They don’t correlate well because they measure different things. I doubt your body qualifies over 25 years. 1979-2019: 0.29 +- 0.02, in the average: Further to my previous post, I am not sure if the figures have been updated or I misread them, but they look OK now. #hd #tits #cocks #cumshots. These nomadic humans also may have used fire as a land management tool, which would have exacerbated the speed at which the desert took hold. But even worse, when we rebut your false claims, you have no answers. This is my 2021 Challenge to all serious climate scientists. This is your fundamental misunderstanding of the physics here. BTW, the Climategate Emails prove Dr Thompson knows it is sublimation, not warming that is causing the shrinking of the glacier. The atmosphere is either in thermal equilibrium with the surface or cooler. He didn’t come up with the earth at 303 K. And you don’t understand physics, thermodynamics or the greenhouse effect. Clint R, biased doesn’t even come close. But the LWIR radiation leaving the object hits the glass, gets absorbed, and warms the glass. At all times in this, the flow of heat is from warmer surface to cooler atmosphere. I’ve come to this provisional conclusion because I’ve linked you up to research papers recently and you’ve rejected them without having read them (claiming R2 values not present when they are, for example). I’m going to go with 0.15 for January 2021. (3+4+5+4)/3 = 16/3 = 5.33 We are not adding frequencies, we are adding energy. No admission of failure yet so there must be hope. Yove done no experiment to prove this wrong. Lack of O3 would simply result in cooling, not warming. Did you just hop from blog to blog? Dr. Spencer, great work as usual, it is much appreciated. NASA provides the data, they ignore that data, but they provide the date to make a real climate model. Where it is located doesn’t seem to matter that much. RCP 4.5 and 6.0 still in play, if we can stop emissions this century and start drawing CO2 down, but I don’t see that happening. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiant_flux. You are not very good at it. ”. We can’t tax the Sun, we can only tax the Oil Companies. “So you made up some model where a sphere with 1 m^2 surface area which is supplied a 240 W input must somehow emit 480 W/m^2.”. He was a worldwide renowned specialist for visible light, UV and near IR. The data isn’t adjusted, but they do quality control checks to reduce duplication and to winnow out unrealistic values (like maximum temp at location X of 323 degrees C.). Once again, prove me wrong. Would you consider producing charts to help remove the natural forces from those contributed by man-made CO2? From your own data, and that the sun only falls on 1/2 the earth at a time, and irridance per M^2 decreases with incidence angle, let’s say solar radiance = 250 W/M^2 of high energy wavelength light that actually warms the oceans. Yes, the climate models do have more than 1 factor. Then run a 2 factor model and get the Adj-R Squared. Thus, to answer your question, we will never again be talking about a year that is the second coldest on record. Wtf? Increasing CO2 near the surface is irrelevant because H2O absorbs 100% of the LWIR of 15µ. * He clearly indicated more CO2 was better. Of course, its not of much use for whining crybabies who demand to be spoon fed. Choose a location for control for those two factors and you will find no warming. https://stopthesethings.com/2017/04/04/germans-furious-as-more-ancient-forests-felled-to-make-way-for-wind-turbines/. If additional W/M^2 is the cause of warming, look at H20, not CO2. But not all other things are equal. “YOU are the one adding ‘under any circumstance’, not me.” He did not have to look into the greenhouse theory, he already had the expertise to recognize it was faulty. 43.75 | -71.25: 298 It’s amazing to read all the time about El Nino being the only source of warming, and even acting as Earth’s warmth regulator. Yeah, maybe that could fly, but the language is too strong elsewhere in the paper. At high latitudes, stratospheric temperature, especially in winter, can also be influenced by solar activity. Build a CO2 centric model and you get the garbage results like the experts at NASA proudly publish on their website. 4x more energy is carried in that channel at 0C than at -80C despite the fact that the peak channel is 10.6 um vs 15 um. Why in the world would all this effort be given to model the climate if the Sun and Water Vapor are the cause of the warming? Pratt used modern material, like saran wrap in lieu of glass, that interfered with the experiment. Which adjustment would you characterize as fraud? If there are things that you don’t understand then ask questions. Your inability to answer correctly is why you’re an idiot. At least you gave the matter some thought. Water vapour is an amplifying feedback. It’s hard to imagine that the heat is originating from below. I’m really poking at the nature of uncertainty. ET, do you not understand the meaning of the NASA Graph I linked? I usually used Wood for Trees which isn’t as robust. So CO2 can, and will, absorb photons of all energies.”