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.
And? So you show that it might be some other man made chemical, therefore that leads me to believe that you must also agree that global warming is in fact man made.
I think at this point we need to revisit the whole concept of CAGW and how we make reference to it.
Since past warming appears to be limited to the lower troposphere and occurred at a time when the stratosphere cooled dramatically, "global warming" seems a bit out of step with reality as only part of the globe (TLT) actually ever warmed.
And since both lower tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling have mostly subsided, and with Ozone staged to make a huge comeback thanks to the worldwide ban of CFCs, the -ing suffix in warming should receive some attention as well.
Personally, I like temporary anthropogenic atmospheric thermal inversion.
But, NOAA and NASA monitoring shows the man-made CFCs decreasing while the ozone hole continues to set new record highs.
My simple wild ass guess - the ozone hole has always been there and will be there long after the man-made components are gone.
The Ozone hole isn`t really a hole.
Its just an area where Ozone levels decrease below 220 Dobson Units.
As for that trend, the hole is large this year due to extreme cold, but in recent years the hole has been relatively small and certainly declining from its late 1990s peak.
An eighth grader knows that; what happens to climate when an asteroid hits the earth, or when there's a period of intense geological activity, or when gigatons of greenhouses gases are emitted annually?
Those greenhouse gasses are continuing to be added to buy the gigaton but surface temperatures have remained stable for two decades and may even be declining now.
Regardless of the reasoning behind the theory, CAGW simply doesn`t pan out in the real world.
Those greenhouse gasses are continuing to be added to buy the gigaton but surface temperatures have remained stable for two decades and may even be declining now.
Regardless of the reasoning behind the theory, CAGW simply doesn`t pan out in the real world.
Stable surface temperatures? Stable for twenty years? Your head must be really buried deep.
And save the fancy explanation of why the data from GHCN v2 was changed.
We all know the answer to that question.
Fancy explanation? It is because technology has advanced and the technology used today is much more accurate than before. Therefore they are collecting more data points than before, thus the change.
I am typing this on a tiny computer that didn't exist 15 years ago and I stronger than the desktop computer I owned 15 years ago, so hardly what I would call a fancy explanation.
Fancy explanation? It is because technology has advanced and the technology used today is much more accurate than before. Therefore they are collecting more data points than before, thus the change.
I am typing this on a tiny computer that didn't exist 15 years ago and I stronger than the desktop computer I owned 15 years ago, so hardly what I would call a fancy explanation.
How can adjusted data that was originally collected so haphazardly that it was later deemed to be faulty more accurate than a direct and verifiable reading using a satellite?
How can adjusted data that was originally collected so haphazardly that it was later deemed to be faulty more accurate than a direct and verifiable reading using a satellite?
The original data wasn't collected haphazardly, current data is just more detailed than previous data....should be a simple thing for anyone to understand.
Also, no one is saying previous data was faulty.
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.
