PDA

View Full Version : Globe to be cooler, not warmer.



Sonnabend
07-25-2011, 09:44 PM
Cycles in solar motion and activity of 60 and 20 years were used to develop an empirical model of Earth temperature variations. The model was fit to the Hadley global temperature data up to 1950 (time period before anthropogenic emissions became the dominant forcing mechanism), and then extrapolated from 1951 to 2010. The residuals showed an approximate linear upward trend of about 0.66C/century from 1942 to 2010. Herein we assume that this residual upward warming has been mostly induced by anthropogenic emissions, urbanization and land use change

Our results suggest that because current models underestimate the strength of natural multidecadal cycles in the temperature records, the anthropogenic contribution to climate change since 1850 should be less than half of that previously claimed by the IPCC. About 60% of the warming observed from 1970 to 2000 was very likely caused by the above natural 60-year climatic cycle during its warming phase.

A 21st Century forecast suggests that climate may remain approximately steady until 2030-2040, and may at most warm 0.5-1.0C by 2100 at the estimated 0.66C/century anthropogenic warming rate, which is about 3.5 times smaller than the average 2.3C/century anthropogenic warming rate projected by the IPCC up to the first decades of the 21st century. However, additional multisecular natural cycles may cool the climate further.

For idiot wilbur, here are the two scientists

Craig Loehl (http://www.ncasi.org/search/Results.aspx?for=Craig+Loehle&stit=1&skey=1&sful=0)

Adjunct Professor Scafetta (http://www.fel.duke.edu/%7Escafetta/)

Before wilbur opens his mouth, I want to see his climate science credentials

Oh thats right...he doesnt have any..........

Rockntractor
07-25-2011, 09:52 PM
TNO is filling in for Wilbur, he is in the middle of a beauty treatment and will be right with you when he is finished.
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/Funny-Owl.jpg

Apache
07-25-2011, 11:20 PM
For idiot wilbur, here are the two scientists

Craig Loehl (http://www.ncasi.org/search/Results.aspx?for=Craig+Loehle&stit=1&skey=1&sful=0)

Adjunct Professor Scafetta (http://www.fel.duke.edu/%7Escafetta/)

Before wilbur opens his mouth, I want to see his climate science credentials

Oh thats right...he doesnt have any..........

Wilbur had a bad case of keyboard diarrhea. He can't play in the pool anymore...

The Night Owl
07-26-2011, 01:36 AM
Cycles in solar motion and activity of 60 and 20 years were used to develop an empirical model of Earth temperature variations. The model was fit to the Hadley global temperature data up to 1950 (time period before anthropogenic emissions became the dominant forcing mechanism), and then extrapolated from 1951 to 2010. The residuals showed an approximate linear upward trend of about 0.66C/century from 1942 to 2010. Herein we assume that this residual upward warming has been mostly induced by anthropogenic emissions, urbanization and land use change…

Our results suggest that because current models underestimate the strength of natural multidecadal cycles in the temperature records, the anthropogenic contribution to climate change since 1850 should be less than half of that previously claimed by the IPCC. About 60% of the warming observed from 1970 to 2000 was very likely caused by the above natural 60-year climatic cycle during its warming phase.

A 21st Century forecast suggests that climate may remain approximately steady until 2030-2040, and may at most warm 0.5-1.0C by 2100 at the estimated 0.66C/century anthropogenic warming rate, which is about 3.5 times smaller than the average 2.3C/century anthropogenic warming rate projected by the IPCC up to the first decades of the 21st century. However, additional multisecular natural cycles may cool the climate further. [/URL]



Why didn't you provide a link to the full article you quoted from? Don't you want anyone to see the full text?

Anyway, the material you quoted doesn't indicate that Earth will cool but rather that it will continue to warm, albeit at a rate lower than that predicted by IPCC. A lower rate of warming... but still warming.


Before wilbur opens his mouth, I want to see his climate science credentials.

Wilbur has been banned. I'm sure you knew this when you posted. In fact, I'm sure you rushed to make this post taking shots at him once you saw he was banned because you knew he couldn't answer back.


Oh thats right...he doesnt have any..........

I believe Wilbur has told you that his background is in computer science and statistics. That doesn't make him an expert on climate but he hasn't claimed he is either.

So, just what the fuck are you trying to say here?

The Night Owl
07-26-2011, 01:56 AM
An interesting tidbit about Mr. Scafetta:


Sceptical climate researcher won't divulge key program

A physicist whose work is often highlighted by climate-change sceptics is refusing to provide the software he used to other climate researchers attempting to replicate his results.

Nicola Scafetta, a physicist at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, has published a series of papers over the past few years that suggest the sun played a much bigger role in warming over the 20th century than is generally accepted. In particular, one 2006 paper he co-authored concluded that: "The sun might have contributed approximately 50 per cent of the observed global warming since 1900" (Geophysical Research Letters, DOI: 10.1029/2006GL027142).