. barry says: The amount of BS you spout could green a desert. Does anyone have the correct figures? Similarly, a single ice cube emits 300 W/m^2. Read that above quote. As you point out, weather is more than just temperature, and average temperatures tell you nothing about extremes. No one serious says it is. Why, only CO2 remains after the H2O has condensed out of the atmosphere. In fact, there is hard scientific evidence that all four of these factors contribute to the discrepancy, and that most of it can be explained without resorting to model physics errors. If this geothermal factor is a large part of that ice loss then the AMO going negative may not lead to any large increases in sea ice. The earth appears to be pretty close to a self healing entity over millennia if not millions of years. You will see there is no warming due to CO2. I was interpreting that as LWIR of 9.5 microns being thermalized. Average temperature anomaly for the 6 years up to Dec 2020 minus the average temperature anomaly for the next 2 years. “Tipping points” are not runaway processes, just sudden, quasi-permanent changes, of which the geological record is abundant. You won’t regret it. Hansen brought that notion to climate modeling at GISS. …but the full database has grown from 75,000 to over 100,000 in the last 8 years. Water content is a feedback, not a forcing. Daily and Monthly. And after they are put in charge of everything, they will find trouble everywhere, diagnose it incorrectly, apply the wrong remedies, and make things worse! TF, you are one of the stupidest idiots here! In past years claims for worlds warmest year usually are made well before the end of December. I see below one of your comments, somewhere above, ” I look at desert stations that show no warming based upon sound scientific reasoning and support of empirical evidence. You did never make the comparison, otherwise you wouldn’t write ‘possibly’. Although, I am surprised by the amount of cooling this month. Stop trying to be gratuitously offensive. But you would have to read it to know that…. The Arctic is reported to be warming much faster than the rest of the Earth and the largest increase is during the Winter half of the year. All one has to do is open a web browser and go look at the various space based radiometer products that are widely disseminated to see that GHGs lower the amount of radiation escaping to space. The concentration of H2O changes with temperature. Of course that has since been thoroughly debunked. NASA and the IPCC haven’t even come close to modeling the global temperature. As to heating any deep body of water from the top, this is just unphysical nonsense. Low cloud cover is a reducing feedback. Barnston & Schickedanz 1984 I’m talking about R. W. Wood. Wood, a scientist who was renowned for his work with gases like CO2, sodium vapour, etc. Here is, for example, another comparison of the El Ninos in 1997/98 and 2015/16, by looking at UAH’s absolute temperatures, reconstructed out of Roy Spencer’s anomaly and climatology files: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EeNGcBpI1lIlB7IByn08xgFMfX2nl5cH/view. But Google: Delay Time for Terrestrial InfraRed Radiation to escape Earth’s Atmosphere. I think you and I see this quite differently. Why it is called ‘the Super El Nino’ is very probably due to the fact that at the time it was active, UAH6.0 LT had its topmost anomaly, what of course is misleading. Here is a station where the raw data shows RAW temps much cooler in the past. Probably more important to GAST is whether the AMO changes modes in the near future. Your statement is meaningless and useless. 2016: 11.22 I’m hoping we can agree to ignore 15 um radiation entering from space at least for now. Nearly 14 years later and history repeats, as it has over and over in these ‘debates’. That’s the value for the central month. Do the same in a rain forest and they will warm as well. I have always felt some doubt as to whether this action played any very large part in the elevation of temperature. OMG…words of wisdom from Eli Rabbett, aka Josh Halpern. But, and this is crucial, adding more 15μ photons is like adding more ice cubes. *, * Without the radiative forcing supplied by CO2 and the other non-condensing greenhouse gases, the terrestrial greenhouse would collapse, plunging the global climate into an icebound Earth state. I too can say that I have never advocated for any specific policy. Muller admits he was never a skeptic yet we see claims that he is a converted skeptic. Everybody knows this. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/10/osudr-lonnie-thompson-pushes-gloom-and-doom-still-thinks-the-snows-of-kilimanjaro-are-melting-due-to-global-warming/. She thinks the next grand minimum began last year. Do you think that will keep you from insulting, discrediting, and denigrating? Now why is that? The plants on our planet would prefer 1,000 ppm CO2. By the way, the water vapour graph displays the work of applying WV retrieval from satellites and relying on the Clausius–Clapeyron relationship to scale it. ps. But you are missing the next step up! Just as silly as claiming deep ocean currents are due to surface wind! This is of great importance at night as it slows down heat loss from the surface. And I could go on and on and on and on. From Nick Stokes site. It doesn’t matter which side of the topic it is. The reason the gas is cooled to -80C° and only the 9.5µ LWIR is applied is to isolate the impact of the LWIR on the gas to see if it does in fact warm the gas to its associated blackbody temperature. I would like to know how you download stations in bulk the parse them out into groups so easily. There is perhaps an over-emphasis on CO2, but it is certainly not the only factor that is considered. “We now possess all the necessary data” etc. 1) I’ve heard multiple times that CO2 is the only forcing factor that has changed over time. You’re EXTREMELY confused. If the chamber is 0 C, the gas will warm to 0 C. If the chamber is 50 C, the gas will warm to 50 C. This follows from the definition of “thermal equilibrium”. But for 2020 12 the NH SH average is 0.22 not the quoted figure of 0.27. Ball4, I went on to say “Blue objects don’t just reflect blue photons.”. Oh look, an attempted leading question from troll Bindidon. Human Activity in China and India Dominates the Greening of Earth, NASA Study Shows Worth a read for some insight on how good the sealing against air infiltration is, useful models, growth response to increased CO2, and suchlike. As said: the rest when I have time to do…. That is why the La Nina phenomenon and the surface temperature of the largest ocean on Earth have such a great influence on the global temperature. RTFR. He has a degree in applied mathematics and he seems to have absorbed everything spoon fed him by Hansen. This other is the N and S Polar regions. No one is allowed to work outside in those temperatures. With enough ice cubes (ie completely surrounding the thermometer with ice) then the thermometer would indeed receive 300 W/m^2. https://tinyurl.com/y4h2mcxb [and clouds!] Finally, any increase in geothermal heat flux would probably take centuries to be felt at the surface… the ocean abyss has stable stratification, and so must be slowly forced upward on the large scale by convective sinking in certain polar regions.”, https://judithcurry.com/2019/07/21/geothermal-ocean-warming-discussion-thread/. Maybe the US fracking mania will get the Yellowstone magma chamber awake, and then… wherever you live, Ojmjakon, Werchojansk etc will come to you (but not only in the usual winter time). Are you daring to question the “eminent” Zeke Stay at home dad pretending it’s possible to be both ? I’ll be calling the physics department Monday to see if they will run that experiment. Looks like you missed the bit you were initially interested in. Humbly, -C. I track this quite closely and run my own models to predict the next GISS update. 1.66 mm +/- 0.66 mm per year since the gauge was installed. Stage 2 the other results to come in. – unadj: 0.04 In other words, how do you make predictions with this model? However, CO2 can be heated to any desired temperature merely by compression, or mixing with a gas of the desired temperature. https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_MEAN_ALL_EQ_2020.png. but got lost a couple of times. What is the R-Squared? Has to try something, I suppose. Indore (22.72N, 75.80E) ID:207427540000 All this is well encapsulated in Kepler’s 2nd law. Folkerts got caught claiming two ice cubes will heat something to 325K (52C, 125F)! 