Posted on 11/09/2017 11:40:58 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
If observed climate variables such as temperature or precipitation change over time, it raises the question as to whether human influence plays a role. To investigate this, scientists are applying a method for estimating causal relationships.
The fact that greenhouse gases emitted by humans are changing the global climate system is scientifically undisputed. Climate researchers often look to the future with their models and try to calculate how the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will affect various climate variables.
To test whether these climate variables are influenced by rising greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, scientists have developed the detection and attribution method.
The method involves a combined analysis of long observation series and simulation experiments in which climate models are calculated both with and without human influence in order to compare them with the actual observations. If the latter are only reproduced by the simulations with emissions, it can be concluded that man-made climate change is demonstrable in the observations.
The detection and attribution method is an important instrument for climate research and was used in the last UN climate report in the chapter on the evidence of man-made climate change.
(Excerpt) Read more at phys.org ...
No serious scientist disputes that CO2 causes warming, specifically a reduction in heat escaping to space from the upper atmosphere. http://clivebest.com/blog/?p=4475
Anything speculating on the consequence of that reduced heat escape is pure guesswork. However, it is perfectly rational to assume that there is some effect, therefore man causing at least some “climate change” is proven. Degree, consequence and best approach to deal with it are total unknowns.
Given past wild uncoupled swings in both temperature and CO2 concentration throughout Earth’s history, it is unlikely the consequences are catastrophic, so a rational scientist would not recommend extreme measures.
The very idea that a climate model could encompass all the variables is preposterous.
There are known variables, known unknown variables and unknown unknown variables, as Donald Rumsfeld would say, and Goedel's Incompleteness Theorems tell us we can't know them all.
Can anybody say what is the right temperature for the earth?
I didn’t think so.
The computer models don’t produce accurate projections. Solution: Use twice as many!
“The fact that greenhouse gases emitted by humans are changing the global climate system is scientifically undisputed.”
The question has always been: by how much? It may be an undetectable amount, if may be detectable but insignificant, It might even be significant.
That is the basic question: How much?
The question cannot be answered by models, because we do not know much about many feedback loops in the atmosphere.
All the models have “K”factors that are just guesses placed in them to make the model work. The number put in for “K” is adjusted to make the model look like what the modeler thinks reality should look like.
The models cannot be validated, because we do not have more than a few decades of scanty data for climate history.
All the data before that is “modeled” on assumptions about tree rings or plankton in sediments, or some such.
Even the last few decades of data seldom have accuracies to better than .5 degrees Centigrade, and much of that is routinely “adjusted” by warmists to fit their ideas of what reality should look like.
It can’t be proven. It can’t be subjected to this basic scientific test: “What is the observed climate of the earth in the absence of human activity? What is the observed climate of the earth in the presence of human activity? What is the difference?” Hint:the first question can not be answered.
there was a story about the warming vulcanic activity under the ice in antartica... the reporting said the activity occured after an increase in climate warming...
really.
“Here’s an even greater challenge. Can it ever be disproven?”
Doesn’t it have to be proven, before it can be disproven?
Typical, conflate man made warming with CO2. Build a parking lot it gets warmer. Place the weather station near the parking lot, it gets even warmer. Reduce CO2 it will get colder?
This is some of the best propaganda I’ve seen in a while on this. It reads more like science and less like the activist d1psheet ‘journalism’ you typically see.
The war on CO2 escalates.
You can’t prove it...
Wrong! This is highly disputed. Actual temperature readings show no warming. Only after readings are adjusted does a warming trend occur. Why the adjustments?
Your whole premise relies on starting out with a falsehood.
Exactly! Less human emissions must show a marked decease in climate change
Estimating? LOL. Yeah; estimating is great if you want to know how much it will cost to pave your driveway. "Proof-by-Estimate" is absurd.
The fact that greenhouse gases emitted by humans are changing the global climate system is scientifically undisputed.
I just love it when the Left uses verbal tactics like this. "The fact that Donald Trump is the worst President, ever, is undisputed". "The fact that Communism is far superior to Capitalism is undisputed".
"Undisputed". But still a lie. LOL.
Some without a single bit of scientific evidence accept man-made or fabricated climate change. These people are fully prepared to place economic burdens on others first and then seek justification for their actions. If justification is or is not forthcoming the burden will remain.
There is but one way to establish a new theory and there is but one way to prove the theory.
WHAT?
That's easy. Predict how much rain and snow for any shoreline community, AND the average temperature, week by week, for the next five years, within 1%.
When the Liars can do that, I'd be willing to accept that they can predict a 1 meter rise in sea level over the next century.
Volcanics? I've never heard that word before. Definitely a possibility for my next band name -- if I ever have another band.
The Volcanics. Hmmm. I like it.
Take measurments.
Remove all humans.
Repeat the measurements.
Compare before and after.
“No serious scientist disputes that CO2 causes warming, specifically a reduction in heat escaping to space from the upper atmosphere. http://clivebest.com/blog/?p=4475";
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.