Nobody has run away, dumbass. People simply conclude that you and your nitwit brethren are crackpots, and not worth engaging in rational discourse. Most people here care about what climatologists think about climate, not how some douchebag in an armchair views things from the dim end of the Dunning-Kruger curve. Most people here are laughing at you. Sad, but true.
As you were, soldier.
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Clearly you have zero idea what you’re talking about. Please do refer to the post in question. And if you feel like you’d like to help your brethren, feel free to answer the question posed. With a sensible cite, of course. Also, feel free to contact He_Who_Was_Smart_Enough_To_Run_Away and see if you can get him to come back and substantiate his claims by answering what was asked of him. Lest one think that the two of you are full of shit. I await your valuable contribution to SAVING THE WORLD!!!
:rolleyes:
Well yeah, but much of the time the final fallback position of the internet warmist is the “You’re Not a Climatologist” argument. Bonus points if they throw in an unintendedly ironic reference to Dunning-Kruger.
Of course he won’t. He has essentially no understanding of the actual issues involved, for him it’s all about the feelz.
That argument might carry some weight if you were able to lay out what exactly climatologists do and do not think on these issues. In precise terms and without weasel words. And demonstrate that climatologists actually subscribe to such a position.
For example, is there agreement among climate scientists about water vapor feedback? If so, what exactly is it?
My favorite fallback position when confronting a Dunning-Kruger test subject on SDMB is to consult my own expertise as a logician, conclude the person with whom I’m “discoursing” is full of shit and then say something snarky before wandering off to a more interesting thread.
Lol at the additional unintended irony. As I said, you have essentially no understanding of the actual issues involved, for you it’s just about feelz.
Rather than engage with trolls and idiots, I find the science to be quite interesting, and having actually lived long enough to watch the last 50 years of climate science, there are some things that can be discussed, which would have been speculation and assumption twenty or thirty years ago. What’s surprising is the level of ignorance from the people that consider themselves smarter than anyone else … wait. I think that is the definition of the DK effect. To be stupid, and consider yourself smarter than everyone else. Fascinating.
SCIENCE BITCHES!
Just as I have pointed out multiple times, and supported with multiple peer reviewed papers, the models, as well as the theoretical warming from the enhanced greenhouse effect (AGW), depends upon a feedback from warming NH winters. It’s a key prediction of AGW. And of course, it’s measurable. Here’sthe thirty year trend and the twenty year trend, both of which are being discussed back in 98 and 2000, the subject of the two GISS links in this post. Note in the Zonal mean graph the hump that represents the high latitudes warming trend. and note that the warming is considered a result of increased winds, due to greenhouse gases, which is assumed to cause a STRONG POLAR VORTEX, which keeps all the cold bottled up in the polar regions, causing warm wet winters in the US and Europe. And Asia.
I bolded the good parts, not that it will matter to the true believer, the bolding is for the science based people.
The 1990 IPCC report goes on at length about this as well, but strangely enough, there isn’t a single html version of it online. Anywhere. Yet.
But there is zero doubt that warming NH winters is a key prediction of increasing greenhouse gases. That the twenty year trend 1995-2014 is so different than the predictions, it’s the sort of thing that drives a true believer into a blank stare, some sort of mental freeze up, or worse.
Here’s those winter trends that I’ve posted a dozen times now.
last twenty years winter trend
Check out the zonal mean and compare with the warming twenty year trend.
It’s so obvious, even a true believer can see it.
The trend since 2002 is much more extreme, and mostly to illustrate what a colder NH winter trend looks like, it’s a short period. Somehow 17 years became the length of time needed, which is interesting, since the 17 year trend is also really obvious as well.
It’s become such a problem in the war of perception, that now we see more and more “experts” and stories about how “global warming” is “causing” the colder winters, at the same time some people are still trying to say there is no trend towards colder NH winters. It’s a most interesting time to be alive.
No really it is. At the same time, right now. there are a half dozen different stories being fed in various ways by various groups and believers, trying to spin things, attempts to influence what people “believe” about climate change.
None of which changes anything, except for the people busy altering the data of course. They actually matter, but not in a good way.
The problem with presenting links to GISS pages, is that it is impossible to actually refute it with the usual “that’s not what the experts say”, since the linked pages are actually from the experts. Both the data as well as the explanations of how warming is causing the stronger polar vortex which leads to warmer winters. (there’s more on this at the first two links)
Ain’t that a hoot?
tl;dr
I linked to GISS experts discussing how greenhouse gases are the likely cause of the warming NH winters, due to a stronger polar vortex, from a warming world. And to GISS maps showing the trends then, and now.
I leave it up to the reader to understand why predictions and calculations made during the 80s and 90s (and to this day) about how and why greenhouse gases would lead to drastic warming, which would be most obvious in the NH boreal winters.
Such a warming was observed from 1970-2000 and was considered prime evidence that greenhouse gases were driving the warming. Warming was considered the cause of a stronger polar vortex, which kept the arctic air in winter bottled up, making the US, Europe and Asia warmer in winter.
The essential points of the GISS data and models was that a positive feedback from warming would lead to even more warming, which would be most evident in winter. More rain and less snow. Milder winters, leading to even more warming of high latitudes. Many warnings were published, ranging from damage to winter wheat, invasive species moving north, polar bears going extinct, permafrost loss and methane release, and on and on. hand wringing and demands to do something now were common. Still are actually.
Meanwhile, in the real world, winters got colder, with much more snow.
Of course not a single person who spent the last twenty years predicting warmer winters, with less snow, has ever come out and said anything close to “we were wrong about this”. Oh no. And they never will.
Instead we already hear “global warming is causing the colder winters”. Which is exactly why I started off complaining about global warming. because of a record cold day in August.
If global warming can make it colder, then of course colder August temperatures can also be blamed on global warming.
Global warming, I’m so sick of it.
That’s not a “key prediction” but a result of AGW.
Global warming does not refer to warmer winters but to increasing global temperature anomaly. That, in turn, may lead to extreme weather conditions.
“NASA Study; Cal. Drought, Polar Vortex, El Nino, Linked To Global Warming.”
Or it’s all about being smugly correct, no matter what. Like the example we now have on the page here.
So a weak polar vortex is now blamed for the colder winters, and also blamed on greenhouse gases. Just like the warming winters were blamed on greenhouse gases.
Of course it’s always “likely” or “might be” or “it could happen”, which is how science works. After the fact science predicts what will likely happen. That is sarcasm for the humor impaired btw
In essence, when the winter trend was warming, that was due to greenhouse gas increase. Now greenhouse gas increase is responsible for colder winters.
The only part left is to blame rising greenhouse gases for the global mean temperature going down. (which is has, for 17 years according to satellite data).
So if it’s warming, it’s greenhouse gases. If it’s cooling, it’s greenhouse gases. This is how science works. Nobody can stand before SCIENCE!
That was also sarcasm for you fuckheads who just don’t get it
In case you don’t know, warming actually is already blamed for the cooling. The increased winds, due to warming, have buried the ocean heat in the deep layers, which is why the oceans are cooling.
Winds are also blamed for Antarctica cooling, but in that case the ozone depletion is considered the cause of the increased winds. The stronger circumpolar vortex, due to heating from ozone depletion, blowing around the south pole “protects” the south pole from warming.
No, that is not a made up thing.
The 1990 IPCC report is cautious about the predictions from the enhanced greenhouse effect. While the modelers went ahead and used an amplified winter warming as a positive feedback, leading to their predictions about drastic and rapid global warming, wiser heads noted that it was actually an unknown, and there was no way to know what the effect of an enhanced greenhouse effect actually would be.
Some scientists, a minority of course, proposed the enhanced greenhouse effect would lead to unexpected consequences, including a rapid increase in snow and ice, changes in ocean and wind patterns, and could cause extreme cooling, amplified by volcanoes, leading to colder winters, with dangerous amounts of ice and snow.
This view was difficult to defend due to the obvious extreme warming trend that was happening in the NH winters.
Now, it might be another story.
Science, it’s a lurching monster, blown by the wind.
More details in the articles shared.
Indeed, but the argument works both ways.
More details in the NAS final report.
Global mean temperature did not go down in the long term:
Also, one should consider multiple sources of measurements:
From what I know, ocean heat content has been rising.
From what I gathered, conclusions are cautious because governments are the ones that release the final report:
“IPCC report summary censored by governments around the world”
The reason for this is that governments work with businesses, which in turn tend to be conservative when it looks at this issue:
“Climate Risks Have Been Underestimated for the Last 20 Years”
http://www.alternet.org/environment/climate-risks-have-been-underestimated-last-20-years
In relation to that:
“How the IPCC Underestimated Climate Change”
Finally, multiple positive feedbacks enumerated here have to be considered:
http://guymcpherson.com/2013/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/
You either missed all the points, or are just handwaving them aside and doing the exact same thing. Or something. Who the fuck can tell? It’s exactly what the GIGOs of the climate alarmist movement do. When the winters were trending warmer, that was considered global warming (AGW), now that they are trending colder, that is AGW. The alarmist can’t see the problem. If you can’t view reality, see what is actually happening, you are lost. Like this complete fuckhead below.
You see? That fossil fuel guzzling fuckhead, sitting in his air conditioned office typing away on fossil fuel powered computers and enjoying his fossil fuel powered lights and food, he sits in judgement, spewing his hatred and fear, and he can’t get it. He just is clueless in the extreme.
He actually believes there is some vast conspiracy, that “they” are responsible for the planet’s doom, and that he is a blameless good guy, sounding the alarm. As long as he doesn’t have to change anything, or lift a finger, and as long as he gets his fossil fuels, and lives in comfort, he will spew forth venom and lies, and sleep like a baby at night.
That is the very sort of person who wants to tell the world what to do, as long as he doesn’t have to do it.
Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY), formerly a climate-change skeptic, changed his mind after researching the issue.
Excuse me, I have to go wash some pigshit out of my hair.