1. Of course these two are highly correlated! Are the Maldives under water yet? That means that if in fact CO2 warms water and Ice, Ice would melt itself. = wild guess predictions of a horrible climate in 100 years — repeated every year since the 1960s. “I constructed time series out of existing data, Entropic man. It will make a big difference in the answer to your question. Bindidon would call this “Cherry Pick” the locations controlled for the UHI Effect. Then, anything is possible. How can one location be exposed to 40x the W/M^2 and the temperatures be essentially the same? More CO2 in the atmosphere (or H2O, CH4, N2O, CFC gases, not only CO2 plays a role here), more absorp-tion of IR happens in the atmosphere than if these gases were absent. I doubt it. Roughly 2 orders of magnitude every 1 um you move from the peak. Generally, if it has been a hotter day, it will be followed by a warmer night. In general quote: The is NASA, the people that put a man on the moon, are showing to all the world what complete failures they are. So which predictions were they? Sure, we’d all like to see the AGW crowd find their hypothesis proven wrong to the point of indefensible. bobd…”Sadly you are confused about Wood, his experiment has been repeated with confirmation that there is an effect”. 3) CO2 appears to trend with temperature, but the CO2 W/M^2 shows a log decay. The gradual increase in temperature over the last 140 years is due to the direct forcing from increasing CO2 and the amplifying feedbacks it induces. Enter & enjoy it now! Various regional LT departures from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 24 months are: The full UAH Global Temperature Report, along with the LT global gridpoint anomaly image for December, 2020 should be available within the next few days here. None of that volatility can be attributed to CO2 unless you can explain how CO2 causes both warming and cooling. Two ice cubes can’t warm something more than one ice cube. First…H2O is not the only thing that modulates daily highs and lows. Ooops?! However, the 5% it doesn’t is probably the most volatile. The facts are Climate Science makes definitive statements with absolutely no credible data sets to support them. We are at 0.5C now. – Tropics can absolutely go below baseline. Photon frequencies don’t simply add, just like fluxes don’t simply add. I have no interest. Measure the temperature of an asphalt road surface in direct noon sunlight.. bdgwx, Lower Troposphere increased due to more solar radiation reaching the oceans and increase in H20 Vapor. Take it back! The data have been averaged over the oceans in the latitude band from 20S to 20N. The daily swings in CO2 in a cornfield is 200 ppm, more than the change in CO2 since the start of the industrial age. Bindidon, your inability to see yourself as others see you is what is shameful…and hilarious. Finding love is a challenging quest even in your home country. The data represents 95% of the planet. Most radiative transfer and radiative forcing models incorporate the water vapor feedback (Clausius-Clapeyron relationship) unless specifically noted. The mathematician, Gavin Schmidt, could not describe positive feedback or give the equation for it, yet he programs climate models at GISS that have positive feedback in them. Thanks again, Bindidon. Do a study for the temperature differentials between greening and non-greening locations, and you will be able to tease out the impact of H20 on the global temperature charts created by NASA. For example, an object in deep space will equilibrate at 3K Halpern et al rebutted that would mean one radiator was not radiating. 1 source for hot moms, cougars, grannies, GILF, MILFs and more. As a physicist, he was aware of the correctness of the physics in the theory. Check this out – you can explore natural influences on global temps maually. Candidate to take on this challenge. “bob, a REAL science study has a meaningful start (usually called an abstract, or introduction), a discussion portion, and an end (called a conclusion or summary). Water vapour does indeed correlate with temperature, because changing temperature causes changing water vapour. The Oceanic Nino Index (ONI) is based on sea surface temperatures in the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean.”. If you use 13 months you avoid weighting the average to data before or after the selected month. I am hoping you are quite a bit more intelligent than ClintR. Geologists and been thinking about this and collecting data about this for years. Thanks Clint, the comments are greatly appreciated. Purposeful omission is one of the ways he avoids reality. I will allow Prof. Muller to speak for himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sme8WQ4Wb5w. Really? Lifesaver. You bring in another ice cube and it warms it more. City fills up with kids on extra buses? 