm interested in your answer to this question, progs.

Quote:

My question to you progresiveslol is that if you are so ignorant about how the atmosphere works then why are you spamming this forum with your propaganda?

You have very little understanding of how the atmosphere works, you know very little about statistics and one half of the stuff you post contradicts the other half. Yet you are certain you are right. Is this a paid gig, progs, or do you do this because of you want to leave a record behind that you were on the wrong side of history.

NOBODY does! the only people who claim that are the drongos who dont understand it at all and simply google something and therefore beleive that it is the entire truth. Atmospheric phsyics is an exceptionally complex area which its practictioners admite is very very poorly understood.

but you do?

wrong.

There is a big difference between complete understanding and very limited understanding. Don't pretend understanding isn't some sort of continuum. Saying someone has limited understanding isn't saying you know everything, or even close to everything. It means you believe you have a relatively deeper understanding.

that is nothing more complex than saying that I, as an expert in this field know 0.002% of the subject whiel you as a novice know 0.0001% about it.

yeah that 0.002% really impresses me.

Go on, goldie, make your own numbers up to argue a point.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Embarrassment for the climate alarmists
Reply #74 - Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 1:31am

gold_medal wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:29pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 4:06pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:41pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 3:11pm:

The triangle or delta symbol represents change. It's a comparison between data collected in 1970 and 1996. It's a measure of the change in outgoing radiation between these two points in time.

It would be helpful to include h2o so we can see if that has dropped or gained seeing as it covers all co2 wavelengths. It would also be helpful to have 2 lines. Each representative of time.

Water Vapour is not an external forcing, it is a function of temperature.

wow... that is just so wrong. and to add to the error in your posts. climatologists of all persuasions admit they know very little of the response of clouds and water vapour to increased warming thus making any predictive model invalid.

but keep going and dig yourself a deeper hole. Everything is a function of temperature... except CO2 because that is the CAUSE of temperature. How convenient! and yet not supported by ice-cores or even current experience.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1356701751

Under this measure - which is included in Kyoto Protocol - was not included

Water vapour contributes up to 74% of Greenhouse effect and they decide it should not be included as a measure

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged