• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Global Warming & Earth’s Global Temperature Measurement

Mainframes

Regular Member
Aug 6, 2003
595
21
46
Bristol
✟23,331.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
.

Like usual, you forgot "a world of physical-chemical processes and events" dynamically happening continuously.

Take your items 1-4 and integrate them into the real world!

Heat travels to cool/cold, high pressure travels to low pressure, mass heat transfer physics (atmospheric and ocean gyre) through radiation, conduction and convection on grand scale, and fluxes of moisture with condensation/evaporation cycling, all these processes with gradational intensities from the earths surface vertically, latitudinally from equator poles-ward, rotational day/night and orbital seasonal earth orientation, all of which are interdependent and intricately integraded that significantly impact and control mass heat transfer on earths surface.

The real world has "dynamic" processes and there is no such thing as "trapped heat". Rather there are dynamic equilibriums in heat or energy collection, transfer, and entrophy.

If you want to over simplify things that's OK, but recognize it is a mental exercise, and an independent not interdependent and intergrated parameter in the physics of physio-chemical and thermdynamic climate systems.
.

Yes the world has many dynamic processes occurring and I am well aware of them. However when you then ADD ON TOP OF THESE the effects of a greenhouse gas that is increasing rapidly in the atmosphere from artificial sources then the conclusion of man made global warming is not hard to grasp.
 
Upvote 0

hurste1951

Member
Nov 9, 2014
465
15
74
✟696.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
.


Bitterness?

.

Bitterness that someone who claims to have a background in much the same thing as I do doesn't seem to follow real science much on these threads.

Like someone who claims all of AGW is some sort of "lie" to dupe people while that person has no idea what a "temperature anomaly" is when discussing AGW. Or who doesn't have a clue how significant figures and averages work.

Basically, Heissonear, you seem to be about the least informed individual when it comes to AGW that I've seen in a long time.

I hope that isn't how you approach your geology work!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Bitterness that someone who claims to have a background in much the same thing as I do doesn't seem to follow real science much on these threads.

Like someone who claims all of AGW is some sort of "lie" to dupe people while that person has no idea what a "temperature anomaly" is when discussing AGW. Or who doesn't have a clue how significant figures and averages work.

Basically, Heissonear, you seem to be about the least informed individual when it comes to AGW that I've seen in a long time.

I hope that isn't how you approach your geology work!

I can think of some people less informed.

But Heis, seriously, you can't just repeat the same things (But what about cooling forcings!), ignore the data that addresses it (Here's a chart showing the directions and magnitudes of those forcings that shows they do not overcome CO2 forcing), repeat the claim in a new thread, and expect people to take you seriously.
 
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
.

As originally posted, how lame it has been for "GAGW climate scientists" to list GLOBAL YEARLY TEMPERATURES for the past 150 years - and to compare them to each other like it means something. What a charde of science.

Such is promoted so as to compare earth's temperature difference from year to year.

Sparse and incomplete global temperature data should be presented as such.


Remember, no real true, accurate Global yearly temperature value attainable means no true, accurate Global yearly temperature attainable.

Even to try and derive a single decimal point accuracy in earth's yearly Global temperature valve. You have no clue of the amount of error because of incomplete "global" data to go by.

.
 
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
.

As originally posted, how lame it has been for "GAGW climate scientists" to list GLOBAL YEARLY TEMPERATURES for the past 150 years - and to compare them to each other like it means something. What a charde of science.

Such is promoted so as to compare earth's temperature difference from year to year.

Sparse and incomplete global temperature data should be presented as such.


Remember, no real true, accurate Global yearly temperature value attainable means no true, accurate Global yearly temperature attainable.

Even to try and derive a single decimal point accuracy in earth's yearly Global temperature valve. You have no clue of the amount of error because of incomplete "global" data to go by.

.
Can we tell the temperature of Topeka, Kansas with one weather station? Would you listen to the news saying, "It's 39 degrees in Topeka" and say, "Well, maybe on the corner of 6th and Lee, but what about 6 blocks away at Union and Ferris?"
 
Upvote 0

hurste1951

Member
Nov 9, 2014
465
15
74
✟696.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
.

As originally posted, how lame it has been for "GAGW climate scientists" to list GLOBAL YEARLY TEMPERATURES

Again, for those who may have missed it: climate scientists almost exclusively deal in something called a TEMPERATURE ANOMALY rather than an absolute temperature.

A temperature anomaly is the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A TEMPERATURE AND A REFERENCE TEMPERATURE FOR THAT REGION OVER A BROAD PERIOD OF TIME. The TEMPERATURE ANOMALY has been found to correlate MUCH BETTER ACROSS LARGER DIFFERENCES than just the temperature.

So Heissonear is trying to dupe you into thinking a global "temperature" is what is reported. DO NOT LISTEN TO HIM. He doesn't know much about this topic. Do not be DUPED.

You can read the REAL SCIENCE BEHIND THIS >>>>HERE<<<<<


It explains why Temperature Anomalies are preferred over just the "temperature".

Sparse and incomplete global temperature data

It is sparse but not that sparse. There are over 1000 temperature stations in the US alone. As for the OCEAN COVERAGE there are many, many, many ships at sea constantly measuring temperature as well as a LARGE number of Argo floats and XBT systems measuring temperature.

There is admittedly a sparsity in the Southern Hemisphere but again this isn't as dire as Heissonear would have you believe.

Even to try and derive a single decimal point accuracy in earth's yearly Global temperature valve

Most modern temperature readings are taken to 1 decimal place. Do not be duped by people who don't know what they are talking about.

. You have no clue of the amount of error because of incomplete "global" data to go by.

Heissonear doesn't know this but indeed this topic is at the FOREFRONT of global climate studies. Error and error propogation and uncertainty are CENTER STAGE in almost every real paper written on this subject.

DO NOT BE DUPED BY PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW THE REAL SCIENCE. MAKE SURE TO READ ONLY REAL SCIENCE SOURCES.

.[/QUOTE]
 
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
For several decades we have shown a lot of graphs from climatologists showing earth's "Global" temperature over time. Such as earths temperature each year over the past 100 years.

These graphs do not list the "absolute temperature" of the earth. Instead, the Earths temperatures listed on these graphs comes from sparse, geographically incomplete temperature measurements of the earth.

Why haven't "CAGW climate scientists" made this "incomplete data locations" clear?

And why are they showing in many cases warming and cooling data that is less than 0.1% from year to year comparisons? Such as 0.18% difference, etc.?

And why have the Alarmists trusted Climate Models that over the past decade have become recognized as inaccurate to real world observations?

The "Pause" in Global Warming is now stated by main CAGW scientists (see below link) as being due to the solar radiation relecting off of volcanic aerosols - aerosols in the earths atmosphere that have come from "small volcanos" over the past two decades?


Total volcanic stratospheric aerosol optical depths and implications for global climate change - Ridley - 2014 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
For several decades we have shown a lot of graphs from climatologists showing earth's "Global" temperature over time. Such as earths temperature each year over the past 100 years.

Example?

And why have the Alarmists trusted Climate Models that over the past decade have become recognized as inaccurate to real world observations?

I have yet to see a model where carbon dioxide stops being a greenhouse gas. Can you point me to one?

The "Pause" in Global Warming is now stated by main CAGW scientists (see below link) as being due to the solar radiation relecting off of volcanic aerosols - aerosols in the earths atmosphere that have come from "small volcanos" over the past two decades?

If eating broccoli decreased the chances of getting cancer from cigarettes, does that mean that smoking does not cause cancer?
 
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I have yet to see a model where carbon dioxide stops being a greenhouse gas. Can you point me to one?
.

Your one-liner claim of CO2 "GHG effects" needs to be properly embedded into the real world - you know, how even atmospheric aerosols among other cooling natural factors can cause the current "Pause" in Global Warming.


Atmospheric and Climate Sciences

Vol.04 No.05(2014), Article ID:51443,8 pages
10.4236/acs.2014.45072

Do Increasing Contents of Methane and Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere Cause Global Warming?

G. V. Chilingar, O. G. Sorokhtin, L. F. Khilyuk, M. Liu*

Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, US Section, Los Angeles, USA

http://file.scirp.org/Html/4-4700320_51443.htm


.

Geophysical Research Letters

Total volcanic stratospheric aerosol optical depths and implications for global climate change

D. A. Ridley1,*, S. Solomon2, J. E. Barnes3, V. D. Burlakov4, T. Deshler5, S. I. Dolgii4, A. B. Herber6, T. Nagai7, R. R. Neely III8, A. V. Nevzorov4, C. Ritter9, T. Sakai7, B. D. Santer10, M. Sato11, A. Schmidt12, O. Uchino7 andJ. P. Vernier13,14

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL061541/abstract?campaign=wlytk-41855.5282060185

.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
.

Your one-liner claim of CO2 "GHG effects" needs to be properly embedded into the real world - you know, how even atmospheric aerosols among other cooling natural factors can cause the current "Pause" in Global Warming.

The fact that you have to invoke cooling mechanisms to counteract the heating caused by the burning of fossil fuels proves my point.
 
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
As pointed out above with the weblink provided, "Aerosols" are now suspected to be the reason for "the Pause" in Global Warming.

News from recent MIT research on a new link to aerosol generation is below.



Written by Jennifer Chu, MIT News Office

&#8220;Ever notice an earthy smell in the air after a light rain? Now scientists at MIT believe they may have identified the mechanism that releases this aroma, as well as other aerosols, into the environment.

Using high-speed cameras, the researchers observed that when a raindrop hits a porous surface, it traps tiny air bubbles at the point of contact. As in a glass of champagne, the bubbles then shoot upward, ultimately bursting from the drop in a fizz of aerosols.

The researchers suspect that in natural environments, aerosols may carry aromatic elements, along with bacteria and viruses stored in soil. These aerosols may be released during light or moderate rainfall, and then spread via gusts of wind.

&#8220;Rain happens every day &#8212; it&#8217;s raining now, somewhere in the world,&#8221; says Cullen R. Buie, an assistant professor of mechanical engineering at MIT. &#8220;It&#8217;s a very common phenomenon, and it was intriguing to us that no one had observed this mechanism before.&#8221;

&#8220;Until now, people didn&#8217;t know that aerosols could be generated from raindrops on soil,&#8221; Joung says. &#8220;This finding should be a good reference for future work, illuminating microbes and chemicals existing inside soil and other natural materials, and how they can be delivered in the environment, and possibly to humans.&#8221;

Buie and Joung have published their results this week in the journal Nature Communications.

Capturing a frenzy, in microseconds

Buie and Joung conducted roughly 600 experiments on 28 types of surfaces: 12 engineered materials and 16 soil samples. In addition to acquiring commercial soils, Joung sampled soil from around MIT&#8217;s campus and along the Charles River. He also collected sandy soil from Nahant Beach in Nahant, Massachusetts.

In the lab Joung and Buie set up a system of high-speed cameras to capture raindrops on impact. The images they produced revealed a mechanism that had not previously been detected: As a raindrop hits a surface, it starts to flatten; simultaneously, tiny bubbles rise up from the surface, and through the droplet, before bursting out into the air. Depending on the speed of the droplet, and the properties of the surface, a cloud of &#8220;frenzied aerosols&#8221; may be dispersed.

Frenzied means you can generate hundreds of aerosol droplets in a short time &#8212; a few microseconds,&#8221; Joung explains. &#8220;And we found you can control the speed of aerosol generation with different porous media and impact conditions.&#8221;

Buie says this mechanism may explain petrichor &#8212; a phenomenon first characterized by Australian scientists as the smell released after a light rain.

&#8220;They talked about oils emitted by plants, and certain chemicals from bacteria, that lead to this smell you get after a rain following a long dry spell,&#8221; Buie says. &#8220;Interestingly, they don&#8217;t discuss the mechanism for how that smell gets into the air. One hypothesis we have is that that smell comes from this mechanism we&#8217;ve discovered.&#8221;


http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/150114/ncomms7083/full/ncomms7083.html

.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
As pointed out above with the weblink provided, "Aerosols" are now suspected to be the reason for "the Pause" in Global Warming.

News from recent MIT research on a new link to aerosol generation is below.



Written by Jennifer Chu, MIT News Office




http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/150114/ncomms7083/full/ncomms7083.html

.

I see you've "discovered" yet another thing you were previously told about.

Remember this chart?
image_large


Hey, look! Aerosols are accounted for in the IPCC numbers! You showed them so much they went back in time just to include what you wanted!
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
Upvote 0

hurste1951

Member
Nov 9, 2014
465
15
74
✟696.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
They already do.

What is it about burning fossil fuels that causes volcanoes to erupt more often in order to offset the warming from CO2?

Heissonear appears to know almost nothing about what the climate scientists actually work with.

It's amazing to see on these threads how many times Heissonear claims "Climate scientists don't do this or that" followed almost immediately by people posting examples of where they have been doing it for decades!

I am hopeful that Heissonear won't be able to dupe too many people just because he is personally unfamiliar with the basic science. He doesn't even seem to understand the concept of "temperature anomalies" or what they are or how they are used or even why they are used.

Sad really. Why is it that people with the least education in science demand people listen to them?

Keep up the good work all you SCIENCE EDUCATED FOLKS. Hopefully no one will read Heissonear's stuff until he learns some of the science he's critiquing!
 
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What is Manmade that has been hyped is a Global Temerature for a since period of time. It is hyper-science

And Abused like ever!!!

Let's take a 24 hour period of time for the "Globe"

Was there one temperature at all locations?

Was there brief periods wher solar maximum was located?

Was there opposite side of the earth no solar and cooling/cooler temperature and lack of DIRECT solar warmth?

But the "Globe" - if you let "climate scientists" insert it was 15.3 degrees Celsius!

Too much math "telling the story"? Yes Sir!!!

Some people got frost bite "that day".

Others ran out of "propane heater fuel" and spent time "cold in Minnisota". So what?

Remember, it was 15.3 degrees Celsius! So we are told.

Same for the year 2014. It was warm! Yea, right, by a 100th degree using sparse geographic data?

Is that what has come of "Climate Science"?

Yep. Hype. CO2 is plant nutrient, plants make stuff from CO2, like corn, potatoes, lettuce, hay, you know the stuff we and animals on earth need. CO2 is not a pollutant.
 
Upvote 0

hurste1951

Member
Nov 9, 2014
465
15
74
✟696.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
[serious];66927253 said:

It is unclear where Heissonear gets his 'facts' on climate change mainly because he doesn't seem to understand the science.

The only thing I can think of in this case is the "average global temperature" people refer to when comparing the temperature as it would be based solely on the earth's "blackbody temperature".

When I was first learning about greenhouse gases I read that the earth's "blackbody temperature" just based on the Stefan Botlzmann equation would be something like -18degC (This is MATH so Heissonear wouldn't be expected to know anything about that). As opposed to the actual 'average temperature' which is something like +15degC.

A gross average obviously, but used to explain how greenhouse gases work.

Heissonear doesn't appear to understand the real science of climate change per se so perhaps this is what he is talking about.

To understand what he is reading (or more accurately what his favorite bloggers TELL him) would be to ask too much.
 
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
WHY ARE GLOBAL TEMPERATURES EXPRESSED AS A DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL,
INSTEAD OF A SIMPLE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE?


One reason is that there are several different techniques for coming up with a global average, depending on how one accounts for temperatures above the data-sparse oceans and other poorly sampled regions.

Source
 
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No longer a shame for "climate scientists" to state incorrect scientific statements , like earths "global temperature" for a one year period to the 0.01 decal point (hundredth of a degree F)?


&#8220;In addition, we can evaluate climate over longer periods of observation. For example, in 2013, the global temperature was about 1.12°F (0.62°C) above the long-term average for the 20th century, according to NOAA&#8217;s National Climatic Data Center.&#8221;


Source: https://www2.ucar.edu/climate/faq/what-average-global-temperature-now
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0