Global warming is likely to speed up

Micawber said:
"Global warming is likely to speed up as the Earth becomes increasingly more sensitive to atmospheric CO₂ concentrations, scientists from the University of Reading have warned."
~~~
A lot of findings there. It's a bit chewy to get through so I don't expect any Republican science denier to hold the thoughts together at at once in the underscored section.

I do, however, expect shape shifting cornholio abraxas whatever he may be calling himself to try and kill the messenger with a blog, some oil funded think tank or otherwise.
He will be joined by Big Hog who will say the earth was hotter eons ago and yet protozoa thrived and that drastic change is awesome anyway, then enter stage right the perennial tag team trolls
Morwr and adroitless to simply set forth some insults.
Click to expand...

Deny the science or try to understand and accept it -- either way we have choices to make. We're not going to be able to put that galloping climate change horse back in its barn at this late date. We must discuss how we are going to deal with the effects of global warming. Here is a timely piece by Jeff Masters, BS MS PhD (meteorology)
~~~
"The devastating hurricane season of 2017 was the most damaging hurricane season in U.S. history, with total damages of $206.6 billion, according to estimates from disaster research scientists Charles Watson Jr. of Enki Holdings, LLC and Mark Johnson of JISC, Inc. The 2017 losses included $114 billion from Hurricane Harvey, $60 billion from Hurricane Irma, and $32 billion from Hurricane Maria. Their 2017 damage estimate surpassed their estimate of the destruction from 2005, when Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Rita, Hurricane Dennis, and Hurricane Wilma helped drive $151.4 billion in damage. The National Hurricane Center (NHC) and NOAA/NCEI have not yet released their official damage estimates for the hurricane season of 2017."

https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/2017-us-hurricane-damages-206-billion-highest-record
~~~

Great article, thanks for posting it.
 
Micawber said:
Your blog does not controvert the OP central thesis. I will explain it slowly so a peon like you can try and generate some relevant boolean terms to steal a contra position from some climate denial liars blog for the right wing imbecile readers where you get ALL your lies..

The disparity or contrast between high and low altitude temps is lessening the more CO2 is injected from the factories of the dirty scumbags you represent, and this is troublesome because it lessens cloud cover over oceans causing increase surface water temps globally and
also decreases the escape of heat from earth. You see, volcanoes exist, as does yack guano and photoynthesis or car emissions. So you can't yank out their contribution either pos or negative and call that a valid study. Just as you can't take say, special teams points off the board and claim your team won the game.
Click to expand...

You're so full of shit, truly just a pompous windbag. I really do not know where to start with this pretentious load of bollocks.
 
Shape Shifter said:


Global warming has not accelerated temperature rise in the bulk atmosphere in more than two decades, according to a new study funded by the Department of Energy.

University of Alabama-Huntsville climate scientists John Christy and Richard McNider found that by removing the climate effects of volcanic eruptions early on in the satellite temperature record it showed virtually no change in the rate of warming since the early 1990s.

“We indicated 23 years ago — in our 1994 Nature article — that climate models had the atmosphere’s sensitivity to CO2 much too high,” Christy said in a statement. “This recent paper bolsters that conclusion.”

Christy and McNider found the rate of warming has been 0.096 degrees Celsius per decade after “the removal of volcanic cooling in the early part of the record,” which “is essentially the same value we determined in 1994 … using only 15 years of data.”

The study is sure to be contentious. Christy has argued for years that climate models exaggerate global warming in the bulk atmosphere, which satellites have monitored since the late 1970s.

Christy, a noted skeptic of catastrophic man-made global warming, said his results reinforce his claim that climate models predict too much warming in the troposphere, the lowest five miles of the atmosphere. Models are too sensitive to increases in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere, he said.

“From our observations, we calculated that value as 1.1 C (almost 2° Fahrenheit), while climate models estimate that value as 2.3 C (about 4.1° F),” Christy said.

While many scientists have acknowledged the mismatch between model predictions and actual temperature observations, few have really challenged the validity of the models themselves.

A recent study led by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory climate scientist Ben Santer found that while the models ran hot, the “overestimation” was “partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.”

Christy’s removal of volcanic-driven cooling from satellite temperature data could also draw scrutiny. The study also removed El Nino and La Nina cycles, which are particularly pronounced in satellite records, but those cycles largely canceled each other out, the co-authors said.

Christy said his works shows the “climate models need to be retooled to better reflect conditions in the actual climate, while policies based on previous climate model output and predictions might need to be reconsidered.”

Two major volcanoes — El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991 — caused the global average temperature to dip as a result of volcanic ash, soot, and debris reflecting sunlight back into space.

Those eruptions meant there was more subsequent warming in the following years, making the rate of warming appear to be rising as a result of man-made emissions or other factors, Christy said.

“Those eruptions happened relatively early in our study period, which pushed down temperatures in the first part of the dataset, which caused the overall record to show an exaggerated warming trend,” Christy said.

“While volcanic eruptions are natural events, it was the timing of these that had such a noticeable effect on the trend. If the same eruptions had happened near the more recent end of the dataset, they could have pushed the overall trend into negative numbers or a long-term cooling,” Christy said.

https://climatechangedispatch.com/s...eleration-in-global-warming-for-23-years/amp/
Click to expand...

There is also a huge amount of bullshit surrounding sea level rise yet NOAA states that the rise is of the order 1.7-1.8mm per year or less than 6 inches by the year 2100.

The graphs can provide an overarching indication of the differing rates of regional vertical land motion, given that the absolute global sea level rise is believed to be 1.7-1.8 millimeters/year.
Click to expand...

https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/globalregional.htm
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top