Australian Politics Forum - IPCC 95% sure about AGW

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #375 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 2:05pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 1:41pm:

vuk11 is 95% certain that CO2 can only act as a greenhouse gas if under pure vacuum conditions.

lol

You misunderstand like I knew you would.
Who's the shill in this situation?

You know what I meant it was said in the very next sentence fool.
Vacuum was an analogy for a situation without external factors, that is what most people use vacuum for as an analogy, unless they are referring to a physical vacuum in space. Which I was NOT.

C02 increases temperature in a controlled environment, however it is CLEAR that it doesn't raise the temperature if multiple external factors work against it such as reduced solar activity.

Please don't misquote me it's one of my pet hates for people that manipulate. Why do you think I'm so against the IPCC? Because they misquote authors and manipulate data.

Back to top

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #376 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 2:09pm

Oh you absolute troll you can't even quote right!

You:
"Only in a vacuum can CO2 act as a greenhouse gas" vuk11

Me:
Vuk11 wrote on Oct 17^th, 2013 at 6:39pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 17^th, 2013 at 5:07pm:

does an increase in CO2 in the earths atmosphere warm the earth or not?

Only in a vacuum.
It's not a yes or no answer nor is it a black and white question. It would increase temperature in a perfectly controlled environment, without carbon sinks, without fluctuating solar activity, without precipitation fluctuations, without Methane cooling, without observed negative feed backs, without the climate adapting with the use of multiple drivers. The simple fact is, yes in a little test lab you can get c02 to do a perfectly controlled greenhouse effect, the rest of the earth is an entirely different beast altogether.

Now After this quote YOU ASKED ME:
Quote:

Define a vacuum

Now before I could even answer that so we were on the same page you go off on this tangent misquoting me. Sly man absolutely sly. I bet your dancing "haha vuk said vacuum, I asked him to define what he meant but I didn't wait for his reply haha I'm going to misquote him ahah"

You sir have shown your true colours, you are sly.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 18^th, 2013 at 8:54pm by Vuk11 »

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 139603 Gender:	Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW Reply #377 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 2:52pm Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 1:44pm: You politicise the words theory and fact for your own personal reasons No, but I'd love to hear what you think my 'personal reasons' are.
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic Gold Member Offline πολιτικός Posts: 4826 Mawson Base Gender:	Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW Reply #378 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 4:09pm greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 2:52pm: Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 1:44pm: You politicise the words theory and fact for your own personal reasons No, but I'd love to hear what you think my 'personal reasons' are. you work for the fossil fuel industry?
Back to top	Mini Ice Age (2014-2029) Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139603
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #379 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 4:55pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 4:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 1:44pm:

You politicise the words theory and fact for your own personal reasons

No, but I'd love to hear what you think my 'personal reasons' are.

you work for the fossil fuel industry?

No. I work for no-for-profit organisations.

And, I support the use of renewable and alternative energy sources.

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #380 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 6:03pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 4:55pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 4:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 1:44pm:

You politicise the words theory and fact for your own personal reasons

No, but I'd love to hear what you think my 'personal reasons' are.

you work for the fossil fuel industry?

No. I work for no-for-profit organisations.

And, I support the use of renewable and alternative energy sources.

non for profit organisations, at least in the USA, can be a very misleading label.

There are many organisations in the USA that claim this category but only because they don't deliver dividends to shareholders. Their primary goal is still profit and they deploy the corporate model to achieve this. Their profits are distributed internally.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Ajax Gold Member Offline CO2 has never controlled temperature on Earth Posts: 10982 Australia Gender:	Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW Reply #381 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 8:38pm So typical of all alarmists...chimp.....??? You cannot defend the IPCC's computers pseudo science. So you twist everyone's words and misrepresent their statements to go of track about the actual science. Really pathetic imo..............!!!!!!!!
Back to top	1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax 2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139603
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #382 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 8:57pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 4:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 1:44pm:

You politicise the words theory and fact for your own personal reasons

No, but I'd love to hear what you think my 'personal reasons' are.

you work for the fossil fuel industry?

No, I do not work for the fossil fuel industry.

Back to top

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #383 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 8:59pm

As a point of clarification, where do you guys stand on the 15/16/17 year temperature stall? Are you with the: "The missing temperature is in the ocean" crowd
or: "There is no stall!".

Like are we working off the same data here or what?

Quote:

THE UN's climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain's Met Office, but said it would need to last "30 to 40 years at least" to break the long-term global warming trend.

Back to top

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #384 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 9:12pm

Vuk11 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 8:59pm:

As a point of clarification, where do you guys stand on the 15/16/17 year temperature stall? Are you with the: "The missing temperature is in the ocean" crowd
or: "There is no stall!".

Like are we working off the same data here or what?

Quote:

THE UN's climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain's Met Office, but said it would need to last "30 to 40 years at least" to break the long-term global warming trend.

Hey Vuk

Muso and I were at it about this missing heat has gone into the oceans.

Muso was argueing that it had gone into the deep ocean (3000 metres) because that's what the IPCC had said to defend the 15 years of no temperature rise.

