how global warming works
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
LOL
Tell us, dumbshrub, why does the IPCC refer to the slowdown in the rate of warming?
Tell us, dumbshrub, how much was anthropogenic forcing overstated in past reports?
Two things you should know, but you don't have a clue. You probabaly think I'm spewing right wing talking points.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24173504
Tell us, dumbshrub, why does the IPCC refer to the slowdown in the rate of warming?
Tell us, dumbshrub, how much was anthropogenic forcing overstated in past reports?
Two things you should know, but you don't have a clue. You probabaly think I'm spewing right wing talking points.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24173504
From the UN IPCC Fifth Assessment Report , Working Group I Contribution To The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis – Final Draft Underlying Scientific-Technical Basis, Chapter 9, Box 9.2: Climate Models and the Hiatus in Global-Mean Surface Warming of the Past 15 Years, page 31, :
(c) Model Response Error
The discrepancy between simulated and observed GMST trends during 1998–2012 could be explained in part by a tendency for some CMIP5 models to simulate stronger warming in response to increases in greenhouse-gas concentration than is consistent with observations… This finding provides evidence that some CMIP5 models show a larger response to greenhouse gases and other anthropogenic factors (dominated by the effects of aerosols) than the real world (medium confidence). As a consequence, it is argued in Chapter 11 that near-term model projections of GMST increase should be scaled down by about 10% (Section 11.3.6.3). This downward scaling is, however, not sufficient to explain the model-mean overestimate of GMST trend over the hiatus period.
(c) Model Response Error
The discrepancy between simulated and observed GMST trends during 1998–2012 could be explained in part by a tendency for some CMIP5 models to simulate stronger warming in response to increases in greenhouse-gas concentration than is consistent with observations… This finding provides evidence that some CMIP5 models show a larger response to greenhouse gases and other anthropogenic factors (dominated by the effects of aerosols) than the real world (medium confidence). As a consequence, it is argued in Chapter 11 that near-term model projections of GMST increase should be scaled down by about 10% (Section 11.3.6.3). This downward scaling is, however, not sufficient to explain the model-mean overestimate of GMST trend over the hiatus period.
evince
Truthmatters
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22567023
Ocean storage
This latest research, including the decade of stalled temperature rises, produces a range of 0.9-5.0C.
"It is a bigger range of uncertainty," said Dr Otto.
"But it still includes the old range. We would all like climate sensitivity to be lower but it isn't."
The researchers say the difference between the lower short-term estimate and the more consistent long-term picture can be explained by the fact that the heat from the last decade has been absorbed into and is being stored by the world's oceans.
Ocean storage
This latest research, including the decade of stalled temperature rises, produces a range of 0.9-5.0C.
"It is a bigger range of uncertainty," said Dr Otto.
"But it still includes the old range. We would all like climate sensitivity to be lower but it isn't."
The researchers say the difference between the lower short-term estimate and the more consistent long-term picture can be explained by the fact that the heat from the last decade has been absorbed into and is being stored by the world's oceans.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/pacific-ocean-temperatures_n_3832273.html
Cooler Pacific Ocean Temperatures Might Explain Global Warming 'Hiatus'
Cooler Pacific Ocean Temperatures Might Explain Global Warming 'Hiatus'
evince
Truthmatters
Volt
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Can you see infra-red?
evince
Truthmatters
green house gases trap light with these wave lengths.
there is NO way around the fact that green house gases cause the world to retain heat.
Now how do you get around those facts to claim there is not harm in producing more of these gases and releasing them into the atmosphere where they will retain more infa red light waves which in turn cant produce anything but more heat in our planets system?
there is NO way around the fact that green house gases cause the world to retain heat.
Now how do you get around those facts to claim there is not harm in producing more of these gases and releasing them into the atmosphere where they will retain more infa red light waves which in turn cant produce anything but more heat in our planets system?