|
MAN MADE* Global warming is a hoax. (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Ang ' ela_ie |
| quote: | Originally posted by BTG
why dont we solve both by creating an equal amount of pollution that would make everything sustainable? |
Because equal amounts dont exist in the energy source. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by BTG
black guy:that graph is correct? |
lol @ "black guy"
As far as I can tell, the graph is backed up by the data on that table I linked to. I'm no scientist, so I can't speak to the validity of the actual data, but it's on NASA's website and is the result of a series of sensors they have been monitoring in the Troposphere. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by BTG
black guy:that graph is correct? |
I dunno, I can't find it on youtube. :nervous: |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
|
interesting how they kind of correlate eh?
 |
|
|
| BTG |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
lol @ "black guy"
As far as I can tell, the graph is backed up by the data on that table I linked to. I'm no scientist, so I can't speak to the validity of the actual data, but it's on NASA's website and is the result of a series of sensors they have been monitoring in the Troposphere. |
ah but the site says:
. The temperature in this region is more strongly influenced by oceanic activity, particularly the "El Niņo" and "La Niņa" phenomena, which originate as changes in oceanic and atmospheric circulations in the tropical Pacific Ocean.
which says nothing for the global warming, since el nino is a natualr occurance, but even still, what i said before was still incorrect. i'll admit. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
Another interesting segment from NASA that shows them a bit more on the fence:
| quote: | | Surface thermometer measurements indicate that the temperature of the Earth is warming at an average rate close to +0.20 deg. C/decade since 1979, while the satellite data shows a warming trend of about half of this. These differences are the basis for discussions over whether our knowledge of how the atmosphere works might be in error, since the warming aloft in the troposphere should be at least as strong as that observed at the surface. A scientific report on what this apparent discrepency between the satellite and surface data means in the context of global warming theory will be completed in 2005 as part of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program. |
Same source as before.
From that report:
| quote: | "The finding that the surface and troposphere temperature trends have
been as different as observed over intervals as long as a decade or two is difficult to reconcile with our current understanding of the processes that control the vertical distribution of temperature in the atmosphere. |
http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/216.pdf
So you may have a point that scientists are still currently exploring. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
interesting how they kind of correlate eh?
|
Is that atmospheric temps? I honestly need my hand held through a lot of science-speak.
I should stick to politics :p |
|
|
| BTG |
I don't know if you saw my graph i posted before, and although some have claimed children could have made this, I assure you people with more education then said person, compiled this graph:
and that LOOKS to be as good an explanation as any. How could anyone claim otherwise |
|
|
| Ang ' ela_ie |
| Seriously, what is your source? No one is going to pay attention unless you give them a legit source. Ie. NASA, NOAA, etc. |
|
|
| Ang ' ela_ie |
Read.
Title: Climate change and solar variability: What's new under the sun?
Author(s): Bard E (Bard, Edouard), Frank M (Frank, Martin)
Source: EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS 248 (1-2): 1-14 AUG 15 2006
"Overall, the role of solar activity in climate changes - such as the Quaternary glaciations or the present global warming - remains unproven and most probably represents a second-order effect. Although we still require even more and better data, the weight of evidence suggests that solar changes have contributed to small climate oscillations occurring on time scales of a few centuries, similar in type to the fluctuations classically described for the last millennium: The so-called Medieval Warm Period (900-1400 A.D.) followed on by the Little Ice Age (1500-1800 A.D.). (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved."
Title: Atmospheric electric fields at the Kennedy Space Center, 1997-2005: No evidence for effects of global warming or modulation by galactic cosmic rays
Author(s): Harrison H
Source: GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS 33 (10): Art. No. L10814 MAY 27 2006
"Abstract: Near surface, atmospheric voltage gradients [E-z] measured at 31 sites of the Kennedy Space Center [KSC], between Aug. 1997 and Dec. 2005, averaged 162.5 +/- 3.5 V/m, positive upward, with a standard deviation of 21.4 V/m and an apparent trend of + 0.40 +/- 1.04 %/ yr. That is, no significant positive trend, predicted to be a consequence of global warming, yet rises above the noise. The correlation of E-z with a monthly index of galactic cosmic rays at Haleakala, Hawaii, was - 0.07 +/- 0.18, for periods between 2 and 25 months. That is, no significant short-period effect of solar-magnetically modulated cosmic-ray flux on E-z was observed at KSC, during this epoch."
Should I keep going? I have a few more on this computer. |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
Is that atmospheric temps? I honestly need my hand held through a lot of science-speak.
I should stick to politics :p |
honestly, the info that you have been speaking of, and a lot of other things in your posts i thought you had some science background.
anyways, the graph is of the Southern Oscillation Index.
as always, per NOAA,
| quote: | | The Southern Oscillation Index (SOI), defined as the normalized difference in surface pressure between Tahiti, French Polynesia and Darwin, Australia is a measure of the strength of the trade winds, which have a component of flow from regions of high to low pressure. High SOI (large pressure difference) is associated with stronger than normal trade winds and La Niņa conditions, and low SOI (smaller pressure difference) is associated with weaker than normal trade winds and El Niņo conditions. The terms ENSO and ENSO cycle are used to describe the full range of variability observed in the Southern Oscillation Index, including both El Niņo and La Niņa events. |
|
|
|
| Ang ' ela_ie |
Youre right, I should.
Title: A review of the solar cycle length estimates
Author(s): Benestad RE
Source: GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS 32 (15): Art. No. L15714 AUG 13 2005
Abstract: New estimates of the solar cycle length are calculated from an up-to-date monthly sunspot record using a novel but mathematically rigorous method involving multiple regression, Fourier approximation, and analytical expressions for the first derivative based on calculus techniques. The sensitivity of the estimates to smoothing are examined and the analysis is used to identify possible systematic changes in the sun. The solar cycle length analysis indicates a pronounced change in the sun around 1900, before which the estimates fluctuate strongly and after which the estimates show little variability. There have been speculations about an association between the solar cycle length and Earth's climate, however, the solar cycle length analysis does not follow Earth's global mean surface temperature. A further comparison with the monthly sunspot number, cosmic galactic rays and 10.7 cm absolute radio flux since 1950 gives no indication of a systematic trend in the level of solar activity that can explain the most recent global warming.
Title: Can solar variability explain global warming since 1970?
Author(s): Solanki SK, Krivova NA
Source: JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SPACE PHYSICS 108 (A5): Art. No. 1200 MAY 21 2003
These time series are compared with the climate record for the period 1856 to 1970. The solar records are scaled such that statistically the solar contribution to climate is as large as possible in this period. Under this assumption we repeat the comparison but now including the period 1970-1999. This comparison shows without requiring any recourse to modeling that since roughly 1970 the solar influence on climate (through the channels considered here) cannot have been dominant. In particular, the Sun cannot have contributed more than 30% to the steep temperature increase that has taken place since then, irrespective of which of the three considered channels is the dominant one determining Sun-climate interactions: tropospheric heating caused by changes in total solar irradiance, stratospheric chemistry influenced by changes in the solar UV spectrum, or cloud coverage affected by the cosmic ray flux. |
|
|
|
|