1987 3 -0.29 Adjusted NASA data doesn’t really prove much to me as I’ve demonstrated. Yeah, that is consistent with my hypothesis that you’ll find a negative correlation between diurnal surface temperature response and diurnal surface CO2 response. The warmer air means the engine releases its heat less efficiently. P.S. Lots of desert. I have also followed his reasoning as to how he developed the law. I didn’t mean to be rude or hostile of condescending, but the time for debating the reality of climate change is long past. That’s darned cold but -35C is brutal in comparison. First…if you want to correlate water vapor changes with temperature changes why not just use what has already learned over the last 200 years? Conceivably, if they alternate in timing and intensity like Yellowstone’s geysers. He regards being called an idiot as being tantamount to a physical assault, since he has no sense of humour. Lots of desert. It bottoms just about -80C. There would be nothing to stop the emitter emitting at a maximum rate. Get an infrared lamp and shine it on a pan of water. Are you channeling Errol Flynn? When they speak of ‘German humor’, they actually mean humor that actually is none. What have ratings to do with facts? CO2 will cool the atmosphere all wth way down to -80C&Deg;, and will only warm the atmosphere if it is less than -80C&Deg;. I hope he sends you a cut from his next week paycheck. If we add glass around all sides, the sunlight goes through the glass and still warms the object. People get the two confused often. Molecules dont collide, but its a start. Somebody had to. Where water vapor is, warmth will be. The first example being the links to Roy Spencer’s anomaly files, because it contains ‘ncd-c’. All CO2 molecules emit. Do the regression from 1959 and show the results. Observation and use. My microwave oven uses radiation with MUCH longer wavelengths. It does have an effect at the surface, and what happens elsewhere in the atmosphere translates througout. The average has way gone up, even though the photon has the same average as the atoms. Blue objects don’t just reflect blue photons. CO2 simply adds to the insulation ability of the atmosphere. Can you provide a link to the publications where you are seeing those predictions? “requires certain software not native to my computer the files had an unusual suffix .gz or something for compressed files.”, Tar + Gnu zip, the free open source 7-zip should handle it: https://tinyurl.com/. We know that vegetation increases water vapor. You waited until the very end — ” CO2 is a forcing.”. A CO2 laser has NOTHING to do with the atmosphere, you idiot. The only ones we get these days are dim and off their rocker. Alarmists claim that CO2 drives temperatures. Svante Arrhenius believed that stimulating children with electric shocks would make them smarter. Funny, I went to test my theory that the greening of the Earth has contributed to warming, and guess what? Something to Consider: Now add in the silly claim that because he doesn’t know what else might have caused warming, that it must be AGW. I could be wrong, but I think the 25,000 number is outdated (and should be updated). There are no GHGs in the containers, and they will warm just like everything else. Answer that very very simple question. * Bindidon If you write a long comment and it gets refused, go back one step in the browser and move to the thread’s end. Now, before you make some other comment, can you at least admit I have found you not one but several examples of climate modeling focussing on water vapour (and cloud) component? Other differentials: Has that area been warming? ”. Unlike you we do not blame the misapplication of the theory on the theory being wrong. And it does, it cools the atmosphere where it is emitting from but not the surface. How do you know what inputs to use for G, S, and C for future time periods? Well…actually…with the ONI index < 1.0 we would normally expect December to be even lower than what was reported. Cold + Hot = warm “GHCN daily data, which is raw daily summaries of temp, rain, humidity etc for weather stations. Cook 2015 Absolutely not. Lamberts Law, Beers Law, Fresnels equations, and all that. Bindidon, thousands of nonsense papers can’t alter reality. Do you honestly believe Trump was lying, or are you just trolling again, barry? The best is to look at the grid distribution: https://drive.google.com/file/d/17ZgjmYUL43320EoLQ5bL0Hs3aYwas-gt/view, When gridding, each cell has the same weight…. Clausius stated in words. PMMA or plexiglass looks to be the ideal and cheap material to do this experiment. To get there would require the technological capture and geological burial of 65 ppm of CO2. This graphic shows its seasonality, and evolution over time. This indicates that direct CO2 forcing accounts for no more than 60% of warming and feedbacks account for at least 40%. I heard Dr. Spencer say on a TV interview years ago that AGW could be 10% or 90% of the cause of our recent warming, but we really don’t have a clue. They would of course never acknowledge such research and work to ban it from publication, but that just means you are