So I argued that if the heat had gone into the deep oceans (3000 metres) the argo system consisting of 3000 buoys all over the world would have detected it.

The buoys dive down to 2000 metres and every two weeks rise to the surface and transmit the data.

It takes them two weeks to dive and surface from 2000 metres, so they go pretty slow.

In the AR5 paper the IPCC are now saying the most of the heat went into the top layers of the oceans (700 metres).

Poor muso and chimp they have been left with their willies in the wind.

That's what happens when they try to defend a science that is based on computer circulation models.

No body needs to be a scienctist these days just have a look at the weather on your television every night to see where the highs and lows come from and you might say to your self its good that they get the next few days right and that's maybe.

And they want to make us spend trillions on the air we breath because their computer models are saying this or that.

For bugger sake you alarmists wake up...........!!!!!

How can you put your faith in computer circulation models.

BTW dude totally agree the earth's atmosphere is not a test tube.

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #385 - Oct 18^th, 2013 at 9:17pm

If it's the temperature went into the ocean then I can sort of understand that. The IPCC fifth report showed a minuscule temperature rise in what, the top 70m or so. Beyond that it's non-existent. I always got sh*tty when both Loehle and Willis came up with cooling oceans, so they removed some ARGO data that was "too cool". Took Loehle 6 years to come up with that excuse.

Didn't you guys chat about the satellites and how they could measure really small rises in sea level? I haven't had a chance to check that thread out yet, what was your/Muso's conclusion?

Cheers for the reply.

Back to top

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #386 - Oct 20^th, 2013 at 10:52am

Vuk11 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 9:17pm:

If it's the temperature went into the ocean then I can sort of understand that. The IPCC fifth report showed a minuscule temperature rise in what, the top 70m or so. Beyond that it's non-existent. I always got sh*tty when both Loehle and Willis came up with cooling oceans, so they removed some ARGO data that was "too cool". Took Loehle 6 years to come up with that excuse.

Didn't you guys chat about the satellites and how they could measure really small rises in sea level? I haven't had a chance to check that thread out yet, what was your/Muso's conclusion?

Cheers for the reply.

I suppose we agreed not to disagree on that one...!!

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #387 - Oct 20^th, 2013 at 12:28pm

Ajax wrote on Oct 20^th, 2013 at 10:52am:

Vuk11 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 9:17pm:

If it's the temperature went into the ocean then I can sort of understand that. The IPCC fifth report showed a minuscule temperature rise in what, the top 70m or so. Beyond that it's non-existent. I always got sh*tty when both Loehle and Willis came up with cooling oceans, so they removed some ARGO data that was "too cool". Took Loehle 6 years to come up with that excuse.

Didn't you guys chat about the satellites and how they could measure really small rises in sea level? I haven't had a chance to check that thread out yet, what was your/Muso's conclusion?

Cheers for the reply.

I suppose we agreed not to disagree on that one...!!

cracks are appearing within your congregation of temple worshipers Mr Ajax....

why would you AGREE to NOT disagree with one of your fellow priests in public?

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #388 - Oct 20^th, 2013 at 12:42pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 20^th, 2013 at 12:28pm:

Ajax wrote on Oct 20^th, 2013 at 10:52am:

Vuk11 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 9:17pm:

If it's the temperature went into the ocean then I can sort of understand that. The IPCC fifth report showed a minuscule temperature rise in what, the top 70m or so. Beyond that it's non-existent. I always got sh*tty when both Loehle and Willis came up with cooling oceans, so they removed some ARGO data that was "too cool". Took Loehle 6 years to come up with that excuse.

Didn't you guys chat about the satellites and how they could measure really small rises in sea level? I haven't had a chance to check that thread out yet, what was your/Muso's conclusion?

Cheers for the reply.

I suppose we agreed not to disagree on that one...!!

cracks are appearing within your congregation of temple worshipers Mr Ajax....

why would you AGREE to NOT disagree with one of your fellow priests in public?

WTF are you talking about.....been on the turps chimp...????

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #389 - Oct 20^th, 2013 at 1:00pm

Ajax wrote on Oct 20^th, 2013 at 12:42pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 20^th, 2013 at 12:28pm:

Ajax wrote on Oct 20^th, 2013 at 10:52am:

Vuk11 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2013 at 9:17pm:

If it's the temperature went into the ocean then I can sort of understand that. The IPCC fifth report showed a minuscule temperature rise in what, the top 70m or so. Beyond that it's non-existent. I always got sh*tty when both Loehle and Willis came up with cooling oceans, so they removed some ARGO data that was "too cool". Took Loehle 6 years to come up with that excuse.

Didn't you guys chat about the satellites and how they could measure really small rises in sea level? I haven't had a chance to check that thread out yet, what was your/Muso's conclusion?

Cheers for the reply.

I suppose we agreed not to disagree on that one...!!

cracks are appearing within your congregation of temple worshipers Mr Ajax....

why would you AGREE to NOT disagree with one of your fellow priests in public?

WTF are you talking about.....been on the turps chimp...????

now, now dark night

lets not get too angry in public

we wouldn't want the priests in your crack pot religion to demand a confession from you now would we?

have you found any models yet that suit your religious beliefs?

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged