Clearly you've got to stop getting your primary data and images from the late John Daly's Web site.
Since the beginning of the century sulfate aerosols kept going up & up and yet the temperature rose & cooled over the century regardless.
Fabulous graph. You can even see the blip in the 1950s with rapid (and sulfur-intensive) industrial activity!
Let's go back and see what Dr. Tett said, exactly (I even underlined this part): "After 1970 our model with greenhouse gases alone begins to depart significantly from the observations. However, when we included sulphate aerosols, which have a cooling effect, the model agreed with the data from the 1930s and onwards."
I interpret as him saying that the effect of sulphate aerosols didn't throw the models off the "real" track until the 1970s, but adding their effect makes the models better back to the 1930s. Consistent with your fabulous graph.
It also shows your liberal contradictory logic, you think the 0.2-0.5 W/M² shown in the graph caused all this cooling, yet a 4 to 10x increase of 2.0 W/M² solar irradience has no effect.
Don't call me a liberal just because I'm knowledgeable about climate change. Where do you get the solar irradiance increase value? And it should be clear the sulfate aerosols exert a cooling effect -- I don't think "caused all this cooling" is an accurate characterization.
bbzzzztt! Wrong again
Not quite wrong, inaccurate. I should have quantified. Your quote was qualitative and concerned the general compositon of the Asian aerosol. My statement was about emissions from India: "India's smoke does not have an appreciable sulfate component, for example."
The Asian Brown Cloud (PDF)
Excerpt:
"SO2 emissions (which are converted to sulfate aerosols) are 5 Tg/yr of sulfur for India, 28 Tg/yr for China and 25 Tg/yr for North America. Emission sources of other aerosol components such as organics, black carbon, fly ash and dust are very poorly characterized. For black carbon, available estimates suggest that the Asian region may contribute about 30 to 50% of the total world emissions."
India's total emissions have a much lower sulfur content than higher-industry emissions from China and North America, because the Indian emissions are predominantly from cooking fires, not coal burning. My statement that India's smoke does not have an appreciable sulfate content was inaccurate. India's emissions have a much lower sulfate content than emissions from more industrialized countries. Thanks for requiring this clarification.
ummm yeah, like I said it was between 1945-1950 that the temperature really dropped and then between 1950-1960 with the "with rapid (and sulfur-intensive) industrial activity" the temperature instead of continuing to fall actually rose slightly You are actually agreeing with my case
Lets make this simple, where's the correlation in the following?
| Year | Sulfate Aerosols | Temperature change |
| 1900-1944 | Increased | Increased significantly |
| 1944-1950 | Increased | Decreased significantly |
| 1950-1960 | Increased | Increased slightly |
| 1960-1970 | Increased | Decreased |
| 1970-1980 | Increased | Steady cooler |
| 1981-2000 | Increased | Increased significantly |
| 2001-present | Increased | Steady warmer |
Let's go back and see what Dr. Tett said, exactly (I even underlined this part): "
Let's not, his "program" has already been debunked by me and others here
Where do you get the solar irradiance increase value?
See the charts posted by others above
Not quite wrong, inaccurate. I should have quantified. Your quote was qualitative and concerned the general compositon of the Asian aerosol. My statement was about emissions from India: "India's smoke does not have an appreciable sulfate component, for example." The Asian Brown Cloud (PDF) Excerpt:
"SO2 emissions (which are converted to sulfate aerosols) are 5 Tg/yr of sulfur for India, 28 Tg/yr for China and 25 Tg/yr for North America.
Again you are arguing my case for me against your argument that sulfate aerosols cooled the planet only between 1945-1980
unless you care to explain how 50 Mt/Tg per year of sulfate aerosols can cool the planet in 1970 yet even more in 2002 (56 Tg per year in just 3 regions - 70-80 tg total worldwide) of the same sulfate aerosols don't?