Page 97 of 108 FirstFirst ... 47879596979899107 ... LastLast
Results 961 to 970 of 1072

Thread: New report on climate change released today

  1. Top | #961
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    21,918
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    64,391
    Rep Power
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    Without monkeys how would we have monkey business?
    Speaking of monkeys. Climate variations has been responsible for our very own evolution. Which supports what Iv'e been constantly saying here.
    That you think Salma Hayek is hot?

  2. Top | #962
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    20,442
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    30,919
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post

    But NEVER in human history has it changed at anything CLOSE to this rapidity.
    Chicxulub.
    There were humans at the time of Chicxulub??

  3. Top | #963
    Elder Contributor angelo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    10,043
    Archived
    5,706
    Total Posts
    15,749
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by angelo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post

    Without monkeys how would we have monkey business?
    Speaking of monkeys. Climate variations has been responsible for our very own evolution. Which supports what Iv'e been constantly saying here.
    That you think Salma Hayek is hot?
    Yea, that too!

  4. Top | #964
    Veteran Member bleubird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,122
    Archived
    2,737
    Total Posts
    3,859
    Rep Power
    63

  5. Top | #965
    Nut Case George S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    S. C.
    Posts
    1,934
    Archived
    16,498
    Total Posts
    18,432
    Rep Power
    45

    New Report on Climate Change Released Today

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/...s-roundup-361/

    The above link has many pages. Among them Defending the Orthodoxy and Challenging the Orthodoxy. Note the parallel with religion.

  6. Top | #966
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    20,442
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    30,919
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by George S View Post
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/...s-roundup-361/

    The above link has many pages. Among them Defending the Orthodoxy and Challenging the Orthodoxy. Note the parallel with religion.
    Yup. wattsupwiththat.com has a lot of close parallels to religion. In particular the whole 'belief in the face of evidence' thing.

    Reading that nonsense reminds me very strongly of reading the "scientific explanations" Young Earth Creationists employ to "prove" that the world can only be 6,000 or so years old.

    They too love to pretend that the actual science used by their opponents is just the same as their religion, and is, like their beliefs, subject to dogmatic orthodoxies.

  7. Top | #967
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,479
    Archived
    17,741
    Total Posts
    25,220
    Rep Power
    66
    From the link:
    “Our result is that the transient climate response – the short-term warming – in the troposphere is 1.1ºC at the point in time when carbon dioxide levels double. This is not a very alarming number. If we perform the same calculation on the climate models, you get a figure of 2.3ºC, which is significantly different. The models’ response to carbon dioxide is twice what we see in the real world. So, the evidence indicates the consensus range for climate sensitivity is incorrect.” [Study published in peer reviewed journal.]

    Christy then discusses the important work he and Ross McKitrick did to test the climate models against observations from 1979 to 2017 in the important tropical troposphere. They chose the Canadian climate model and tested it against temperature trends of the atmosphere between 30,000 and 40,000 feet, in the tropics from 20°N to 20°S. They also tested the warming trends against 102 climate model runs (those publicly available). They found the models show a warming about three times what is occurring. [Study published in peer reviewed journal.]
    It's kind of weird that they don't list the peer-reviewed journal. Is it one of those that publish anything, is the description not correct of the findings? George S, since you posted to the thread, can you tell us what journal so we can look at primary sources?

    By the way, I checked one of these out from prior posts to that website and I found that the article exaggerated...always check your primary sources.

  8. Top | #968
    Nut Case George S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    S. C.
    Posts
    1,934
    Archived
    16,498
    Total Posts
    18,432
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    From the link:
    “Our result is that the transient climate response – the short-term warming – in the troposphere is 1.1ºC at the point in time when carbon dioxide levels double. This is not a very alarming number. If we perform the same calculation on the climate models, you get a figure of 2.3ºC, which is significantly different. The models’ response to carbon dioxide is twice what we see in the real world. So, the evidence indicates the consensus range for climate sensitivity is incorrect.” [Study published in peer reviewed journal.]

    Christy then discusses the important work he and Ross McKitrick did to test the climate models against observations from 1979 to 2017 in the important tropical troposphere. They chose the Canadian climate model and tested it against temperature trends of the atmosphere between 30,000 and 40,000 feet, in the tropics from 20°N to 20°S. They also tested the warming trends against 102 climate model runs (those publicly available). They found the models show a warming about three times what is occurring. [Study published in peer reviewed journal.]
    It's kind of weird that they don't list the peer-reviewed journal. Is it one of those that publish anything, is the description not correct of the findings? George S, since you posted to the thread, can you tell us what journal so we can look at primary sources?

    By the way, I checked one of these out from prior posts to that website and I found that the article exaggerated...always check your primary sources.
    The author of the website is Anthony Watt. The following quote is from his web site:
    About Anthony:

    I’m the founder and editor of WattsUpWithThat.com the world’s most viewed website on climate. I’m a former AMS Television Seal Holder (Seal 676 retired) television meteorologist who spent 25 years on the air and who also operates a weather technology and content business, as well as continues daily forecasting on radio, just for fun.

    Weather measurement and weather presentation technology is my specialty. I also provide weather stations and custom weather monitoring solutions via www.weathershop.com (if you like my work, please consider buying a weather gadget there, StormPredator for example) and www.tempelert.com, and turn key weather channels with advertising at www.viziframe.com

    The weather graphics you see in the lower right corner of the blog are produced by my company, IntelliWeather. As you can see most of my work is in weather technology such as weather stations, weather data processing systems, and weather graphics creation and display. While I’m not a degreed climate scientist, I’ll point out that neither is Al Gore, and his specialty is presentation also. And that’s part of what this blog is about: presentation of weather and climate data in a form the public can understand and discuss.

  9. Top | #969
    Content Thief Elixir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    10,105
    Archived
    707
    Total Posts
    10,812
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post

    But NEVER in human history has it changed at anything CLOSE to this rapidity.
    Chicxulub.
    There were humans at the time of Chicxulub??
    There were human ancestors. They were probably some smoggy little bastards, too.

  10. Top | #970
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    23,006
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    119,758
    Rep Power
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    From the link:
    “Our result is that the transient climate response – the short-term warming – in the troposphere is 1.1ºC at the point in time when carbon dioxide levels double. This is not a very alarming number. If we perform the same calculation on the climate models, you get a figure of 2.3ºC, which is significantly different. The models’ response to carbon dioxide is twice what we see in the real world. So, the evidence indicates the consensus range for climate sensitivity is incorrect.” [Study published in peer reviewed journal.]

    Christy then discusses the important work he and Ross McKitrick did to test the climate models against observations from 1979 to 2017 in the important tropical troposphere. They chose the Canadian climate model and tested it against temperature trends of the atmosphere between 30,000 and 40,000 feet, in the tropics from 20°N to 20°S. They also tested the warming trends against 102 climate model runs (those publicly available). They found the models show a warming about three times what is occurring. [Study published in peer reviewed journal.]
    It's kind of weird that they don't list the peer-reviewed journal. Is it one of those that publish anything, is the description not correct of the findings? George S, since you posted to the thread, can you tell us what journal so we can look at primary sources?

    By the way, I checked one of these out from prior posts to that website and I found that the article exaggerated...always check your primary sources.
    Second this. [Study published in peer reviewed journal] is a major red flag. It's not unusual for the popular press to not mention the source at all. When they are being more careful they may mention the name without giving the full citation. Still more careful will provide citations and links if possible. If they give the name they might occasionally identify it as a peer reviewed journal. Never have I seen a reference to "peer reviewed journal" without the name unless the intent was to deceive.

    Note that there are pay-to-publish scam "peer reviewed" journals out there. That would be my first thought when the source is identified merely as "peer reviewed journal".

Similar Threads

  1. Today there is a report of how to time travel.
    By George S in forum Natural Science
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-28-2019, 09:56 PM
  2. Global Warming to Climate change to Climate Catastrophe.
    By T.G.G. Moogly in forum Natural Science
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 10-20-2018, 06:07 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-02-2018, 12:00 AM
  4. Climate Change Fanatics Confront Growing Evil - Climate Lukewarmers
    By maxparrish in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 01-28-2015, 03:11 AM
  5. Ezell Ford autopsy report released
    By ksen in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 01-01-2015, 04:19 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •