Climate Change Denial

[MitchP85D]

.... ok.... then you make a line of best fit How is mine incorrect? I'm simply asking why Roys data doesn't match other data by the same name... I defend everything I cite... buuuut I also don't cite stuff with clear misspellings Kinda.... kinda shows maybe the peer review wasn't exactly.... thorough... or existent.

I swear, you are like talking to a fencepost. I told you that you are comparing two graphs that have different parameters for their abscissas and ordinates, plus the temperature anomalies are based on a different time period for averaging. That seems to go in one hole in your head and out the other. I gave you an opportunity to challenge Spencer. You won't do it, and both you and I know why you won't!

 

[nwdiver]

I know it is a heat content graph. We've had a multi-decadal warming period because of the warming oceans. El Ninos dominate during a warming ocean period. But guess what? La Ninas dominate during cooling ocean cycles. And that is what we have in store for us during the next 3 tp 4 decades. It is just now starting. Solar physicists are thinking this.

Soooo.... why did you respond with a post referencing surface temperatures?

Where do you think the energy for the warming oceans is coming from? Do you think it's a coincidence that it oddly matches the amount of radiative forcing predicted by the increase in atmospheric CO2? (1.5w/m^2)(510.1M km^2) = 765TW ; (765TW)(24hrs/day)(365days/yr) = 6.7E18wh/yr => 2.4E22 J/yr. Very close to the measured increase in ocean heat content.... 'creepy'.

 

[nwdiver]

I swear, you are like talking to a fencepost. I told you that you are comparing two graphs that have different parameters for their abscissas and ordinates, plus the temperature anomalies are based on a different time period for averaging. That seems to go in one hole in your head and out the other. I gave you an opportunity to challenge Spencer. You won't do it, and both you and I know why you won't!

I swear, you are like talking to a fencepost. I told you that you that using different parameters for their abscissas and ordinates, plus the temperature anomalies are based on a different time period for averaging can't change the slope of the line. That seems to go in one hole in your head and out the other. I gave you an opportunity explain where the data came from. You won't do it, and both you and I know why you won't!

 

[MitchP85D]

Wonder if this is Dr Spencer himself posting as 'Mitch', trying to drive traffic to his ENTERTAINMENT site. LOL

I assure you, I am nowhere near the stature of the great atmospheric scientists Roy Spencer and John Christy. By the way, there is another great climate scientist who allows for a limited amount of public participation on her site. She is Dr. Judith Curry.

Climate Etc.

 

[eevee-fan]

I assure you, I am nowhere near the stature of the great atmospheric scientists Roy Spencer and John Christy. By the way, there is another great climate scientist who allows for a limited amount of public participation on her site. She is Dr. Judith Curry.

Climate Etc.

OK, so you are now signed up to provide marketing services for 2. LOL

 

[nwdiver]

Wonder if this is Dr Spencer himself posting as 'Mitch', trying to drive traffic to his ENTERTAINMENT site. LOL

Nah... he's not misspelling 10% of his words... or maybe he's putting his posts through more peer review than his published ovservations

 

[MitchP85D]

I swear, you are like talking to a fencepost. I told you that you that using different parameters for their abscissas and ordinates, plus the temperature anomalies are based on a different time period for averaging can't change the slope of the line. That seems to go in one hole in your head and out the other. I gave you an opportunity explain where the data came from. You won't do it, and both you and I know why you won't!

Of course the differences between the X and Y axis will affect the slope! Present it to Spencer. See what kind of a response you will get. What are you afraid of?

 

[nwdiver]

Of course the differences between the X and Y axis will affect the slope!

.... not when you transfer the data points on the other graph to adjust for the difference in the axis.... !

Where do you think the energy for the warming oceans is coming from? Do you think it's a coincidence that it oddly matches the amount of radiative forcing predicted by the increase in atmospheric CO2? (1.5w/m^2)(510.1M km^2) = 765TW ; (765TW)(24hrs/day)(365days/yr) = 6.7E18wh/yr => 2.4E22 J/yr. Very close to the measured increase in ocean heat content.... 'creepy'.

 

[MitchP85D]

OK, so you are now signed up to provide marketing services for 2. LOL

Not signed up for marketing services of either. I've mixed it up with some global warming zealots on Spencer's site. I haven't posted on Curry's site yet.

 

[MitchP85D]

.... not when you transfer the data points on the other graph to adjust for the difference in the axis.... !

Where do you think the energy for the warming oceans is coming from? Do you think it's a coincidence that it oddly matches the amount of radiative forcing predicted by the increase in atmospheric CO2? (1.5w/m^2)(510.1M km^2) = 765TW ; (765TW)(24hrs/day)(365days/yr) = 6.7E18wh/yr => 2.4E22 J/yr. Very close to the measured increase in ocean heat content.... 'creepy'.

But you haven't adjusted for the differences of the temperature anomaly. Spencer used a 5-year average. The other graph (not specified) more than likely used a 30-year average. Spencer explains all of that. I assure you. You will never take the time to read Spencer's reasoning.

 

[DrLOAC]

Truth is determined by OBSERVATION! When observations were not confirming previous predictions by the advocates of human-caused global warming theory, then the raw data was manipulated to fit the predictions of warming. The past was made colder and the present was made warmer. These are called "adjustments," which is just a fancy word for fudging.

Lol. Spencer is on his what 6th major revision and 11th adjustment of his own data. Somehow I assume your fine with his adjustments.

UAH satellite temperature dataset - Wikipedia

Here’s a little pro tip. Anyone who uses scientific equipment especially ones in orbit has to massage their data and recalibrate their sensors. I’ve done it myself.

Hell, you probably think the UAH data is made by satellites directly recording atmospheric temperatures like something out of Star Trek

And you are just grasping at anything to discredit Spencer with. And yet again, you fall flat on your face. UAH publishes data not only of the Lower-Troposphere, but the Mid-Troposphere, Tropopause, and Lower Stratosphere. Look below the digital data below the graph.

Roy Spencer, PhD

The Lower Troposphere is front and center because that part of the atmosphere is closet to the earth's surface, which includes both land on ocean. I've noticed some of you here did not know that UAH measures the temperature of the lower troposphere over both land and ocean!

Is the lower troposphere the entire atmosphere? If the lower troposphere has cooled where did the heat go? Why has ocean heat content and ground level temperatures continued to rise?

If you actually understood the state of the climate these would be be things you could explain.

 

[MitchP85D]

But you haven't adjusted for the differences of the temperature anomaly. Spencer used a 5-year average. The other graph (not specified) more than likely used a 30-year average. Spencer explains all of that. I assure you. You will never take the time to read Spencer's reasoning.

And there is nothing at all creepy about ocean temperatures affecting global temperature. When the oceans warm, the atmosphere warms. When the oceans cool, the atmosphere cools.

 

[DrLOAC]

I assure you, I am nowhere near the stature of the great atmospheric scientists Roy Spencer and John Christy. By the way, there is another great climate scientist who allows for a limited amount of public participation on her site. She is Dr. Judith Curry.

Climate Etc.

But only Judith Curry after she stopped publishing peer reviewed climate
science and started going on right wing media.

 

[nwdiver]

But you haven't adjusted for the differences of the temperature anomaly. Spencer used a 5-year average. The other graph (not specified) more than likely used a 30-year average. Spencer explains all of that. I assure you. You will never take the time to read Spencer's reasoning.

LOL..... what? How does that make literally ANY sense.... spencer took a data set that's a 30 year average and made it a 5 year average???? How would that even work? ..... and.... why would that alter the line of best fit so dramatically?

Aside from that it's right there in the title. '12-month running means' Spelled correctly and everything

 

[nwdiver]

And there is nothing at all creepy about ocean temperatures affecting global temperature. When the oceans warm, the atmosphere warms. When the oceans cool, the atmosphere cools.

..... and it's clear from the math that the warming is due to additional CO2.... so what exactly are you arguing against? You think energy is miraculously springing forth from the oceans???? Where is the energy coming from? Clearly the increase in thermal heat content is due to CO2.

 

[MitchP85D]

Lol. Spencer is on his what 6th major revision and 11th adjustment of his own data. Somehow I assume your fine with his adjustments.

UAH satellite temperature dataset - Wikipedia

Here’s a little pro tip. Anyone who uses scientific equipment especially ones in orbit has to massage their data and recalibrate their sensors. I’ve done it myself.

Hell, you probably think the UAH data is made by satellites directly recording atmospheric temperatures like something out of Star Trek


Is the lower troposphere the entire atmosphere? If the lower troposphere has cooled where did the heat go? Why has ocean heat content and ground level temperatures continued to rise?

If you actually understood the state of the climate these would be be things you could explain.

Do you actually understand the state of the climate? My gawd, you must have an awfully high appraisal of yourself if you think you do.

Spencer and Christy are constantly updating and improving their methods for measuring the temperature of the earth's atmosphere. The same goes for the scientists at Remote Sensing Systems (RSS).

Remote Sensing Systems

www.remss.com

Note what the scientists at RSS have observed:

• The troposphere has not warmed quite as fast as most climate models predict. Note that this problem has been reduced by the large 2015-2106 El Nino Event, and the updated version of the RSS tropospheric datasets.

They are the competitors of UAH data. And their data does not differ that from UAH. Scroll down to the graph which shows their observations compared to computer models. They note the same thing Spencer notices.

NOAA uses both temperature data sets.

Microwave Sounding Unit Temperature Anomalies | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

Temperature history for three different layers of the atmosphere: lower troposphere, middle troposphere, and lower stratosphere. These are different parts of the atmosphere than the more familiar surface temperature

www.ncdc.noaa.gov

 

[MitchP85D]

..... and it's clear from the math that the warming is due to additional CO2.... so what exactly are you arguing against? You think energy is miraculously springing forth from the oceans???? Where is the energy coming from? Clearly the increase in thermal heat content is due to CO2.

What determines ocean temperature is the amount of mixing from the 200+ meter depth (4C or less) occurs in the top layer of the ocean. Stagnant periods of mixing produce warmer temperatures in the top layer of the ocean (El Nino dominated). Periods of excessive mixing (La Nina dominated) cools the top layer of the oceans. La Ninas occur when the cooler water from the deeper water mixes with the top ocean layer. Atmospheric CO2 has nothing to do with it. It is much like a gnat vs. a gorilla.

 

[MitchP85D]

But only Judith Curry after she stopped publishing peer reviewed climate
science and started going on right wing media.

You mean "pal" reviewed literature.

 

[nwdiver]

What determines ocean temperature is the amount of mixing from the 200+ meter depth (4C or less) occurs in the top layer of the ocean. Stagnant periods of mixing produce warmer temperatures in the top layer of the ocean (El Nino dominated). Periods of excessive mixing (La Nina dominated) cools the top layer of the oceans. La Ninas occur when the cooler water from the deeper water mixes with the top ocean layer. Atmospheric CO2 has nothing to do with it. It is much like a gnat vs. a gorilla.

None of that answers the question. Where is the energy coming from?

The math would say otherwise. 1.5w/m^2 is the measured radiative forcing of CO2. That's 2.4E22 J/yr, a bit MORE than the increase in the thermal energy content of the oceans. So literally 100% of the additional thermal energy could be due to radiative forcing (and it most likely is). Hardly a 'gnat'.

For further context all of humanity uses ~1E20J/yr. Every gram of U235 fissioned, every liter of fools fuel, every cord of wood... everything is ~1% the energy of the radiative forcing caused by the CO2 we've dumped into the atmosphere because of our pathetic addiction to fools fuel. Math.

 

[eevee-fan]

Reminds me of...