right, and that is what matters. Darwin said: I still think geo-thermal is the cause of the ocean warming. For bona-fide 1970’s era predictions start with Budyko. It’s great that you’re catching up wit the science. Co2 molecule average velocity in our atmosphere is less than 500 m/s All I’ve seen are “adjustments” to make the temperature more linear and to better correlate with the trend in CO2. Above the 60th parallel, the influence of pressure and solar radiation on the temperature in the troposphere and the stratosphere is clearly visible. Once gain, thanks a million. Yes, can’t have any impact on plant life either. In the Finance world, they calculate a year based on a TTM, or trailing 12 months. ” I hope I live long enough to see a reversal of the Arctic sea ice extent. If the ice remains at 273 Kelvin it will emit to the sphere a total of 0.227 Watts which will raise the sphere to a temperature of 44.7 Kelvin. You may find that there is no gas in the universe that interacts only with photons of a specific energy level. Both would be enclosed, both would be sheltered from incoming radiation, both would have identical atmospheric temperatures around and above the corn. 0.00? However, a new paper may have discovered a significant geothermal factor in the Arctic. The current la nina has already peaked and was not as cold as some models projected, however, it is the coldest la nina event in 10 years, and will finally offset some of the warming spike from the 2015/16 Super El Nino. bob, your ongoing effort to pervert reality makes you an idiot. Or slimy trolls too lazy to think for themselves.”. If you assign to average to July, the opposite occurs. So if the chamber is -80 C, the gas will stay at -80C. Once equilibrium is established, the temperature of the water can be read from the thermometer scale. 9347 you see that 2020 will end around 1.10C. I never assumed that I or what I write would be rated positively on this blog. Fill an insulated container with a Greenhouse gas with Ozone and CO2. I don’t know. Never claimed it did. EM has no mass whereas heat requires atoms to exist. Find where I stated such. For some reason, NASA “adjusts” a desert station for both H2O and the Urban Heat Island effect which clearly aren’t present. – to a competition between 200 US grid cells and 2,000 cells outside of the US. Look up sites that have been exposed to increasing H2O and you will find warming. June 10JMA ENSO forecast predicts ENSO neutral conditions for the foreseeable future. Strange. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/. Yes and no. Didnt stop it from being warmer than the Super El Nino year of 1998.”. Consider an similar, familiar example — the sun EMITS a flux of about 64,000,000 W/m^2 from its surface. What about that paragon of yellow, the banana? I’m not absolutely certain of this. 4) There is no way anyone familiar with chart reading would see a significant trend being caused by CO2 in any of the graphs Bindidion created. They have since come in sooner and sooner as scientists play catch up with rapid pace of sea ice loss. CO2 increases, temperatures increase, New York sinks into the oceans? It reduces the heat lost by the surface. Just read a global temp researcher on the topic: “The vertical profile of ocean warming (if it can be believed) suggests warming decreasing with depth. No need really. Ho ho ho! To maintain its temperature it has to have 30,000 watts of energy supplied to it. Only seen in hot places, during the day, in fine conditions? All who permanently urge in saying something, like those little dogs who constantly have to pee on every tree: they have nothing to say. BTW, where is the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship for CO2? CHM00054511 1951 1 10 -20.1 When the wind started the cables vibrating, like a huge guitar, the vibrations were transferred to the deck and back to the cables. Interesting time period, but what does it tell us? She did a decent job in Bladerunner as a freaked out robot. The sort of thing that NOAA and NASA (knowing no better) try to foist on a gullible audience. If you add another ice cube the temperature of the sphere rises to 53.2 Kelvin. They will teach you how to build a real model. If you are trying to suggest that el Ninos are responsible for the warming in recent times, then you might want to consider what that means if you run the tape backwards. How would you measure the prediction? Similarly, CO2 absorbs and emits 15 um IR *better than* 12 um IR.

Circuit Vtt Domme, Caen Et Ses Alentours, Cinema Réunion Rex, Boutique En Ligne Château De Chambord, Hôtel Sur Pilotis Philippines, Musique Electro Année 2020, Verrine Fraise Chocolat Blanc Mascarpone, Trottinette électrique Dualtron, Salaire Moyen Ligue 1 Hors Psg,