Climate sensitivity

I like how you alarmists are now calling known climate history a "strawman", lol...

Known, established science is now a strawman, wow, lol... you guys are just too much

 

. . . ranted the strange kid, playing with a straw dog.

 

This is what mindless incomprehension looks like. You live in a bubble and talk to yourself.

 

The guy made some valid points . Why not just address them ?

 

the points have been addressed countless times, you and others didn't comprehend it then and you and they are not going to comprehend it now...there is either a cognitive or educational deficiency (maybe both) that prevents some from seeing the bigger picture regardless how many times the information is repackaged...

one more time just for the hell of it,seriously try comprehend ...[I]that previous climate change periods occurred is irrelevant, their relevancy is the reason they occurred and how they differ from this warming period[/I]...

 

But they don't differ. They show a remarkable similarity in both level and rate of change. Today's conditions are well within natural variability and Occams razor suggest most probably natural in origin. The need to invoke humans as culprit is entirely predicated upon political considerations rather than environmental ones

 

As NASA's data quite irrefutably shows, you are wrong. There has not been more than 300 parts per million carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for the last 650,000 years, until 1950, when it has climbed almost vertically to nearly 400 parts per million. There is plenty of other evidence there too, of course. Global surface temperatures and whatnot. In sum, you are demonstrably claiming that the opposite of the truth is true.

http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

 

It doesn't matter what the CO2 is doing but what the temperature is doing. If CO2 were indeed the boogyman claimed we would be seeing the highest temperatures since the last glaciation. The fact that we are nowhere near that strongly suggests that the whole hypothesis has little merit and that natural forces are in play here

 

NASA apparently does not agree with you.

Firstly, CO2 is not the only evidence, so I don't think it is fair that you attempt to isolate it. Secondly, your claim implies a falsehood, since 10 of the last 12 years have been the hottest on record. That fact is contained in the very link I just posted, so it evidences quite succinctly that you are not bothering to read the material which refutes you. Here is the link again:-

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

 

The record is irrelevant because it is far too short to be making determinations about anything. That's when the politics takes over

There is not a single Peer review study that has empirically linked human activity with temperature. This entire hypothesis is predicated by faith in climate models all of which have spectacularly failed in just 25 years to predict today's conditions. Not only has the human impact on temperature never been quantified its signature has never even been detected yet against the noise of natural background variation. This is hardly surprising given the CO2 rise since 1850 represents a miniscule 0.012% of atmospheric volume

 

you're wasting your time, flogger and the rest of the forum's deniers know more than all the combined scientists at NASA, more in fact then 97% of all scientists...who would've guessed we'd have such incredible expertise in our little forum...

 

I am but a humble servant of the facts rather than a slave to the opinions

 

Okay - happy to look at any reliable unadulterated "fact" you want to put out there - one of course that is not the source of derision by the majority of physicists in the world such as that scream of a paper trying to prove that CO2 does not cause a greenhouse effect

Please post THAT one again - it is SOOOO worth shredding - in fact it is so bad that even I, a NURSE can spot the rubbish

 

You alarmists are a hoot...

So, the MWP is back in?? The LIA is back in?? With caveats though right?? is that where the goalposts have shifted to now??

So your story now is that there was a Roman Warming Period, MWP, and LIA - BUT, today's warming blows previous warming periods away, AND today's warming is pure disaster b/c we really should still be in the middle of the LIA, but for man introducing gabillions of tons (scary) of CO2 into the atmosphere??

Is that the story now?? We really should still be in the LIA??

 

Hoot-hoot, at gobble-gobble . . . Gibbies rock; Fenders . . . don't get a Fender . . . Jimi's dead . . .

What is it, with all YOUR periods, in the current interglacial?

The story is you don't read science posts or reports, PERIOD.

YOU don't want to admit, to regular Milankovitch cycles, over the last several million years, now to be famously disrupted, by human interference.

YOU are on your period, and you won't smarten up and mop it up, to notice we should be reglaciating, but we aren't.

See doctor, if your hysteria continues, like a little animal, which chases its own tail, infinitely.

 

http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/lappi/gisp-last-10000-new.png

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The horror!!!

Run for your lives!!! It's global warming!!!

 

Let's hope even catastrophists don't want to lose the 0.75º C that Earth has warmed since the LIA ended.
A little more warming would be nice.

 

Hear, hear!!

I'll tell ya, I'm looking out my window now at snowbanks the size of small mountains. We're completely under siege here... last two days we've gotten a nice little warm up into the 20's, but tomorrow it's supposed to go back to Arctic conditions again, low of -17 F and a high of -5 F.

Utility bill is going to be skyhigh... can't wait to get that sucker!!!

 

Please prove that 'the majority of physicists have ever been asked for any opinion on this issue ?

 

What's your excuse?

What, in your opinion, makes flogger a denier?
Is it because he doesn't agree with you and the rest of the catastrophist sheeple?

 

Have you not considered relocating to a more suitable clime, or are you obliged to stay put?

 

Perhaps a little discussion of denialism is in order. It's different from skepticism.

http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2012/05/18/is-the-holocaust-denialclimate/

 

Mark Hoofnagle?

How low can you go?

 

Actually moved here from a much better climate to be near family. Have 2 young kids, and my health isn't great, so I wanted them to grow up near their grandparants and cousins. It was a big sacrifice for me personally, but it's what was best for my kids - so in that regard it isn't a sacrifice at all.

My wife is filipino... I tried to warn her, she said she was ready, lol... she can't believe how cold it is!!! Luckily there is a large filipino community here, and the girls meet quite often to talk and cook filipino dishes, so it's all good.

 

214:

224:

I bet your wife and the local Filipino community are fascinated, by your denialism, given not only Haiyan/Yolanda, but increased frequency and severity of typhoons, while islands are generally threatened, by sea level rise.