User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5376
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:59 am

WetEV wrote:See the Real Climate link for more discussion.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... f-numbers/
Yes, they originally made the bogus claim that those numbers were surface data. As usual, they had to eat crow on that.

The simple fact is that the atmosphere is warming VERY slowly, if at all. Any increase in surface temperatures due to the greenhouse effect REQUIRES a faster growth in temperatures in the atmosphere. Exactly the same portion of the atmosphere that was measured for that graph. Any increase in surface temperatures that is faster than the measurements in that graph are NOT due to the greenhouse effect. Simply put, the theorized hotspot NEVER materialized. More proof that the CO2-based belief system is as false belief system.

Ignore those measurements if you will. I refuse to do that.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5376
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 7:35 am

For those who want to understand the details of the imagined hotspot which never materialized, Dr. David Evans provided a detailed explanation of how we KNOW that the WVEL has NOT ascended with increasing CO2, but instead, it has descended:
Dr. David Evans wrote:In the last few decades there was surface warming yet the WVEL did not ascend — there is no hotspot. Therefore the conventional model is incorrect.

That post is part of an outstanding series of posts which explain, in gory detail, the structural flaws which exist in ALL the currently-popular climate models.

Dr. Evans does NOT dispute ANY of the physics used in the models, he ONLY addresses the serious architectural flaws found in the models. He has summarized his work in this white paper: Why More Carbon Dioxide Makes Little Difference. But I recommend reading the long version which is the series of blog posts found at the bottom of the page, starting with this post.

Here is the basic summary of Dr. Evans' excellent work:
Dr. David Evans wrote:The scientists who believe in the carbon dioxide theory of global warming do so essentially because of the application of “basic physics” to climate, by a model that is ubiquitous and traditional in climate science. This model is rarely named, but is sometimes referred to as the “forcing-feedback framework/paradigm.” Explicitly called the “forcing-feedback model” (FFM) here, this pen-and-paper model estimates the sensitivity of the global temperature to increasing carbon dioxide.1

The FFM has serious architectural errors.2 It contains crucial features dating back to the very first model in 1896, when the greenhouse effect was not properly understood. Fixing the architecture, while keeping the physics, shows that future warming due to increasing carbon dioxide will be a fifth to a tenth of current official estimates. Less than 20% of the global warming since 1973 was due to increasing carbon dioxide.

The large computerized climate models (GCMs) are indirectly tailored to compute the same sensitivity to carbon dioxide as the FFM. Both explain 20th century warming as driven mostly by increasing carbon dioxide.3

Increasing carbon dioxide traps more heat. But that heat mainly just reroutes to space from water vapor instead. This all happens high in the atmosphere, so it has little effect on the Earth’s surface, where we live. Current climate models omit this rerouting. Rerouting cannot occur in the FFM, due to its architecture—rerouting is in its blindspot.4

The alarm over carbon dioxide can be traced back to an erroneous assumption implicitly made in 1896 and never corrected—that there are no significant feedbacks in response to increasing carbon dioxide rather than to surface warming. The rerouting feedback is such a feedback. The FFM introduced another erroneous assumption—that the heat blocked from leaving to space by increasing carbon dioxide causes the same surface warming as if, instead, absorbed sunlight is increased by the same amount,5 or more generally, surface warming is proportional to the sum of all radiative forcings. These assumptions are built into the architecture of the FFM, and are echoed in the GCMs.

Increasing carbon dioxide causes warming in the upper troposphere, because it blocks some heat from escaping to space from there. In the GCMs that heat travels down to warm the surface, where it is like heat from increased absorbed sunlight — due to water vapor amplification of surface warming, less heat is then radiated to space from water vapor. In reality that heat mainly reroutes, radiating to space from water vapor molecules instead. Crucial observations from the last few decades indicate that the heat radiated to space from water vapor has been increasing slightly, suggesting that the effect of rerouting (which lowers the water vapor emission layer) was outweighed by the effect of water vapor amplification due to the surface warming (which raises it).
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

downeykp
Forum Supporter
Posts: 578
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 9:11 am
Delivery Date: 31 May 2011
Leaf Number: 1931
Location: Keaau, HI

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:21 am

You do realize that your Dr. of choice isn't a climate scientist. He's a mathematician and an engineer. He has been debunked by many scientists.

This is from Media Matters:

The right-wing echo chamber is promoting an op-ed written by mathematician and engineer David Evans, which they claim is part of the "demolition of the theories" behind man-made climate change. But Evans is not a climate scientist, and claims he is pushing in his op-ed have long been discredited.

Evans himself does not claim to be a climate scientist. According to a resume posted on his research firm's website, Evans is a mathematician and engineer. He also "sells information for investors about gold companies." As DeSmogBlog pointed out, his resume lists no published, peer reviewed articles that deal with climate science. Studies have shown a strong consensus among actively-publishing climate scientists that human activity is contributing to climate change and that "the relative climate expertise" of skeptics is "substantially" lower.

Evans' questionable credentials on climate science were no problem for right-wing bloggers. Hot Air pushed Evans' claims with a post titled, "Former 'alarmist' scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science." Fox Nation subsequently joined in, linking to the Hot Air post and declaring, "Scientist Flips, Blows Global Warming To Bits."

However, Evans's claims aren't anything new. He's been making them for years.

Evans was roundly debunked back in 2008 after he brought his claims to the media. Skeptical Science has a thorough debunking of Evans' scientific falsehoods here.
2011 Black Leaf SL+QC Vin. 1931
Res. 6-14-10 Order 1-25-11
EVSE: Mod'd Ver. 2 Nissan L1
Delivered 5-31-11

67 Months 25600mi. 10 bars

39 Suniva panels 10.3kw with Enphase micro inverters my electricity cost $21.87 a month.

WetEV
Posts: 1682
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:46 am

RegGuheert wrote:Dr. David Evans


The Dr David Evans that issued this prediction?

Is it the same Dr David Evans?

Image
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5376
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:59 am

WetEV wrote:The Dr David Evans that issued this prediction?
Yes, and that is based on his model which is completely separate from his critique of the existing model.

In other words, your argument is both an ad-hominem and a non-sequitur argument.

Again, the idea that once a CO2 molecule in the atmosphere receives a photon of light it only has the options of emitting it toward the Earth or the sky is non-physical. In fact, it can also thermalize that energy into any molecule in the atmosphere or retransmit it to water vapor, which then has its own . His identification of that serious flaw in the basic model stands as presented.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

finman100
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:42 am
Delivery Date: 06 Jun 2014
Location: Albany, OR

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:47 am

JHC, the liars believing the lies, and telling everyone believe me! 'Tis true, I swear I'm not lying.

Good god.

So glad to be on the right side of history for this one. How can people be so gullible and stupid? is it really our human ego and greed of $$$ ?

Why would lessening pollution be bad? Nope, wait. I'm sure there is an economic answer that has NOTHING to do with a longer term than next quarter.

Not impressed with people's "credentials" that make this s$%t up and sell it to others, so we can continue the status quo.
Albany, Oregon
2014 Silver SV with charge/LED package. June 2014, I'm in the EV game!
30,200 miles
19.1 kWh on 100% charge (56ish Ah)
4.2 miles/kWh average
Best trip: all of 'em. They're all no-gas!

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5376
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:55 am

Here is Dr. Evans' actual prediction:
Dr. David Evans wrote:The notch-delay hypothesis predicts sustained and significant global cooling starting sometime from 2017 to 2022, of ~0.3 °C but perhaps milder.
Simply put, it hasn't been falsified since the dates of the prediction have not yet come to pass.

For those interested, here is his page on that hypothesis. His note:
Dr. David Evans wrote:(Please note that even if this solar hypothesis and prediction prove to be wrong, the identification of the errors in the conventional climate models and the finding that carbon dioxide is not the main cause of recent global warming are still correct.)
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

lorenfb
Posts: 1086
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:01 pm



It appears that around 1995 that the model became unstable, e.g. a feedback term contributed to excessive
positive feedback. Prior to that, the model just exhibits an offset bias to observed data.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5376
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:04 pm

downeykp wrote:Evans was roundly debunked back in 2008 after he brought his claims to the media.
Amazing! That's particularly incredible since he didn't start posting about his work until September, 2015.

In other words, you are spewing complete BS.

Dr. Evans' criticism of the model is very solid. But you guys don't seem to care about the complete inability of the current models to make accurate predictions.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

NeilBlanchard
Posts: 515
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 5:02 pm
Delivery Date: 14 Oct 2014
Leaf Number: 306278

Re: Is the science settled over global warming? If so when?

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:23 pm

RegGuheert wrote:Sigh. Another fact-free post from a climate alarmist.
NeilBlanchard wrote:We have known that we humans are causing climate change for several decades - Exxon knew it in the late 1970's. And it has been further confirmed since then.
The reality: The GLOBAL MEASURED greenhouse effect on this planet has NOT changed in 25 years. So, tell me Neil: If the greenhouse effect has not changed UP OR DOWN in 25 years, how have humans caused climate change? Please just explain the mechanism.
NeilBlanchard wrote:THREE RECORD HOT YEARS IN A ROW - is statistically undeniable. They are not just breaking the record by a smidge - they are smashing the old record, and then smashing that - and then smashing that!
Nonsense: Global Satellites: 2016 not Statistically Warmer than 1998


You're projecting. All the evidence points to anthropogenic climate change. Citing Roy Spencer shows you are simply wrong.

Return to “Environmental Issues”