Wednesday morning links

Why "Climate Change" Seems To Have Faded From The News

If you follow climate or weather information even a little, you will already know that on any given day, somewhere in the world, some weather station, or more likely multiple stations, is recording an "all time high" temperature for the particular day in question, while some other weather station, or maybe multiple stations, is recording an "all time low."

That's right. However, if the Earth's mean temperature was level, then we would expect the same number of record highs and records lows. Instead, we see a much higher number of record highs, consistent with a warming trend. See King, Attributing Changing Rates of Temperature Record Breaking to Anthropogenic Influences, Earth's Future 2017.

QUOTE:

Here is the latest chart from UAH going through the end of June 2018

The chart shows a clear warming trend.

#1 Zachriel on 2018-07-18 09:13 (Reply)

^ What the Clattering Soros-Schlansky Robot(s) is trying to float here is the unscientific notion that man's contribution of 4% of atmospheric CO2 - an inert trace gas constituting a whopping .04% of the atmosphere - has magically swamped eons of natural atmospheric negative feedback by combining with water vapor (up to two orders of magnitude greater by volume than itself) in a magically reactive way to throw earth's otherwise completely flatlined, stable-but-completely- unstable climate out of whack.

Scientists know that this absurd view violates the rule of equivalency which states that if there is no demonstrable difference between phenomena they are not different phenomena. In other words, if Earth didn't come along and destabilize it's eternal stability, then man surely couldn't have destabilized its eternal stability.

Conversely, if there is something to temperature rise - which the long term record expectedly shows - then if man's infinitesimal influence and tenure couldn't have done it, Earth must have. Or if man somehow did, Earth was already the culprit pursuant its twenty-fold greater influence extending back for those same eons. Or pursuant these variables, that Earth actually has no capacity self-regulate, meaning those eons never happened and we're all dead.

The CS-SR(s) wishes you to believe that man has leap-frogged an entire planetary system to cause unnatural chaos in a system simultaneously noted for it's stabilized/chaotic, negative feedback/positive feedback system. The CS-SR(s) has therefore favored an outlandish theory over reality, and in so doing has tacitly disallowed the fact that AGW was visibly invented to enrich its proponents to an almost incalculable degree.

Short version: 4% of benign entity constituting .04% of a whole in turn destabilizes 4% of a natural feedback system tens or hundreds of thousands of years old and destroys it in a way nobody can demonstrate, much less prove. Because: vast potential for profit. Equals Science!

#1.1 Meh on 2018-07-18 11:14 (Reply)

^ "Chart shows a clear warming trend."

Well, you may reply to the deaf CS-SR(s), the chart shows clear major climate influences too, and they ain't your 450 watt power supply, sport. For instance, here is the million year record.

https://serc.carleton.edu/images/microbelife/topics/proxies/milankovich_cycles.png

Too long? Not confirmation biasey enuf? Fine. Here's the teensy 10k yr record, in other words, the entire time man's been driving Hummers and I'll be darned, no warming trend here neither:

http://www.climate4you.com/images/GISP2%20TemperatureSince10700%20BP%20with%20CO2%20from%20EPICA%20DomeC.gif

#1.2 Meh on 2018-07-18 14:56 (Reply)

Sigh. And again I ask, what is the perfect temperature of the Earth?

When did it happen?

Please be precise. Thank you.

#1.3 jimg on 2018-07-18 17:40 (Reply)

Zach, baby, climate change has happened, is happening, and will happen in the future. Were it not so, I would be responding to you from under 2 km of ice, that being what swept across the may part of the prairies during the last Ice Age.

#1.4 Frances on 2018-07-18 23:52 (Reply)

Frances: climate change has happened, is happening, and will happen in the future.

Sure. However, the current rate of climate change is much faster than at any time in human history, and will cause profound changes to the environment. And because it is human-caused, it is avoidable.

Frances: Were it not so, I would be responding to you from under 2 km of ice, that being what swept across the may part of the prairies during the last Ice Age.

What will those crazy climate scientists come up with next?!

