Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Satellite sea level measurements are not affected by rising or sinking land so more believable.
Since 1993 (when satellite sea level measurements started), the sea level rise is 96 mm (3.77 inches in 27 years). The current rate is 3.3 mm per year - or 1.3 inches every 10 years.
I dont know if thats interpreted as its ONLY 1.3 inches every 10 years or holy cow, the sea is currently rising by 1.3 inches every 10 years.
Quote:
One moderate volcano blow, with its accompanying sulfur, carbon, and particulates constitute a huge "burp" into the atmosphere which likely eclipses those of man.
Easy to check.. Do a google search on something like "are volcanoes putting out more CO2 than man" or someting like that. You will find that the only place the quote is true is maybe on AM radio.
I liked post # 43 on the accuracy of climate models as it gave some links.
You will notice there is always some discrepancy between satellite and earth station temperature anomaly measurments. Both have their issues. Ground based measurements have some obvious problems and while satellite would seem to be more accurate, satellite must try and look through the atmosphere to determine what the temp on the surface is.
Here is a latest look at how well the models have predicted global temperature anomaly.
Here is a recent post from this guy http://clivebest.com/blog/?p=9252 and he thinks the IPCC models do tend to predict more warming than is actually occurring. But.. its not a large error.
This guy (Cllve Best) is on the skeptic side.. should make everyone happy.
Interesting also that in predicting the future, you have to predict what the increase in green house gasses will be. So you have to predict future population growth and also future CO2 emission per person. Get those a little off and the predictions will also be off no matter how good the science models are.
In 2012, an incredibly important milestone may have passed on climate change, and none of us noticed. That year may have been when the world reached peak carbon dioxide emissions per person. If so, that would mark a key inflection point in the world’s collective efforts to dramatically decarbonize the global economy.
Global population is expected to continue to increase through the century, from about 7.8 billion people in 2020 to about 10.9 billion in 2100, according to the central estimate of the United Nations. That means that the only way for carbon dioxide emissions to be reduced will be to reduce the amount emitted per person, since we won’t be reducing the number of people like in the 1976 sci-fi film Logan’s Run.
Our current US government seems to be trying to create another inflection point in the opposite direction.
Satellite sea level measurements are not affected by rising or sinking land so more believable.
Since 1993 (when satellite sea level measurements started), the sea level rise is 96 mm (3.77 inches in 27 years). The current rate is 3.3 mm per year - or 1.3 inches every 10 years.
I dont know if thats interpreted as its ONLY 1.3 inches every 10 years or holy cow, the sea is currently rising by 1.3 inches every 10 years.
Easy to check.. Do a google search on something like "are volcanoes putting out more CO2 than man" or someting like that. You will find that the only place the quote is true is maybe on AM radio.
Satellites measure the difference between the center of gravity and the surface of the water and their orbit, so rising tectonic plates make sea level appear to rise when tidal gauges stuck in the bed rock (tectonic plate) show no change... Revisit my example of a bowl of water on a stair case from our last discussion.. There's a difference between moving the bowl up a step vs putting more water in the bowl.....Probably a little of both going on in Nature....Best estimates say 1-2 mm/yr.
[I still wanna know how they can be so sure of a 1-2mm rise when waves and tides account for several meters of variations?]
Re: volcanoes & weather-- it's not so much the co2 or even so2 but the particulates (plain dirt) that blocks the sun that leads to cooling. It as said that the entire planet enjoyed nightly, glorious red sunsets and markedly cooler weather after Krakatoa erupted in 1883. That just happens to be the time frame use by the Warmists as their zero point in illustrating the current warming...Makes the warming look much more impressive.
I think it is pointless to show graphs that only go back decades or even hundreds of years due to how long the Earth has been around...over 4 billion years. However, we are now past 400 ppm (parts per million) of co2 for the first time in MILLIONS of years and that number is increasing faster now than it was back then. We are on track for 500 ppm in the next 50 years and the temperature will be over 5.4F warmer. But until climate change happens to you, people will stay in denial. Who wants to hear the sky IS falling?
I think it is pointless to show graphs that only go back decades or even hundreds of years due to how long the Earth has been around...over 4 billion years. However, we are now past 400 ppm (parts per million) of co2 for the first time in MILLIONS of years and that number is increasing faster now than it was back then. We are on track for 500 ppm in the next 50 years and the temperature will be over 5.4F warmer. But until climate change happens to you, people will stay in denial. Who wants to hear the sky IS falling?
You're believing the false hype:
The real scientists have calculated that if co2 were responsible for all the warming, since 1850, then a doubling of co2 would only add 1.7degC to the world temps...That means going from 400ppm to 500ppm would only add about 0.4deg...They also agree that co2 is responsible for no more than half the warming, so make that 500ppm translate into 0.2 deg warming...The artists using computers claim a doubling causes up to 6deg of warming. Note that the prediction from the modelss have been way off.
BTW-- look up total world oil reserves and assume it's all octane (8Cs per molecule), then magically, instantaneously oxidize it all to co2 and distribute it evenly across the 5 mile thick atmosphere, and don't allow any of it to be sequestered... It'll pencil out to a rise of [co2] to about 450ppm.
I think it is pointless to show graphs that only go back decades or even hundreds of years due to how long the Earth has been around...over 4 billion years. However, we are now past 400 ppm (parts per million) of co2 for the first time in MILLIONS of years and that number is increasing faster now than it was back then. We are on track for 500 ppm in the next 50 years and the temperature will be over 5.4F warmer. But until climate change happens to you, people will stay in denial. Who wants to hear the sky IS falling?
The activists graph all the way back all right; using "proxy" data since no one can say what the temperature on Manhattan Island is January 23, 0010 (yes you read that right) was. FWIW on January 23, 1952 the high was 55, low was 31 (link); today's forecast is H 44° / L 32° (link). That, however, doesn't prove it's cooled since 1952; or warmed.
The real scientists have calculated that if co2 were responsible for all the warming, since 1850, then a doubling of co2 would only add 1.7degC to the world temps...That means going from 400ppm to 500ppm would only add about 0.4deg...They also agree that co2 is responsible for no more than half the warming, so make that 500ppm translate into 0.2 deg warming...The artists using computers claim a doubling causes up to 6deg of warming. Note that the prediction from the modelss have been way off.
BTW-- look up total world oil reserves and assume it's all octane (8Cs per molecule), then magically, instantaneously oxidize it all to co2 and distribute it evenly across the 5 mile thick atmosphere, and don't allow any of it to be sequestered... It'll pencil out to a rise of [co2] to about 450ppm.
The 'real scientists' have calculated? Are these the guys that sat with dunce caps in the corner? Who are these 'real' scientists? All I know is the vast majority believe climate change is real AND man made. The majority are wrong according to you but the 'real' scientists are not.
The 'real scientists' have calculated? Are these the guys that sat with dunce caps in the corner? Who are these 'real' scientists? All I know is the vast majority believe climate change is real AND man made. The majority are wrong according to you but the 'real' scientists are not.
Most sociologists and other "professionals" believed in racial inferiority of Jews and blacks, and in eugenics as recently as the years leading up to WW II. Does a "majority consensus" in favor of a view make it right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Doomsday Clock
