Can global warming be real if it’s cold in the U.S.? Um… yes!

[futurecurrents]

the world may be warming since the last ice age.. but there is no science saying man made c02 is doing it.

co2 trails warming.

http://www.climatechangedispatch.co...ture-rises.html

In a study recently published in Global and Planetary Change, Humlum et al. (2013) introduce their analysis of the phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and mean global air temperature by noting that over the last 420 thousand years, "variations in atmospheric CO2 broadly followed temperature according to ice cores, with a typical delay of several centuries to more than a millennium," citing Lorius et al. (1990), Mudelsee (2001) and Caillon et al. (2003).

And they explain this relationship by stating it "is thought to be caused by the slow vertical mixing that occurs in the oceans, in association with the decrease in the solubility of CO2 in ocean water, as its temperature slowly increases at the end of glacial periods (Martin et al., 2005), leading to subsequent net out-gassing of CO2 from the oceans (Togweiler, 1999)."

So if this be true for glacial cycles, should it not also be true for seasonal cycles?

Feeling that such might indeed be the case, the three Norwegian researchers intensively studied the phase relations (leads/lags) between atmospheric CO2 concentration data and several global temperature data series - including HadCRUT, GISS and NCDC surface air data, as well as UAH lower troposphere data and HadSST2 sea surface data - for the period January 1980 to December 2011. And what did they find?

Humlum et al. report that annual cycles were present in all of the several data sets they studied and that there was "a high degree of co-variation between all data series ... but with changes in CO2 always lagging changes in temperature." More specifically, they state that "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 [in relation] to global surface air temperature, and about 9 months [in relation] to global lower troposphere temperature," so that "the overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from the ocean surface to the land surface to the lower troposphere."

Yeah, no way raising the levels of a greenhouse gas responsible for half of the planet's greenhouse effect by 40% would cause the temperature of the earth to rise. That's just crazy talk.

 

[LEAPup]

That can also be said about LEAPup .

You're just afraid I'll find out who you are, and post up picks of you in your pop up camper, eating mayonaise sammiches, and fucking fat hogs.

 

[LEAPup]

Yes, he had no training in climate science and was a right wing nut job like you. So of course he said that.

Gee, I wonder what the Weather Channel's statement on global warming is now?


Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


I wonder if you denier nitwits even care.

I'm not a right winger. I'm a Libertarian. You're a danger to free America.

 

[jem]

you are going to have to do better than that. you got some real science explaining how the laggard can be the cause? for the 20th time frequently greenhouse gases cool.

Yeah, no way raising the levels of a greenhouse gas responsible for half of the planet's greenhouse effect by 40% would cause the temperature of the earth to rise. That's just crazy talk.

 

[futurecurrents]

So we all know CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Well, except for jem and gwb who don't really understand what that means. Here is empirical evidence of it's effect on the earth's temperature.

 

[Lucrum]

So we all know CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

I know you're full of hot air. Well that, and your brother's semen.

 

[bigarrow]

You're just afraid I'll find out who you are, and post up picks of you in your pop up camper, eating mayonaise sammiches, and fucking fat hogs.

Be a brave soldier and fuck with me man to man first Ok.

 

[bigarrow]

you are going to have to do better than that. you got some real science explaining how the laggard can be the cause? for the 20th time frequently greenhouse gases cool.

Jem if it is obvious what you are saying is true then how is it that most of the experts in the field seem to disagree with what you are saying. It's not probable that they are all frauds or that they are all delusional. Could they be wrong in their forecasts, of course but that's a different argument.

 

[jem]

Most experts do not agree... that is b.s. propaganda.

If you are following what is going on... about a year or so ago... the real scientists and astronauts at NASA circulated a letter saying stop with the propaganda. Shortly thereafter the chief agw nutter left the climate . nasa group which was responsible for most of the b.s left. (hansen)

Since then NASA has been putting out more solid science. some of which shows CO2 also cools.

I have linked to many different articles showing the consensus is closer to 50 / 50 and dropping..
-------------------------------------------------

Finally its the science that matters not some paid for consensus.
If man made co2 is causing warming on earth should not one of these many scientists be able to prove it or least show it in part?

All they have is failed models.

My approach is...
First lets establish we are warming outside natural variability then show us the cause.
So if there is such a huge consensus... where is their science?

For instance... I am concerned that the co2 curve is shaped like the laffer curve.

In the beginning you add more and you get warming. But eventually as you add more its starts reflecting more of the sun back into space. Therefore adding more would start cooling.


And if you think about it... if the greenhouse did not act this way... we would have burned up a long time ago.

Jem if it is obvious what you are saying is true then how is it that most of the experts in the field seem to disagree with what you are saying. It's not probable that they are all frauds or that they are all delusional. Could they be wrong in their forecasts, of course but that's a different argument.

 

[jem]

For the deceptive troll fc, try showing a recent graph.

So we all know CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Well, except for jem and gwb who don't really understand what that means. Here is empirical evidence of it's effect on the earth's temperature.