#1.4.1 Zachriel on 2018-07-19 07:26 (Reply)

Why "Climate Change" Seems To Have Faded From The News

Though seemingly infinite, an in reality very large, yet finite amount of lefty hysteria can only be allocated in so many ways. That is, it's hard to set one's hair on fire regarding climate change when "treason" is all the rage.

#2 Bill Carson on 2018-07-18 09:19 (Reply)

Too bad. The climate-changers were easy marks and reacted in predictable ways. The treason-shriekers are bbc* and may turn violent at any moment.

*bbc: beyond batshit crazy.

#2.1 BillH on 2018-07-18 10:40 (Reply)

Climate change is merely a formula to keep universities and their professors fully funded and on the progressive/Marxist bandwagon. Once the BS is blessed by Congress and the president then they can create more law and regulation to control more of our life. Its the world class naggers being paid to assess more fines, permits, and banishments all for the public safety. (and children of course)

#2.2 indyjonesouthere on 2018-07-18 15:39 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Batwoman: Lesbian comic hero to get TV series

Bird Dog: So what?

It's a first, like first monkey in space, or first woman to swim the English Channel, the first ethnically mixed marriage on TV, or the first orange president.

#3 Zachriel on 2018-07-18 09:26 (Reply)

The goal is to actively attract children to a homosexual lifestyle. It is to reprogram the young, to make them more malleable for the adults to prey on. Other than that, who cares?

#3.1 Anon on 2018-07-18 10:29 (Reply)

And NAMBLA wants to have a part in the freak show as well. Its all just more postmodern degeneracy fit only for a third world failed culture.

#3.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2018-07-18 16:05 (Reply)

Chicago: the Spendy City!

But trends don't matter in public spending. Only short-term climate trends matter.

We can say correlation isn't causation, but I'm afraid our brains are hard-wired otherwise. The scientific method tries to hijack that cognitive process and impose discipline on it, but how many people writing articles--or comments in threads--really understand the concept of proposing a causal mechanism, constructing an experiment to test it, and really paying attention to the results? It's so much easier to do retroactive curve-fitting, and there's a ton of money in it.

The Manhattan Contrarian article appends a comment that goes to the core of the issue: the absence of any verified physical principle to support a huge CO2 greenhouse-effect "forcing" multiplier, and the fact that a much smaller forcing than commonly assumed fits the last few decades of data much better. There's only one excuse for a high forcing multiplier, and that's to produce predictions that never quite materialize, but are politically useful in the meantime.

#4 Texan99 on 2018-07-18 09:38 (Reply)

"the absence of any verified physical principle to support a huge CO2 greenhouse-effect "forcing" multiplier"

Screw physical principles - do it for the children!

#4.1 Bill Carson on 2018-07-18 09:45 (Reply)

Texan99: The Manhattan Contrarian article appends a comment that goes to the core of the issue: the absence of any verified physical principle to support a huge CO2 greenhouse-effect "forcing" multiplier, ...

The force multiplier is water vapor. As the atmosphere warms, whether due to the CO2 greenhouse effect or other cause, basic physics implies increasing evaporation rates and rising atmospheric water vapor content. The relationship has been repeatedly confirmed, such as by Chung et al., Upper-tropospheric moistening in response to anthropogenic warming, PNAS 2014. Observations confirm that upper atmospheric water vapor is increasing. Of course, this has been known for more than a century. See Arrhenius, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground, London, Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 1896.

Texan99: and the fact that a much smaller forcing than commonly assumed fits the last few decades of data much better.

Various studies support a climate sensitivity of about 2-4°C per doubling of CO2. A recent study attempted to narrow the range of uncertainty to 2.2–3.4°C, though they made a number of simplifying assumptions that may impact their results. See Cox et al., Emergent constraint on equilibrium climate sensitivity from global temperature variability, Nature 2018.

UAH 6.0 TLT, the chart cited in the article, shows a trend of about 0.127 ±0.061°C/decade, well within model predictions. Keep in mind the distinction between transient climate response and equilibrium climate sensitivity.

