Attacks on scientific consensus on climate change mirror tactics of tobacco industry

Quote from jem:

here is the truth about what agw nuttering has become for the nutter leaders...

when the left is all about power, money, and theft of liberty... having a hammer is pretty important.



http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...al-warming-talks-not-offered-enough-money.php


The modern “environmental” movement has little or nothing to do with the environment, and a great deal to do with the real green stuff: money. One hundred thirty-two governments are in a huff because their latest attempt at extortion has failed:

Poor countries pulled out of the United Nations climate talks during a fight over transferring wealth from richer countries to fight global warming.

Wait! How would giving corrupt third world governments hundreds of billions of dollars fight global warming? Don’t be silly! Everything a liberal wants to do, for whatever reason, “fights global warming.”

The G77 and China bloc led 132 poor countries in a walk out during talks about “loss and damage” compensation for the consequences of global warming that countries cannot adapt to, like Typhoon Haiyan.
More...

I also had a laugh that China (the world's biggest CO2 'polluter') demanded that they remain on the list of 'developing nations' and receive payments from western nations for 'pollution' put into the air by wealthy western nations.

Even more amusing was when the U.S stated that we have reduced our generation of CO2 and that our reduction should be calculated from the peak (as previously demanded by the 'developing nations') so the U.S got credit for our reductions so far - the 'developing nations' demanded that all calculations be based on our current CO2 level so they would get more money in the cash transfers with no credit for our recent reduction.

AGW - What a complete political circus! Absurd!
 
Quote from gwb-trading:

I also had a laugh that China (the world's biggest CO2 'polluter') demanded that they remain on the list of 'developing nations' and receive payments from western nations for 'pollution' put into the air by wealthy western nations.

Even more amusing was when the U.S stated that we have reduced our generation of CO2 and that our reduction should be calculated from the peak (as previously demanded by the 'developing nations') so the U.S got credit for our reductions so far - the 'developing nations' demanded that all calculations be based on our current CO2 level so they would get more money in the cash transfers with no credit for our recent reduction.

AGW - What a complete political circus! Absurd!
More...
It's a cluster fuck alright.
 
Quote from Arnie:

You know why that chart is shown on an angle? Its because if shown straight on, it would show what jem and others have been telling you....CO2 lags temperature.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
More...

Sigh....yes CO2 lags.............and leads when CO2 is rising from other means, although there is really no lead, it is concurrent.


images
 
don't you get tired of misrepresenting charts and data fc.
why not try science and the truth.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/...made-co2-is-not-the-driver-of-global-warming/


An important new paper published today in Global and Planetary Change finds that changes in CO2 follow rather than lead global air surface temperature and that “CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2” The paper finds the “overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere,” in other words, the opposite of claims by global warming alarmists that CO2 in the atmosphere drives land and ocean temperatures. Instead, just as in the ice cores, CO2 levels are found to be a lagging effect ocean warming, not significantly related to man-made emissions, and not the driver of warming. Prior research has shown infrared radiation from greenhouse gases is incapable of warming the oceans, only shortwave radiation from the Sun is capable of penetrating and heating the oceans and thereby driving global surface temperatures.

The highlights of the paper are:

► The overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 11–12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5-10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature.

► Changes in ocean temperatures appear to explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980.

► CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2, and changes in atmospheric CO2 are not tracking changes in human emissions.

The paper:

The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature

Ole Humluma, b,
Kjell Stordahlc,
Jan-Erik Solheimd
a Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1047 Blindern, N-0316 Oslo, Norway
b Department of Geology, University Centre in Svalbard (UNIS), P.O. Box 156, N-9171 Longyearbyen, Svalbard, Norway
c Telenor Norway, Finance, N-1331 Fornebu, Norway
d Department of Physics and Technology, University of Tromsø, N-9037 Tromsø, Norway
Abstract

Using data series on atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperatures we investigate the phase relation (leads/lags) between these for the period January 1980 to December 2011. Ice cores show atmospheric CO2 variations to lag behind atmospheric temperature changes on a century to millennium scale, but modern temperature is expected to lag changes in atmospheric CO2, as the atmospheric temperature increase since about 1975 generally is assumed to be caused by the modern increase in CO2. In our analysis we use eight well-known datasets; 1) globally averaged well-mixed marine boundary layer CO2 data, 2) HadCRUT3 surface air temperature data, 3) GISS surface air temperature data, 4) NCDC surface air temperature data, 5) HadSST2 sea surface data, 6) UAH lower troposphere temperature data series, 7) CDIAC data on release of anthropogene CO2, and 8) GWP data on volcanic eruptions. Annual cycles are present in all datasets except 7) and 8), and to remove the influence of these we analyze 12-month averaged data. We find a high degree of co-variation between all data series except 7) and 8), but with changes in CO2 always lagging changes in temperature. The maximum positive correlation between CO2 and temperature is found for CO2 lagging 11–12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 9.5-10 months to global surface air temperature, and about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is high, but do not explain all observed changes.
 
First of all, there is nothing wrong with the charts I presented above. If they are wrong it should be easy to prove. Second, I know that temps can lead CO2 and have said it multiple times. So what is your point ?

Oh BTW rising CO2 levels also lead temps higher although there is essentially no lag.

Why you don't understand this simple principle is a mystery.

