Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 49 Votes - 2.92 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
An important blog post that I think everyone should read
04-28-2012, 12:32 PM (This post was last modified: 04-28-2012 12:33 PM by Snowlover123.)
Post: #1
An important blog post that I think everyone should read
Hello everyone.

The last thread I started talked about the ACRIM and PMOD TSI controversy, and the reasons behind this controversy.

Today I got an inspiration from these graphs from Skeptical Science.

Their arrogance continues to amaze me.

A member of another forum (who Goose52 knows) kept posting these graphs from Skeptical Science repeatedly. I decided to create my own graph to rebut this graph. This time, however, I use 10 studies to refute the 7 studies the Skeptical Science article posted. The Skeptical Science article claimed that this was further support of a scientific consensus on climate change.

The idea that there is a consensus on the science is not telling the whole truth. There is a consensus that CO2 is causing Global Warming, and there's another consensus that the sun is causing Global Warming.

http://snowlover123.blogspot.com/2012/04...lobal.html

Attribution to climate change over the past 100 years has been difficult because of the chaotic nature of the climate system. The addition of the anthropogenic forcings to the climate system has only made this more difficult. The sun is the supply of energy to Earth, but has it caused Global Warming over the last 100 years? All of the studies below indicate that it has been the cause of Global Warming.

[Image: Solar%2Bcontribution%2Bto%2Bglobal%2Bwarming.png]

Above is the percentage of warming over the last 100 years caused by the solar forcing as documented by ten studies. From left to right: Palle Bago and Butler 2001, Georgieva et. al 2005, Cliver et. al 1998, Solheim et. al 2012 , Link et. al 2011, Scafetta and West 2008, Scafetta and West 2007, Ogurtsov 2007 Blanter et. al 2008 and Scafetta 2009.

"(It is) Foolish to believe humans can control global climate". Climatologist Dr. John Maunder- July 24, 2009

Visit my blog here:

http://www.snowlover123.blogspot.com
Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-29-2012, 05:06 AM
Post: #2
RE: An important blog post that I think everyone should read
Excellent and very well made point, this reply is intended to back up and support your study.
I feel it is an enormous point many frequently miss, so please allow me to add the following.

In the description to the graphic, it states,

" The addition of the anthropogenic forcings to the climate system has only made this more difficult. "

Is this accepting a MASSIVE and UNPROVEN (actually disproven) ASSUMPTION?
I would suggest it is framing the debate, which should always be avoided, whether intentional, or not.
This is the way, or rather just one of the ways, the consensus deliberately frames the debate - they have to.
Accepting this assumption, or rather assertion is to effectively limit the discussion to accepting man has altered climate.
No such thing has ever been shown or proven, in point of fact it has been shown, beyond reasonable doubt that
man has had NO EFFECT upon atmospheric CO2 levels.

PROVEN - Carbon tax has NO BASIS.
C13 "fingerprint" IS natural, NOT man made.






C13 yet another IPCC misdirection, in this instance to assert man has altered climate, when
the above study of what nature actually shows, shows we have not.
ie, AGW says - man emits more C13 than nature, CO2 increases, GH increases, man made global warming...
Dam we (the consensus) got C13 wrong. SSSHHHH

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-29-2012, 07:55 AM
Post: #3
RE: An important blog post that I think everyone should read
(04-29-2012 05:06 AM)Derek Wrote:  " The addition of the anthropogenic forcings to the climate system has only made this more difficult. "

Is this accepting a MASSIVE and UNPROVEN (actually disproven) ASSUMPTION?

Hi Derek,

Perhaps you misunderstood.

"Anthropogenic Forcings" does not necessarily mean CO2. Urbanization, land use changes etc. are all anthropogenic forcings that make the temperature trends more difficult to attribute to a specific factor.

Hope that clears things up.

"(It is) Foolish to believe humans can control global climate". Climatologist Dr. John Maunder- July 24, 2009

Visit my blog here:

http://www.snowlover123.blogspot.com
Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-29-2012, 10:10 AM
Post: #4
RE: An important blog post that I think everyone should read
No problem Snowlover123. May I ask however, which is the MAIN anthropogenic forcing according to what they model ???

To the best of my understanding at present, THE factor IS CO2, and that this is for taxing purposes.
Unfortunately, that is the whole basis for the AGW scam, and it is why C13, and Salby's work is so important and central.
The rest of man's forcings are merely fudge factors really, for modelling purposes. I will try to explain why, as follows.

All of the GHG forcings are fudge factors, they can not be measured.
As are the other man made supposed effects, they do not, and they can not measure them.
This is shown very clearly in the link to the website you linked to. Reading the descriptions of the studies used in their plot, how many times do you see modelled, and scenarios? Many times. Scenarios in particular means, we change the forcings till we get the right result. Please note, changed NOT measured, or observed.........
Originally a modelling "technique" brought to our attention here by Dr. Richard S Courtney.
As he pointed out,
that ain't science, it is self admitted make believe. - My words.

Of course AGW does not want to be tied down to specific forcings for specific factors, as they see them, that could be tested, and would stop fudging......
BUT, there again the political will is for taxes so, CO2 is the main cause to tax. Hence it is THE factor in modelling.

In regards of climate modelling have you seen this thread, from post 20 onwards?
Considered questions and comments arising from free to ALL "shape issue" pdf.
and, post 24 on this thread,
Eureka …Revisited. (The untold “discovery”)
there are other threads hereabouts in regards of models and MODTRAN, but the above should be a good reference / starter point.

The present crop of climate models really are not very realistic at all, playstation science seems appropriate...
I hope that that thread and others here will leave you with a simple question, what does MODTRAN model???
No one knows, and those that do know, or have had access to it have had to sign a none disclosure agreement with the American Navy.....

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  What is the Bern model, and is it important? Derek 0 1,236 12-19-2013 05:02 AM
Last Post: Derek



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)