Friday, May 24, 2013
Help Me Out Here
Is not the following a contradiction between the first part of the sentence and the last?
If it's warming faster than any period during our current interglacial NOW, how can it be warming slower than 13 years ago? Am I missing something?
*I know why. CO2 is not now and has never been a driver of climate change. The temperature change a doubling of it in the atmosphere would cause is about 1.1 degree C. That is, for the change in atmospheric concentration from 280 ppmv to 560 ppmv (which should occur after 2100) the corresponding change in average global temperature would be about 1.1 degrees C in a laboratory. Out in the atmosphere of Earth, there is a negative feedback with clouds which makes the increase for a doubling much less than 1.1 degrees C. It is the sun which causes all the climate change and the 24th cycle of sun spots was half as strong as the last one before, after some sort of "sea change" (to mix the metaphor) of the AP progression in October 2005. What's worse for the planet is that it very much looks like a Maunder type minimum starting in about 18 years which will mean much much colder global weather. Cold is bad. Warm is good.
I quit reading Scientific America (where the quote came from) about two decades ago when it abandoned the scientific method and became a mouthpiece for the serial predictors of doom.
The Earth is now warming faster than at any time in the last 11,000 years, but scientists do not understand clearly* why the atmosphere has warmed less than they expected over the last decade or so – and more slowly than in the 1990s.
If it's warming faster than any period during our current interglacial NOW, how can it be warming slower than 13 years ago? Am I missing something?
*I know why. CO2 is not now and has never been a driver of climate change. The temperature change a doubling of it in the atmosphere would cause is about 1.1 degree C. That is, for the change in atmospheric concentration from 280 ppmv to 560 ppmv (which should occur after 2100) the corresponding change in average global temperature would be about 1.1 degrees C in a laboratory. Out in the atmosphere of Earth, there is a negative feedback with clouds which makes the increase for a doubling much less than 1.1 degrees C. It is the sun which causes all the climate change and the 24th cycle of sun spots was half as strong as the last one before, after some sort of "sea change" (to mix the metaphor) of the AP progression in October 2005. What's worse for the planet is that it very much looks like a Maunder type minimum starting in about 18 years which will mean much much colder global weather. Cold is bad. Warm is good.
I quit reading Scientific America (where the quote came from) about two decades ago when it abandoned the scientific method and became a mouthpiece for the serial predictors of doom.
Labels: Internal contradictions
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 3:59 PM 