Quote from jem:

don't you get tired of misrepresenting charts and data fc.
why not try science and the truth.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/...made-co2-is-not-the-driver-of-global-warming/


An important new paper published today in Global and Planetary Change finds that changes in CO2 follow rather than lead global air surface temperature and that “CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2” The paper finds the “overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere,” in other words, the opposite of claims by global warming alarmists that CO2 in the atmosphere drives land and ocean temperatures. Instead, just as in the ice cores, CO2 levels are found to be a lagging effect ocean warming, not significantly related to man-made emissions, and not the driver of warming. Prior research has shown infrared radiation from greenhouse gases is incapable of warming the oceans, only shortwave radiation from the Sun is capable of penetrating and heating the oceans and thereby driving global surface temperatures.

The highlights of the paper are:

► The overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 11–12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5-10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature.

► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature.

► Changes in ocean temperatures appear to explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980.

► CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2, and changes in atmospheric CO2 are not tracking changes in human emissions.

The paper:

The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature

Ole Humluma, b,
Kjell Stordahlc,
Jan-Erik Solheimd
a Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1047 Blindern, N-0316 Oslo, Norway
b Department of Geology, University Centre in Svalbard (UNIS), P.O. Box 156, N-9171 Longyearbyen, Svalbard, Norway
c Telenor Norway, Finance, N-1331 Fornebu, Norway
d Department of Physics and Technology, University of Tromsø, N-9037 Tromsø, Norway
Abstract

Using data series on atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperatures we investigate the phase relation (leads/lags) between these for the period January 1980 to December 2011. Ice cores show atmospheric CO2 variations to lag behind atmospheric temperature changes on a century to millennium scale, but modern temperature is expected to lag changes in atmospheric CO2, as the atmospheric temperature increase since about 1975 generally is assumed to be caused by the modern increase in CO2. In our analysis we use eight well-known datasets; 1) globally averaged well-mixed marine boundary layer CO2 data, 2) HadCRUT3 surface air temperature data, 3) GISS surface air temperature data, 4) NCDC surface air temperature data, 5) HadSST2 sea surface data, 6) UAH lower troposphere temperature data series, 7) CDIAC data on release of anthropogene CO2, and 8) GWP data on volcanic eruptions. Annual cycles are present in all datasets except 7) and 8), and to remove the influence of these we analyze 12-month averaged data. We find a high degree of co-variation between all data series except 7) and 8), but with changes in CO2 always lagging changes in temperature. The maximum positive correlation between CO2 and temperature is found for CO2 lagging 11–12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 9.5-10 months to global surface air temperature, and about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is high, but do not explain all observed changes.
More...
 
Other than skewing the perspective - I am not saying there is something wrong with your charts... I am saying you are misrepresenting what they graph.

CO2 lags change in temperature -- in the past and now.

Just check the data from the noaa study. there is no argument on the merits. co2 currently trails change in temps by 9 months to a year.

agw nutters are trying to claim there may be other cycles in the data... of course until those cycles are found that is not really an argument.


Quote from futurecurrents:

First of all, there is nothing wrong with the charts I presented above. If they are wrong it should be easy to prove. Second, I know that temps can lead CO2 and have said it multiple times. So what is your point ?

Oh BTW rising CO2 levels also lead temps higher although there is essentially no lag.

Why you don't understand this simple principle is a mystery.
More...
 
Quote from jem:

Other than skewing the perspective - I am not saying there is something wrong with your charts... I am saying you are misrepresenting what they graph.

CO2 lags change in temperature -- in the past and now.

Just check the data from the noaa study. there is no argument on the merits. co2 currently trails change in temps by 9 months to a year.

agw nutters are trying to claim there may be other cycles in the data... of course until those cycles are found that is not really an argument.
More...
You're saying rising temps. lead rising CO2. Someone else is saying rising CO2 leads rising temps. In a feedback loop you're both right.
 
I'm not misrepresenting anything. The charts show what they show. They show how the rising CO2 levels from man has caused temps to rise. I thought that was obvious.

Are you so dumb to think that the sun suddenly got hotter at the same time man started emitting CO2 ?

Nevermind. Rhetorical question.






Quote from jem:

Other than skewing the perspective - I am not saying there is something wrong with your charts... I am saying you are misrepresenting what they graph.

CO2 lags change in temperature -- in the past and now.

Just check the data from the noaa study. there is no argument on the merits. co2 currently trails change in temps by 9 months to a year.

agw nutters are trying to claim there may be other cycles in the data... of course until those cycles are found that is not really an argument.
More...
 
Quote from Ricter:

You're saying rising temps. lead rising CO2. Someone else is saying rising CO2 leads rising temps. In a feedback loop you're both right.
More...

no one is saying they have evidence that co2 leads temps.

Some agw nutters at the IPCC were claiming they had models which showed co2 leading temps but those models failed and they were just models anyway.

The shakun study also did some modeling. it claimed that after warming in antarctica... the modeling showed co2 could have led the warming in other parts of the globe.

Ok lets say Shakuns modeling turned out to be good CO2 still trails the warming.
 
first of all... showing a lead lag relationship does not show causation... It does however make it very doubtful the laggard is the cause.

2nd... your charts do not show co2 leading temperature... if they are accurate.

co2 has always trailed change in temperature in the temperature record. there are no arguments about that.




Quote from futurecurrents:

I'm not misrepresenting anything. The charts show what they show. They show how the rising CO2 levels from man has caused temps to rise. I thought that was obvious.

Are you so dumb to think that the sun suddenly got hotter at the same time man started emitting CO2 ?

Nevermind. Rhetorical question.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top