Climate models have performed quite well..
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
NY Times Cartoon Suggests 'Climate-Change Deniers' Should Be Stabbed to Death
By Jack Coleman | February 23, 2014
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-c...e-deniers-should-be-stabbed-dea#ixzz2uFHnYyE6
Forget debate, just kill the dissenters.
By Jack Coleman | February 23, 2014
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jack-c...e-deniers-should-be-stabbed-dea#ixzz2uFHnYyE6
Forget debate, just kill the dissenters.
LOL!
Oh damn, facts again. Sorry to disappoint the ignorant denier cultists.
Reasoning Behind Cooling Predictions
Quite often, the justification for the few global cooling predictions in the 1970s is overlooked. Probably the most famous such prediction was Rasool and Schneider (1971):
"An increase by only a factor of 4 in global aerosol background concentration may be sufficient to reduce the surface temperature by as much as 3.5°K."
Yes, their global cooling projection was based on a quadrupling of atmospheric aerosol concentration. This wasn't an entirely unrealistic scenario - after all, sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions were accelerating quite rapidly up until the early 1970s (Figure 2). These emissions caused various environmental problems, and as a result, a number of countries, including the USA, enacted SO2 limits through Clean Air Acts. As a result, not only did atmospheric aerosol concentrations not quadruple, they declined starting in the late 1970s
Similarly, if we now limit CO2 emissions, we can also eventually get global warming under control.
Quite often, the justification for the few global cooling predictions in the 1970s is overlooked. Probably the most famous such prediction was Rasool and Schneider (1971):
"An increase by only a factor of 4 in global aerosol background concentration may be sufficient to reduce the surface temperature by as much as 3.5°K."
Yes, their global cooling projection was based on a quadrupling of atmospheric aerosol concentration. This wasn't an entirely unrealistic scenario - after all, sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions were accelerating quite rapidly up until the early 1970s (Figure 2). These emissions caused various environmental problems, and as a result, a number of countries, including the USA, enacted SO2 limits through Clean Air Acts. As a result, not only did atmospheric aerosol concentrations not quadruple, they declined starting in the late 1970s
Similarly, if we now limit CO2 emissions, we can also eventually get global warming under control.
If you were him you'd probably hate your life too.
Holy shit! I'd hang myself if I saw a hairy ass heater mess!!! Eeeeewwwww!!!!! My gal would also flip even though I shave (too much information!) now and then! Lol
I wonder if the harmful effects of excessive SO<sub>2</sub> was denied. Did big business claim controlling SO<sub>2</sub> would harm the economy?
proof you have no science... coming right up...
ricter... fc... with all these experts and all these papers... why don't you pull a five of them read them... post them here and explain how the science showing man made co2 is causing warming.
prediction... neither troll nor enabler will post the science or the papers.
why? the science does not exist and the papers are being mis represented.
ricter... fc... with all these experts and all these papers... why don't you pull a five of them read them... post them here and explain how the science showing man made co2 is causing warming.
prediction... neither troll nor enabler will post the science or the papers.
why? the science does not exist and the papers are being mis represented.