we are back here again
what changed was the Reagan/Thatcher austerity economic model you still think will work, despite failing every single time.
Will you all freeze to death in the Winter for a Net Zero World?
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
what changed was the Reagan/Thatcher austerity economic model you still think will work, despite failing every single time.
Bait and switch, larue, bait and switch.
You can't answer to the fact that the oil$gas industry paid scientists came to the same results as every fucking legit scientist in the world so you dug back into your clipboard of shoddy charts. This one tries to argue that using lower troposphere balloon temperature measurements is the same as the surface temperature in the projections and the measurements. Guess what, larue? They're not. Why don't you climb a few thousand feet and measure the temperature and tell us if its the same as the temperature down here on the surface, where the rest of us humans live.
C'mon larue, tell me why it is that Exxon's scientists came up with the same results as the IPCC and NASA.
Don't run away.
If you are that certain you are correct you must have an answer.
CIMP5 models surface temperature, you can not mix it with atmosphere temperature. If you mix datasets like that then you get retarded graphs like what you just posted.
do you honestly expect the atmosphere to heat up the surface without heating up the atmosphere ?
you are incredibly stupid
WTF is the point of that comparison when you can just use actual surface temperatures vs predicted surface temperatures.
It is like measuring the temperature of the 2nd floor washroom and comparing it to the temperature of the oven in the kitchen.
If the chart title stated that it was comparing predicted surface temperatures to actual atmospheric temperatures, it would be less retarded but still retarded. The fact that the title does not makes the chart ultra retarded.
Last edited:
the surface temperature record data set
1. incomplete ( 2/3 of the planet is covered with water)-the weather stations were not designed to provide region temp variations not a global average tempature
2. inconsistent- a huge volume of colder weather stations were dropped when the soviet union collapsed
3. filled with errors
4. has been fiddled with
besides what part of 4 different balloon datasets verified with 2 satellite data sets confuses you ?
there is a reason scientists have been sending balloons up into the atmosphere for 100 years
the greenhouse gas theory predicts the expected warming will occur in the troposphere
it has not occurred
lean some physics so you can become un retarded
Attachments
Let us assume that by "surface" we mean 2m above the surface of the earth, the volume of air from the surface of the earth to 2m above the surface of the earth is ~1.02 million km^3. The volume of air between the surface of the earth to the mid troposphere is ~2.55 Billion km^3. So the mid troposphere volume is 2550x the volume of air around the surface of the earth. This is not adjusted for pressure, it is just a simple calculation based solely on distance from the earth's surface.
A first order estimate is that the changes to the mid troposphere temperature is 2550x less than surface temperatures. So if the surface of the earth warmed by 1 degree C, the mid troposphere warms by 1/2550 = 0.0004 degrees C.
Last edited:
This may be my favourite larue quote ever.
You are doing your usual tactics, larue. First you claim scientists are biased but then when its pointed out that oil industry scientists came up with the same projections you move on to another outrageous claim.
The next argument is a favourite of yours, that ground surface temperatures aren't reliable. Instead you want to replace those measurements with troposphere measurements precisely because they are high enough in the atmosphere that they won't show surface temperature readings. You ignore the fact that there are multiple data sets for surface temperature that all show similar warmings. Just as you also ignore the fact that there are different satellite data sets and most of them show the warming in the troposphere that was projected by the IPCC.
Satellite data is also incomplete and requires massive stitching for a complete data set.
Here's the guy that runs the RSS data set that you claim is better who says that surface temperature readings are more accurate.
And an article you won't read that finds that the satellite data shows the same warming as surface readings.
Explainer: how surface and satellite temperature records compare - Carbon Brief
A rundown of what surface and satellite temperature records can and can't tell us about global temperature rise and climate change.
www.carbonbrief.org
The rich aren't the problem. Government spending is. No way a country of $40 million people produces a GDP of over a trillion dollars if the rich aren't paying taxes.
instead lets just assume you do not have a clue what you blither about
what part of 4 different balloon datasets verified with 2 satellite data sets confuses you ?
the warming as predicted by failed computer models just is not occurring
my god you are stunned
4 different balloon datasets verified with 2 satellite data sets ?
this is independent verification
yet you still claim failed computer model projections are better than independently verified actual observations
it is well past the time you admit the climate con has failed
i suggest you seek a different route to back door communism on the world
Hey larue, here's a chart from the article linked above that compares the temperatures from satellite and surface readings.instead lets just assume you do not have a clue what you blither about
what part of 4 different balloon datasets verified with 2 satellite data sets confuses you ?
the warming as predicted by failed computer models just is not occurring
It shows you are using faulty, unsourced crap again.
Which data set are you using in that old image, larue?my god you are stunned
4 different balloon datasets verified with 2 satellite data sets ?
this is independent verification
yet you still claim failed computer model projections are better than independently verified actual observations
it is well past the time you admit the climate con has failed
i suggest you seek a different route to back door communism on the world
RSS or UAH?
Where did that chart come from?
Why won't you provide a source?
They are both shown in this chart.
The chart comes from here.
Explainer: how surface and satellite temperature records compare - Carbon Brief
A rundown of what surface and satellite temperature records can and can't tell us about global temperature rise and climate change.
www.carbonbrief.org
I will dumb it down for you. If had an oven that was 1m cubed and you heated it to 1C above ambient, then you open the oven in a room 2550m cubed, the temperature of the room would increase 1/2550 C.instead lets just assume you do not have a clue what you blither about
what part of 4 different balloon datasets verified with 2 satellite data sets confuses you ?
the warming as predicted by failed computer models just is not occurring
Heat does not radiate from space to the earth. The rays of the sun heats the surface of the earth so heat radiates from the earth to spaçe.
you certainly did dumb it down
look stupid
co2 is in the atmosphere and the greenhouse gas theory predicts any warming will occur in the troposphere
you simply can not have the atmosphere warming the surface while not warming itself
it is well past the time you admit the climate con has failed
i suggest you seek a different route to back door communism on the world
Why would you not use the lower troposphere temperature data? They are also gathered by satellite and balloons. Is it because the lower troposphere data shows significant warming so you cherry-pick a dataset that has no/minimal warming that also is farther from the earth surface and hence less relevant?
yeah ok
John Christy a climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and respected member of the IPCC is supposedly cherry picking data (according to the climate nutjob Frankfooter)
look stupid, they weather balloons / satellites have been searching for the troposphere warming for decades
\it is just not happening
it is well past the time you admit the climate con has failed
i suggest you seek a different route to back door communism on the world
John Christy's UAH satellite data is included in the chart I posted, larue. On your chart the satellite data agrees with the balloon data.
How come the chart you posted has data that ends in 2015?
Why does your chart disagree with the numbers posted directly on the UAH site?
Are you being dishonest, larue?
