Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 01/28/2010 11:50:43 AM PST by Ben Mugged
A new estimate of the feedback between temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration has been derived from a comprehensive comparison of temperature and CO2 records spanning the past millennium.
The result, which is based on more than 200,000 individual comparisons, implies that the amplification of current global warming by carbon-cycle feedback will be significantly less than recent work has suggested.
Climate warming causes many changes in the global carbon cycle, with the net effect generally considered to be an increase in atmospheric CO2 with increasing temperature -- in other words, a positive feedback between temperature and CO2. Uncertainty in the magnitude of this feedback has led to a wide range in projections of current global warming: about 40% of the uncertainty in these projections comes from this source.
Recent attempts to quantify the feedback by examining the co-variation of pre-industrial climate and CO2 records yielded estimates of about 40 parts per million by volume (p.p.m.v.) CO2 per degree Celsius, which would imply significant amplification of current warming trends.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
I didn’t listen to the State of the Union closely, but Obama’s position seems to have changed. His new take on Global Warming is something like “even though it’s a complete fabrication, the US should lead the world in fighting it.”
Ping of interest. Carbon cycle concern “significantly less than thought.”
How much less?
Well, actually...
none.
Except we only have "accurate" records going back about a hundred years. Everything else is extrapolated.
Anything else I can help you with today?
A model must closely integrate all feedback paths, and this empirically determined positive direction has now fallen from 40 ppm to 7.7 ppm.
What's more, although this is apparently an empirical net feedback (from historical data), that does not say anything about the empirical net once CO2 increases significantly, as it repeatedly did over the last five hundred million years.
God, we high school grads have to expose the shoddiness of PhD "climate scientists?"
The Suntrade Institute
"The science is in" - Barack Obama
Any one who has popped a hot coke can tell what hot CO2 does. Also any third grade science student can tell you that melting ice does not raise the water level.
barbra ann
One thing about feedbacks, positive is very destructive and doesn't exist for long. Basically any system with positive feedback eventually rails, and destroys itself in short order.
So since the earth is still here, CO2 has been more than 10 times higher than today, temperature has been higher and lower, positive climate feedbacks based on CO2 don't exist.
Can I have my money back? I never bought in to it, but we sure have paid the cost.
In fact, the major human impact on climate seems to be GIGO computer climate models, for sure. Thanks, Johnny.
“I didn’t listen to the State of the Union closely, but...” ~ Question Liberal Authority
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Obama’s Great Global Warming One-Liner [Daniel Foster]
As you can tell, everybody got a real kick out of it. VIDEO: http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/
They’re all running for the tall timber. :)
The jig is up.
“Abandon Ship, it is every man for himself.”
The Dog Ate My Data
http://thedogatemydata.blogspot.com/2010/01/uk-chief-scientist-climate-change.html
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
UK Chief Scientist: Climate Change “Fundamentally Uncertain”
Not one but two leading alarmist climate scientists desert ship
The credibility of the IPCC has reached a new all time low. Another leading warmist scientist, this time the UK’s Chief Scientist Prof John Beddington is deserting ship.
The impact of global warming has been exaggerated by some scientists and there is an urgent need for more honest disclosure of the uncertainty of predictions about the rate of climate change, according to the Government’s chief scientific adviser.
Beddington states in the Times Online:
“I don’t think it’s healthy to dismiss proper skepticism. Science grows and improves in the light of criticism. There is a fundamental uncertainty about climate change prediction that can’t be changed.”
...
“I think, wherever possible, we should try to ensure there is openness and that source material is available for the whole scientific community.”
Climate science fundamentally uncertain!? That is the first time we have heard anything but the mantra, the science is settled from an alarmist scientist. Utterly astonishing. Just as astonishing:
Mike Hulme, Professor of Climate Change at the University of East Anglia, said: “Climate scientists get kudos from working on an issue in the public eye but with that kudos comes responsibility. Being open with data is part of that responsibility.”
It is astonishing because from the Climategate emails leaked in December 2009 the now stood down Prof Phil “Hide the Decline” Jones former head of the CRU at the University of East Anglia we have this email response from him after repeated request for data:
“We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
This talk of openess is totally new for the alarmist scientists. Obviously seeing the way the wind is blowing the more astute are now urging a total change of approach. The IPCC has obviously taken some heavy damage in the last couple of weeks with revelation of known errors being published for political reasons.
See the Times for the full article .
Canada’s leading climate scientist is also deserting ship! When not one but two leading Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming admirals desert the IPCC you can be sure it is damaged.
These two scientists, as well as some others are pulling back now while the going is good.
Read about Canada’s Andrew Weaver in the National Post :
A catastrophic heat wave appears to be closing in on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. How hot is it getting in the scientific kitchen where they’ve been cooking the books and spicing up the stew pots? So hot, apparently, that Andrew Weaver, probably Canada’s leading climate scientist, is calling for replacement of IPCC leadership and institutional reform.
If Andrew Weaver is heading for the exits, it’s a pretty sure sign that the United Nations agency is under monumental stress. Mr. Weaver, after all, has been a major IPCC science insider for years. He is Canada Research Chair in Climate Modelling and Analysis at the University of Victoria, mastermind of one of the most sophisticated climate modelling systems on the planet, and lead author on two recent landmark IPCC reports. For him to say, as he told Canwest News yesterday, that there has been some “dangereous crossing” of the line between climate advocacy and science at the IPCC is stunning in itself.
Not only is Mr. Weaver an IPCC insider. He has also, over the years, generated his own volume of climate advocacy that often seemed to have crossed that dangereous line between hype and science. It is Mr. Weaver, for example, who said the IPCC’s 2007 science report the one now subject to some scrutiny “isn’t a smoking gun; climate is a battalion of intergalactic smoking missiles.”
He has also made numerous television appearances linking current weather and temperature events with global warming, painting sensational pictures and dramatic links. “When you see these [temperature] numbers, it’s screaming out at you: ‘This is global warming!
Abandon Ship, it is every man for himself. http://bit.ly/cjP2JP
Uh-huh...
The CYA in the science media begins.
Won't do 'em any good. They're on record as fawning sycophant devotees to Rev. Al Gore's Church of Mother Gaia Earth Worship.
His new take on Global Warming is something like “even though it’s a complete fabrication, the US should lead the world in fighting it.”
No, he stated (paraphrasing) that "the science behind Global Warming is beyond dispute."
This report provides significant proof, as an example, for why the founders DID NOT choose a direct democracy (mob in the street) and why Congress fails to live up to the standard expected of it when it acts like a mob in the street (jumps to conclusions) and fails to carry out the due diligence expected of it, before it writes the laws.
~~~~~~~
Are you sure you haven't read my fifth-grade granddaughter's science fair project -- which I posted here and here?
The red-framed panel at lower left center of her display describes her experiment with heating Dr. Pepper... '-)
Of course, she also repeated the experiment first formulated by Archimedes of Syracuse -- showing that floating ice does not change the liquid level when it melts (photos included).
FWIW, she also trashes Hansen's skewing of the temperature record by misuse of the Urban Heat Island Effect on US temperature measurements, etc.
I expect you will enjoy taking a look at her work...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.