#4.2 Zachriel on 2018-07-18 10:08 (Reply)

Oh goody, the kiddiez are back to discussing basic physics.

QUOTE:

Hardly, but rather based on the basic physics of heat flow.
Start with this basic fact: The Earth can only gain or lose heat radiatively.

#2.3.1 Zachriel on 2018-02-11 10:24

Yep, let's discuss some basic physics, shall we?

#4.2.1 drowningpuppies on 2018-07-18 11:11 (Reply)

Why, the Clattering Soros-Schlansky Robot(s) contradicted itself(s)?, puppies? Because it seems it(s) also believes - as much as a circuit board can believe - that Earth houses a chaotic negative feedback system that's all out of whack while it's completely stable wherein man constitutes Utter Ruin! at 4% of the whole of .04% of the climate.

And that all this stable instability is the unnatural natural reaction of a positive/negative feedback system going back at least a zillion eons and a hundred years. Makes sense to me!

Near as I can figure, the CS-SR(s) mashes all this contradict-o-rot together because Science!

#4.2.1.1 Meh on 2018-07-18 12:34 (Reply)

I know, I love it when he pretends to have a clue about physics. I've been seeing his silly posts for years, but he's never yet acknowledged what it means to guess at a forcing multiplier, or what the causation theory might be, or how it could be (or has been) tested. It's always: "Radiative heat loss! Greenhouse!" Yes, everyone understands those, and as usual they're not the part that's wrong with the model. The models relied on by alarmists all assume, quite without justification, that the tiny CO2 greenhouse effect will be multiplied, ergo DOOM. They can't seem to address the question of "how much of a multiplication?" Indeed, "Why not a dampening, tending back toward equilibrium?"

#4.2.1.2 Texan99 on 2018-07-18 13:30 (Reply)

Texan99: The models relied on by alarmists all assume, quite without justification, that the tiny CO2 greenhouse effect will be multiplied

No. It's not an assumption, but a result of basic physical processes. As the surface warms, there is increased evaporation. As the atmosphere warms, it is capable of holding more water vapor, which is a greenhouse gas. CO2 will warm the surface about 1°C per doubling of CO2. However, increased atmospheric water vapor has been observed, and there are various empirical studies to determine climate sensitivity to be about 2-4°C per doubling of CO2.

Texan99: Indeed, "Why not a dampening, tending back toward equilibrium?"

There are both positive and negative feedbacks in the climate system. Negative feedbacks include low altitude clouds, and greening of the surface due to CO2 fertilization. Positive feedbacks include ice albedo, high altitude clouds, and increased water vapor. There are longer term feedbacks such as chemical weathering, which removes CO2 from the atmosphere over geological time spans.

#4.2.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2018-07-18 14:00 (Reply)

^ CS-SR(s) has blown right by its unscientific but sciency equivalency canard, wherein man's 4% has suddenly upset all "negative feedbacks" to kick Mother Nature into complete solar system-shattering "positive feedbacks", AND has done so without the slightest indication or proofs thereof. It shall be assumed and theorized.

X condition was utterly fine for terran eternity - well demonstrating the resilience of "negative feedbacks" - until man came along and with X + 4%, proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that equilibrium was no damn "negative feedbacks" system after all, nosiree, but was indeed had been a "positive feedbacks" system all along.

And CS-SR(s) cannot see that 1) this is fundamental psuedoscience, and 2) that it defies reason.

#4.2.1.2.1.1 Meh on 2018-07-18 14:22 (Reply)

Evaporation... hmmm.
Are we learning anything, kiddiez?

Next lesson, kiddiez...
Condensation... hmmm.

Something about the basic physics of heat flow, maybe?

#4.2.1.2.1.2 drowningpuppies on 2018-07-18 15:07 (Reply)

Batwoman: Lesbian comic hero to get TV series

So what?

I totally agree with the "So what?". Now, if the proposed Batwoman were to be a woman who transitioned - surgically - to a male who then identified as heterosexual female before transitioning to a lesbian, that would be change I could believe in. And it would also be a first, too, which is nothing to sneeze at; much like Hillary Clinton being the first female Presidential candidate to lose an election ...

#5 Bill Carson on 2018-07-18 09:38 (Reply)

This one got me to thinking even more about the groundbreaking first ever female candidate to lose a US Presidential election:

Mueller All but Ignores the Other Russian Hack Target: the GOP

Hillary has yet to be tried (i.e., no "double jeopardy" worries) in regard to her alleged mishandling of classified information, right? Does anybody here have any information regarding the statute of limitations in such cases? Because there's continual chirping about how Trump will eventually be impeached and that's inspired me to try to get a handle on the likelihood of Hillary's going to jail one day, which would no doubt provide a veritable treasure trove of important "firsts".

#6 Bill Carson on 2018-07-18 10:00 (Reply)

Bill Carson: Hillary has yet to be tried (i.e., no "double jeopardy" worries) in regard to her alleged mishandling of classified information, right?

Unless new evidence comes to light, there is no basis for criminal charges, as the FBI has confirmed.

Bill Carson: Does anybody here have any information regarding the statute of limitations in such cases?

Assuming you are referring to prosecution under the Espionage Act, the statue of limitations is ten years.

#6.1 Zachriel on 2018-07-18 10:12 (Reply)

Statue of Limitations

#6.1.1 Zachriel on 2018-07-18 10:19 (Reply)

Why have all the Democrats been "resisting" and fighting tooth and nail to prevent justice and finally exposing what really happened? Statue of limitations!

#6.1.1.1 Anon on 2018-07-18 10:32 (Reply)

Now's that's funny!

#6.1.1.2 drowningpuppies on 2018-07-18 11:45 (Reply)

But this looks seriouser.

https://twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1019619737905565696

#6.1.1.2.1 Meh on 2018-07-18 14:29 (Reply)

How many of us here have faith in the FBI? Not I, said the little red hen.

#6.1.2 Sam L. on 2018-07-18 11:43 (Reply)

Heh... that's a good ern.

#6.1.2.1 drowningpuppies on 2018-07-19 10:42 (Reply)

Anon: Why have all the Democrats been "resisting" and fighting tooth and nail to prevent justice and finally exposing what really happened?

The FBI investigated the Clinton email situation, and found no evidence of criminal wrong-doing on Clinton's part. They made far more information public than is normal at the conclusion of a federal investigation. Indeed, Comey was faulted by the Inspector General for doing so.

Sam L: How many of us here have faith in the FBI?

The available evidence does not support criminal charges against Clinton.

#6.1.3 Zachriel on 2018-07-18 12:33 (Reply)

Emphasis on available.

Found that missing server yet?

#6.1.3.1 drowningpuppies on 2018-07-18 16:22 (Reply)

Zzzzz: Unless new evidence comes to light, there is no basis for criminal charges, as the FBI has confirmed.

QUOTE:

A member of the House Committee on the Judiciary said during a hearing Thursday that a government watchdog found that nearly all of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails were sent to a foreign entity and that the FBI didn’t follow-up on that finding.

https://gohmert.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=398647

#6.2 drowningpuppies on 2018-07-18 11:31 (Reply)

Fading Climate change: Every day IS a record because you only get to experience it once! The next time we come around to 2018 (never!) the position of the distance from the sun probably won't be the same. Could be closer, might be further. Since we're also told the sun is dying out....
Which brings us to the joke about the Blondes burning up traveling to the sun.
We'll go at night, silly!
Laughable local news on the radio "NOAA says we could be as droughty as the last couple summers. But.....it's too early to tell so we won't say it yet!" fake news.

#7 Jerry on 2018-07-18 10:12 (Reply)

30,000 Hillary emails went to China. Does seem that Hillary loved to make it possible that everyone got a chance to read emails on her server...classified or not.

#8 indyjonesouthere on 2018-07-18 16:17 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Wednesday, July 18. 2018

Wednesday morning links