Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Well I suspect I am going to have to teach this to you again.
This is a peer reviewed paper see the source at the bottom of the chart.
No agw nutter scientist has ever refuted this fact that in the data. Co2 levels trail change in temperature. Actually agw scentists acknowledge it.
See the blue below. It matches but leads the green line.
Blue line is change in global HadCrut sea surface temps.
Grenn is change in global co2.
Diff annual means that seasonality is taken out of the data.
In short this is rock solid proof that change in Co2 levels trail change in ocean temps.
So in conclusion all your agw friends are lying that asses off... until they can show how co2 (the laggard) leads temperature.
This is a peer reviewed paper see the source at the bottom of the chart.
No agw nutter scientist has ever refuted this fact that in the data. Co2 levels trail change in temperature. Actually agw scentists acknowledge it.
See the blue below. It matches but leads the green line.
Blue line is change in global HadCrut sea surface temps.
Grenn is change in global co2.
Diff annual means that seasonality is taken out of the data.
In short this is rock solid proof that change in Co2 levels trail change in ocean temps.
So in conclusion all your agw friends are lying that asses off... until they can show how co2 (the laggard) leads temperature.
Well I suspect I am going to have to teach this to you again.
This is a peer reviewed paper see the source at the bottom of the chart.
No agw nutter scientist has ever refuted this fact that in the data. Co2 levels trail change in temperature. Actually agw scentists acknowledge it.
See the blue below. It matches but leads the green line.
Blue line is change in global HadCrut sea surface temps.
Grenn is change in global co2.
Diff annual means that seasonality is taken out of the data.
In short this is rock solid proof that change in Co2 levels trail change in ocean temps.
So in conclusion all your agw friends are lying that asses off... until they can show how co2 (the laggard) leads temperature.
Those charts are complete horseshit. And how many times are you going to post the same stupid irrelevant charts? I thought we weren't supposed to do that? If we are again I will post the numerous charts showing that the temps rose concurrently with man's release of CO2.
I may have to report this. You should be banned. If only for being a lying crazed libtardarian troll.
its the data that creates the chart you drone.
I have cited you to the paper.
"but with changes in CO2 always lagging changes in temperature"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658
I have shown you the chart is created and what the paper says it shows.
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.
\\
your crazy perspective charts does not have the granularity to saying which leads which and you have never produced a peer reviewed paper saying man made co2 causes warming.
you need data...and a peer reviewed paper and a chart just to start the argument on a reasonable science like level.
I have cited you to the paper.
"but with changes in CO2 always lagging changes in temperature"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658
I have shown you the chart is created and what the paper says it shows.
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.
\\
your crazy perspective charts does not have the granularity to saying which leads which and you have never produced a peer reviewed paper saying man made co2 causes warming.
you need data...and a peer reviewed paper and a chart just to start the argument on a reasonable science like level.
Last edited:
Yeah ok jerm, sure. Take your meds.
Moving on...all the talk about the models failing is BS.
Calculations of global warming prepared in or before 2001 from a range of climate models under the SRES A2 emissions scenario, which assumes no action is taken to reduce emissions and regionally divided economic development.
View author information
temps are exactly on the trend predicted by the models
here is an older set of models by Hansen. Again, current temps are smack in the middle of these.
Moving on...all the talk about the models failing is BS.
Calculations of global warming prepared in or before 2001 from a range of climate models under the SRES A2 emissions scenario, which assumes no action is taken to reduce emissions and regionally divided economic development.
View author information
temps are exactly on the trend predicted by the models
here is an older set of models by Hansen. Again, current temps are smack in the middle of these.
But what is the evidence, direct scientific evidence, rather than hypothesis or correlation -- which is only a guess and a necessary condition, respectively, that these things you mention have anything to do with changes in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
Last edited:
The Polar Bears are not starving any more. They are going to eat some unarmed liberal scientists.
Polar bears lay siege to researchers in the Arctic Sea
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/02/europe/russia-polar-bears/index.html
Yeah ok jerm, sure. Take your meds.
Moving on...all the talk about the models failing is BS.
Calculations of global warming prepared in or before 2001 from a range of climate models under the SRES A2 emissions scenario, which assumes no action is taken to reduce emissions and regionally divided economic development.
View author information
temps are exactly on the trend predicted by the models
here is an older set of models by Hansen. Again, current temps are smack in the middle of these.
The same old fabricated charts created from altered data and failed models...
Last edited:
The same old fabricated charts created from altered data and failed models...
Perhaps you would prefer the charts of temps that are not world surface temps like piezoe posted. Why don't you denier liars ever use authoritative sources?
yeah sure...
this this the reality of the climate models.
this this the reality of the climate models.
Yeah ok jerm, sure. Take your meds.
Moving on...all the talk about the models failing is BS.
Calculations of global warming prepared in or before 2001 from a range of climate models under the SRES A2 emissions scenario, which assumes no action is taken to reduce emissions and regionally divided economic development.
View author information
temps are exactly on the trend predicted by the models
here is an older set of models by Hansen. Again, current temps are smack in the middle of these.