Re: What about global warming?

On Jun 12, 10:24 pm, Paul Cardinale <pcardin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Now look closer. CO2 changes happen about 800 years AFTER the
temperature changes.
There is no significant correlation between CO2 changes, and
subsequent temperature changes.

Given that the hypothesis is that what is currently happening over the
past 100/50/30 years is something completely new, the argument that it
is different from what we see previously is more support than anything
else. Show me where the CO2 and temperature rose simultaneously over
50 years in prehistory; that would be evidence that what we see now
is nothing new or manmade.

i mean, pumping
large quantities of something which absorbs heat into the atmosphere,

Human contributions to "greenhouse" gases are tiny compared to natural
contributions.

Yeah, we've "only" raised the CO2 in the air by 30%, half of that in
the past 30 years.


and expecting the atmosphere to heat up afterwards. How silly is that.

It's very stupid to attempt predictions based on non-quantitative
analysis.

?non quantitative? what would a non-quantitative computer model look
like? No, it's very silly to discard a model which fits the data very
well and the mechanism behind which is completely plausible in favor
of hand waving and vague assertions of some unknown force which is not
only causing the warming, but is inhibiting the CO2 from causing the
warming.

It's very stupid to ignore actual data in favor of unvalidated
computer models.



unvalidated? Hansen's 1988 model http://timlambert.org/img/hansenupdated.gif
obviously does a good job fitting the actual data since then, and we
have 20 years of development since then.


Note also that the other planets are warming, and the polar cap on
Mars is shrinking.

Other planets? Is the moon warming? Being just next door and all? You
realize that even just by random chance, there would be a 50% chance
that the polar cap on Mars would be shrinking at this time, so if
you're that picky on "validation", that's not really convincing
evidence. Given that the moon isn't warming and all.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Not Evil Just Wrong exposes Al Gores agenda
    ... Bush Admits to Role of Humans in Global Warming ... Roundtable on Climate Change in a statement issued Tuesday. ... of CO2 and other GHGs in major sectors of the global economy," stated ... What the science says... ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: How science is not done
    ... I looked through this voluminous report, which contains haundreds of graphs of measuerements of various temperatures and similar data, usually with trend lines usefully added, but not one of the graphs or tables showed the prediction of any model at all, and nor could I find any data whatsoever on the predictions of various models anywhere in the report. ... so climate science adheres to the first law of thermodynamics. ... Claiming "correlation does not imply causation" doesn't work when there is a physical model that shows why we expect adding more CO2 to make the planet warmer. ... And an ice free north polar route is on the cards in a decade or so if current trends of warming continue or accelerate. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Interesting Take on Climate Change Argument
    ... proof of man-made increase of CO2 content in the global atmosphere, ... as needed by man-made warming hypothesis. ... temperature histories. ... "Responses to climate change are being seen across the U.S.A," said ...
    (rec.audio.pro)
  • Re: Global warming hoax
    ... Did you notice how current CO2 levels are higher than at any other ... temperatures will become higher than is ... ancestors must have survived similar changes in climate. ... would have been warming. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Vqpros kqm Dorotea
    ... Vzemi i smetni njakolko vulkana kolko CO2 ... "Eight of the scientists in the film - John Christy, Paul Reiter, ... of the "theory of global warming". ... the result of rising temperature. ...
    (soc.culture.bulgaria)