This paper has been widely cited by those seeking to cast doubt on the scientific consensus on the cause of climate change, including US senator James Inhofe. Scafetta has also contributed to a book that claimed that "carbon dioxide probably is not the driving factor behind climate change".

...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18307-sceptical-climate-researcher-wont-divulge-key-program.html

Well, this doesn't look good.

Sonnabend
07-27-2011, 05:59 AM
A physicist whose work is often highlighted by climate-change sceptics is refusing to provide the software he used to other climate researchers attempting to replicate his results.Just like DFr Jones and his ilk refuse to supply the data they used to make the "models" that "predict" "climate change:"

Oh that's right, they destroyed it.....

What am I doing? Hammering nails into the coffin of the AGW bandwagon, one nail at a time.:D


I believe Wilbur has told you that his background is in computer science and statistics. That doesn't make him an expert on climate but he hasn't claimed he is either.

\No, he DOES claim to be an expert, and better qualified than many climate scientists, whose scientific proof he dismisses as "crackpots"

There is no proof of AGW. None.

Tell ya what Owl, I'll give you the same challenge I gave little wilbur before he got his obnoxious ass banned

Tale ONE event, any time in the last thirty years. Prove to me conclusively that that event was caused by "manmade climate change" and nothing else.

Put up...or SHUT UP..

The Night Owl
07-27-2011, 12:45 PM
\No, he DOES claim to be an expert, and better qualified than many climate scientists, whose scientific proof he dismisses as "crackpots"

You're lying through your teeth. Show me posts in which Wilbur claimed to be an expert on climate science. Put up or shut up.


There is no proof of AGW. None.

Tell ya what Owl, I'll give you the same challenge I gave little wilbur before he got his obnoxious ass banned

Tale ONE event, any time in the last thirty years. Prove to me conclusively that that event was caused by "manmade climate change" and nothing else.

Put up...or SHUT UP..

A single event doesn't prove or disprove AGW and so it's silly to ask for proof in this context.

In science, knowledge is based on evidence, not proofs. Proofs are for mathematics.

Sonnabend
07-27-2011, 08:54 PM
You're lying through your teeth. Show me posts in which Wilbur claimed to be an expert on climate science. Put up or shut up.

You want me to repost every single post wilbur made in this forum? Where his snide manner and sneering contempt for others, not to mention his arrogance in assuming he was an expert and knew more than the rest of us combined, as a central theme?

Not enough space.


A single event doesn't prove or disprove AGW and so it's silly to ask for proof in this context.

Translation, you can't prove ONE., Thought so.


In science, knowledge is based on evidence, not proofs. Proofs are for mathematics.

Wrong. Science is based on facts not "evidence". Example: Thalidomide. It is a known fact that women taking Thalidomide gave birth to phocomelic babies because the drug was teratogenic.

AGW is not fact, it is not science, is is unproven, unproveable "theories" made up by desperate scientists looking for grants.

There is no proof whatsoever that AGW has any basis in reality..unless you happen to be H G Wells and can go 100 years into the future to prove it.

Look out for Morlocks.

The Night Owl
07-27-2011, 11:22 PM
You want me to repost every single post wilbur made in this forum?

Not at all. Show me one post in which Wilbur claimed he is a climate expert.

Rockntractor
07-27-2011, 11:27 PM
Not at all. Show me one post in which Wilbur claimed he is a climate expert.

Wilbur isn't here, why don't you post your credentials.

Zathras
07-28-2011, 12:04 AM
Wilbur isn't here, why don't you post your credentials.

Wouldn't do any good Rock. The Shit Bird would lie about any credentials he doesn't have. He has no honor and wouldn't hesitate to do so.

Rockntractor
07-28-2011, 12:10 AM
Wouldn't do any good Rock. The Shit Bird would lie about any credentials he doesn't have. He has no honor and wouldn't hesitate to do so.

He is also the king of improper context.
If he posted something true it would look like a lie because of how he presents it, you would think his handlers would notice but I guess good help is hard to find.

Zathras
07-28-2011, 01:28 AM
He is also the king of improper context.
If he posted something true it would look like a lie because of how he presents it, you would think his handlers would notice but I guess good help is hard to find.

Unfortunantly his handlers don't have the guts to come here and debate us...his handlers being Skinner and the rest of the DUmmy admin.

The Night Owl
07-28-2011, 12:12 PM
Unfortunantly his handlers don't have the guts to come here and debate us...his handlers being Skinner and the rest of the DUmmy admin.

I don't know why you guys keep trying to link me to DU. I mean, I like the place but I hardly ever post there. I go to forums looking for fights and I just don't get that there.

Sonnabend
07-28-2011, 08:05 PM
I don't know why you guys keep trying to link me to DU. I mean, I like the place but I hardly ever post there. I go to forums looking for fights and I just don't get that there.

I am sure that sooner or later, DU will join the growing list of sites that has banned your ass for being an obnoxious little troll.

The Night Owl
07-29-2011, 01:17 AM
I am sure that sooner or later, DU will join the growing list of sites that has banned your ass for being an obnoxious little troll.

Do you ever get anything right? I've only been banned from two boards-- at the previous version of CU and at Conservative Cave. Both bannings were years ago.

Edit: I was also banned from Free Republic many years ago but who hasn't been banned from that crazy ass place?

lacarnut
07-29-2011, 04:38 AM
Do you ever get anything right? I've only been banned from two boards-- at the previous version of CU and at Conservative Cave. Both bannings were years ago.

Edit: I was also banned from Free Republic many years ago but who hasn't been banned from that crazy ass place?

You must be doing it all wrong to get banned from 3 sites.

Rockntractor
07-29-2011, 11:10 AM
Do you ever get anything right? I've only been banned from two boards-- at the previous version of CU and at Conservative Cave. Both bannings were years ago.

Edit: I was also banned from Free Republic many years ago but who hasn't been banned from that crazy ass place?

The list keeps growing.

Zathras
07-29-2011, 11:20 AM
I don't know why you guys keep trying to link me to DU. I mean, I like the place but I hardly ever post there. I go to forums looking for fights and I just don't get that there.

LOL, if you have to ask, you really are a DUmmy

AmPat
07-29-2011, 02:06 PM
TNO is filling in for Wilbur, he is in the middle of a beauty treatment and will be right with you when he is finished.
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/Funny-Owl.jpg

I see he is dressed to show up with his blinders on again. We should take his belt and laces before he realizes that his pet hoax is completely exposed.

The Night Owl
07-29-2011, 05:20 PM
Not at all. Show me one post in which Wilbur claimed he is a climate expert.

I'm still waiting.

Rockntractor
07-29-2011, 06:30 PM
I'm still waiting.

As are we for the answer to almost every question you have ever been asked here.

AmPat
07-29-2011, 07:48 PM
Do you ever get anything right? I've only been banned from two boards-- at the previous version of CU and at Conservative Cave. Both bannings were years ago.

Edit: I was also banned from Free Republic many years ago but who hasn't been banned from that crazy ass place?

That's quite a record. Does it suggest that perhaps you are the problem and maybe YOU need to change? I have never been banned from any site.

The Night Owl
07-30-2011, 02:20 PM
That's quite a record. Does it suggest that perhaps you are the problem and maybe YOU need to change? I have never been banned from any site.

Not really. Free Republic doesn't allow lefties and so it's no surprise that I got banned from there. The old CU was run by Gator, who only pretended to allow lefties, and so it's no surprise that I got banned from there.

The only ban I perhaps deserved was the one from Conservative Cave but I don't regret the post that got me banned from there (I basically told Snuggle Bunny, who is a pretentious moron, to go fuck himself). I miss chatting with others there.

AmPat
07-30-2011, 07:01 PM
Not really. Free Republic doesn't allow lefties and so it's no surprise that I got banned from there. The old CU was run by Gator, who only pretended to allow lefties, and so it's no surprise that I got banned from there.

The only ban I perhaps deserved was the one from Conservative Cave but I don't regret the post that got me banned from there (I basically told Snuggle Bunny, who is a pretentious moron, to go fuck himself). I miss chatting with others there.
Unfortunate.

Odysseus
07-30-2011, 10:55 PM
I don't know why you guys keep trying to link me to DU. I mean, I like the place but I hardly ever post there. I go to forums looking for fights and I just don't get that there.

That's because you are of a similar mind (or what passes for it) among those clowns.

Rockntractor
07-30-2011, 11:33 PM
Hootie looks at the world different than we do.
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/upside-sown-owl_1913739i.jpg

Apache
07-31-2011, 12:37 AM
I don't know why you guys keep trying to link me to DU. I mean, I like the place but I hardly ever post there. I go to forums looking for fights and I just don't get that there.

Ya know flocknut you is a pain in the ass. The way you duck threads where you have been cornered :rolleyes:



Still you do have balls to keep showing up....:D

Sonnabend
08-04-2011, 07:16 PM
I could... but it would mean reposting ALL of Wilbur's posts on the subject. Sorry, busy.

The Night Owl
08-05-2011, 10:16 AM
I could... but it would mean reposting ALL of Wilbur's posts on the subject. Sorry, busy.

You don't know how to use the search feature?

Zathras
08-05-2011, 10:55 AM
You don't know how to use the search feature?

No, unlike you, it means he has a life outside of this forum you idiot.

Sonnabend
08-05-2011, 10:49 PM
The poor fowl is about to get a harsh reality jolt. Watch this space:D

Zathras
08-06-2011, 01:38 AM
The poor fowl is about to get a harsh reality jolt. Watch this space:D

:popcorn: