The global warming information Trump is ignoring

[The Barbarian]

No he didn't, he was crushed. He wasn't referring to the RSS DATA. No warming in 18 years.

Well, let's take a look...

Looks like Cruz was up to his usual behavior. There's a reason his fellow republicans called him "Lying Ted Cruz." The data for the graph is here:
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts.txt

 

[sjastro]

Ignoring the wilful ignorance displayed by Ronald who also wants to turn this thread into a prophesy for a fire and brimstone event, here is further evidence supporting AGW from an unlikely "source".

The science that has been presented so far in this thread which supports AGW pertains to what is happening on the surface and in the troposphere, yet even more compelling evidence is occurring in the neighbouring stratosphere in a paradoxical way.
The stratosphere is found to be cooling which supports AGW in the troposphere!

One of the major differences between the troposphere and stratosphere are the temperature profiles with increasing altitude.
In the troposphere the temperature decreases with increasing altitude, in the stratosphere the profile is inverted.
The temperature inversion in the stratosphere is due to the presence of ozone.
Ozone is created and destroyed in the stratosphere.
The destruction of ozone by short wavelength UV radiation is an exothermic reaction which heats up the stratosphere and causes the temperature inversion.
Stratospheric cooling is known to occur when ozone is depleted or varies; but even after taking into account ozone levels; the stratosphere is still cooling due to greenhouse gases in the troposphere.

To understand this without getting into the complications of thermodynamics or Kirchoff’s law, when solar radiation in the form of short wavelength UVA hits the Earth’s surface, the surface is warmed and longer wavelength IR is radiated into the troposphere.
Greenhouse gases can be modelled as an isothermal layer in the troposphere that behaves like a surface which warms up by absorbing IR as described by theQuincunx5.
In reality however an isothermal layer is not formed as the temperature within the layer is not constant and not all IR is absorbed.

A more realistic model is for the greenhouse gasses to form a multilayer where each layer is ”not quite” isothermal.
In this model any individual layer radiates IR is both directions into lower and upper layers including back to the surface which is further warmed.
Each successive upper layer is cooler since each layer absorbs a fraction of the IR radiation which goes into heating the layer.
Furthermore increasing greenhouse gases increases the number of layers.

In the stratosphere greenhouse gases also exist but in a rarefied state.
Increasing greenhouse gases in the troposphere has reduced the incident IR radiation in the stratosphere that would contribute to the warming of the stratosphere.
This explains why the troposphere is out of phase with the stratosphere, why one is heating up when the other is cooling.
It also eliminates the idea that climate change is purely due to variations in solar radiation.
If this was true the troposphere and stratosphere would be in phase.

 

[USincognito]

I'll take these two together. I don't imagine weather readings around the globe, I listen to others and read. I am not a scientist and it's true, I don't know the science, I just listen, read and learn. How about some more cutting and pasting? It appears this past winter was the worst AROUND THE GLOBE. I didn't imagine that, I read that, it's not my science, it's there's.

It wasn't, despite the caps and bold, "around the globe". For instance part of what made the Midwest and Northeast U.S. along with Northwestern Europe so sold this winter was the Polar Vortex moving out of it's normal range and into those areas. The result? Record warm temperatures in the Arctic.

"Crazy, crazy stuff": Arctic has its warmest winter on record - CBS News

It's been so unusually warm that the land weather station closest to the North Pole -- at the tip of Greenland -- spent more than 60 hours above freezing in February. Before this year, scientists had seen the temperature there rise above freezing in February only twice before, and only ever so briefly. Last month's record-hot temperatures at Cape Morris Jesup have been more like those in May, said Ruth Mottram, a climate scientist at the Danish Meteorological Institute.

But it's more than that one place. Across the Arctic Circle in Barrow, Alaska, February was 18 degrees (10 degrees Celsius) warmer than normal and the entire winter averaged 14 degrees (7.8 degrees Celsius) above normal. Of nearly three dozen different Arctic weather stations, 15 of them were at least 10 degrees (5.6 degrees Celsius) above normal for the winter...​

In Texas we basically haven't had a winter the last two of them. 2016/2017 had a few freezing days in D-FW. I'm not even sure we had any in 2017/2018. For the state the entire year was the 2nd warmest on record after 2012.
https://www.texasobserver.org/2017-texas-second-warmest-year-record/

Other than a merely somewhat-above-average summer, 2017 proved to be another record-breaking year of weather extremes in Texas. We hardly had a winter, with the warmest February on record. That month, 42 weather stations in the state broke records, and temperatures in Houston didn’t drop to the 30s the entire month for the first time since 1950.​

Regional weather is different than global climate.

 

[Ronald]

It wasn't, despite the caps and bold, "around the globe". For instance part of what made the Midwest and Northeast U.S. along with Northwestern Europe so sold this winter was the Polar Vortex moving out of it's normal range and into those areas. The result? Record warm temperatures in the Arctic.

"Crazy, crazy stuff": Arctic has its warmest winter on record - CBS News

It's been so unusually warm that the land weather station closest to the North Pole -- at the tip of Greenland -- spent more than 60 hours above freezing in February. Before this year, scientists had seen the temperature there rise above freezing in February only twice before, and only ever so briefly. Last month's record-hot temperatures at Cape Morris Jesup have been more like those in May, said Ruth Mottram, a climate scientist at the Danish Meteorological Institute.

But it's more than that one place. Across the Arctic Circle in Barrow, Alaska, February was 18 degrees (10 degrees Celsius) warmer than normal and the entire winter averaged 14 degrees (7.8 degrees Celsius) above normal. Of nearly three dozen different Arctic weather stations, 15 of them were at least 10 degrees (5.6 degrees Celsius) above normal for the winter...​

In Texas we basically haven't had a winter the last two of them. 2016/2017 had a few freezing days in D-FW. I'm not even sure we had any in 2017/2018. For the state the entire year was the 2nd warmest on record after 2012.
https://www.texasobserver.org/2017-texas-second-warmest-year-record/

Other than a merely somewhat-above-average summer, 2017 proved to be another record-breaking year of weather extremes in Texas. We hardly had a winter, with the warmest February on record. That month, 42 weather stations in the state broke records, and temperatures in Houston didn’t drop to the 30s the entire month for the first time since 1950.​

Regional weather is different than global climate.

I gave evidence of the coldest temperatures around the globe last winter, not just one region - no match for the global warmist viewpoint though.
I live in central Texas. This winter we had a few freezing weeks, I was walking my dog in 10 degree weather one day - colder than last year. But Texas is warm and in the south so, now its in the 90s. Our winters are short and relatively mild compared to most of the U.S.

 

[The Barbarian]

I gave evidence of the coldest temperatures around the globe last winter, not just one region - no match for the global warmist viewpoint though.

Sorry, the data show otherwise. In fact the last year was the second hottest on record.

 

[Ronald]

Ignoring the wilful ignorance displayed by Ronald who also wants to turn this thread into a prophesy for a fire and brimstone event, here is further evidence supporting AGW from an unlikely "source".

The science that has been presented so far in this thread which supports AGW pertains to what is happening on the surface and in the troposphere, yet even more compelling evidence is occurring in the neighbouring stratosphere in a paradoxical way.
The stratosphere is found to be cooling which supports AGW in the troposphere!

One of the major differences between the troposphere and stratosphere are the temperature profiles with increasing altitude.
In the troposphere the temperature decreases with increasing altitude, in the stratosphere the profile is inverted.
The temperature inversion in the stratosphere is due to the presence of ozone.
Ozone is created and destroyed in the stratosphere.
The destruction of ozone by short wavelength UV radiation is an exothermic reaction which heats up the stratosphere and causes the temperature inversion.
Stratospheric cooling is known to occur when ozone is depleted or varies; but even after taking into account ozone levels; the stratosphere is still cooling due to greenhouse gases in the troposphere.

To understand this without getting into the complications of thermodynamics or Kirchoff’s law, when solar radiation in the form of short wavelength UVA hits the Earth’s surface, the surface is warmed and longer wavelength IR is radiated into the troposphere.
Greenhouse gases can be modelled as an isothermal layer in the troposphere that behaves like a surface which warms up by absorbing IR as described by theQuincunx5.
In reality however an isothermal layer is not formed as the temperature within the layer is not constant and not all IR is absorbed.

A more realistic model is for the greenhouse gasses to form a multilayer where each layer is ”not quite” isothermal.
In this model any individual layer radiates IR is both directions into lower and upper layers including back to the surface which is further warmed.
Each successive upper layer is cooler since each layer absorbs a fraction of the IR radiation which goes into heating the layer.
Furthermore increasing greenhouse gases increases the number of layers.

In the stratosphere greenhouse gases also exist but in a rarefied state.
Increasing greenhouse gases in the troposphere has reduced the incident IR radiation in the stratosphere that would contribute to the warming of the stratosphere.
This explains why the troposphere is out of phase with the stratosphere, why one is heating up when the other is cooling.
It also eliminates the idea that climate change is purely due to variations in solar radiation.
If this was true the troposphere and stratosphere would be in phase.

The earth cooled 3 degrees from the years 1450 - 1850. They called it the Little Ice Age. Since then, its warmed maybe 2 degrees. Its sounds cyclical to me, of I may be ignorant to what goes on in the stratosphere, but you tell me, since 1950, how many degrees warmer is it now in 2018? Just a number please.

 

[The Barbarian]

The earth cooled 3 degrees from the years 1450 - 1850. They called it the Little Ice Age.

It corresponds to the sunspot cycle. Few sunspots mean less solar activity and hence colder weather. We are currently in a sunspot low again.

Its sounds cyclical to me,

It is. We should be cooling off, according to natural cycles, but instead, we're getting record temperatures. Massive dumping of CO2 in the atmosphere is overriding the cooling cycle.

of I may be ignorant to what goes on in the stratosphere, but you tell me, since 1950, how many degrees warmer is it now in 2018? Just a number please.

About 2.5 degrees F, based on GISS data, significantly more than expected. And a lot faster than the natural cycle to which you alluded. Just three degrees led to a little ice age in Europe. In a half-century we've already seen 2.5 degrees. This is why glaciers are melting and sea levels are coming up faster than expected.

 

[sjastro]

The earth cooled 3 degrees from the years 1450 - 1850. They called it the Little Ice Age. Since then, its warmed maybe 2 degrees. Its sounds cyclical to me, of I may be ignorant to what goes on in the stratosphere, but you tell me, since 1950, how many degrees warmer is it now in 2018? Just a number please.

Why should I provide you with a "number" given that others posters seemed to wasted the time and effort in doing so only to encounter denial.

If you weren't ignorant about what goes on in the stratosphere, you wouldn't be making the error of equating climate change which started in pre-industrial revolution times with what is happening today.
The point behind stratospheric cooling/heating is that if the causes were not due to human interaction but changes in solar activity; or the inclination of the Earth's axis if one is prepared to look at the last 400,000 years as per another thread(!?); then both the troposphere and stratosphere would be warming or cooling in the same phase.
As explained in my previous post they are out of phase which can only be explained by AGW.
Even your variation in the ozone hole excuse doesn't hold water as the anomaly does not match the variation.

Note the large anomalies in 1983 and 1992 were due to the El Chicon and Mt Manitubo eruptions respectively.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Last week we had:
1 June 2018 Ronald: A quote that supports that you accusing Christian climate scientists with "knowledge AND wisdom" of the enormous scientific crime of faking data.

1 June 2018 Ronald: Accuses Christian and non-Christian scientists of "a conspiratorial effort to revise history, to remove God out of the picture...".

1 June 2018 Ronald: A fantasy of "nothing has ever disproved the Bible, archeology, paleontology, none of them" when archeology and paleontology have "disproved" bits of the Bible.

1 June 2018 Ronald: Climate ignorance - it is weather that changes every minute.

1 June 2018 Ronald: A "You all seem to want to disregard what all this will amount to if we went along with it" lie.

31 May 2018 Ronald: A post of Climategate lies (there was no faked or withheld data).

30 May 2018 Ronald: Lies about a "hoax" and no data.

So what has the weekend brought?
5 June 2018 Roland: Close to a "Most scientists do not agree with global warming alarmists, take a look at the survey." lie.
That was a new report about a 2013 survey of non-experts. It reflects what surveys have always shown. 97% of experts who have published climate science papers agree that we are causing global warming exists. As we get further from people who know what they are talking about the % drops.

As already pointed out, a sample of geoscientists who tend to work for oil industries is ignorant (they are not up to date on climate science) and a bit biased. In the past, oil companies have been responsible for anti-global warming propaganda. This has changed but leaves their employee opinions as dubious.

5 June 2018 Roland: The rather idiotic "2008 list of 31000 scientists" which includes medical doctors, food scientists and mechanical engineers!
How the OISM Petition Project casts doubt on the scientific consensus on climate change.

The 30,000 scientists and science graduates listed on the OISM petition represent a tiny fraction (0.3%) of all science graduates. More importantly, the OISM list only contains 39 scientists who specialise in climate science.

The rest are essentially anyone with an alleged Bachelors degree or above (there is no evidence that qualifications were verified by the organizers). The question is a political question about the Kyoto Agreement with a global warming denial statement.

There happen to be about 10 million science graduates a year. A biased sample is not representative. 84% of 10 million scientist members of the AAAS agree that climate disruption is human-caused.

5 June 2018 Roland: A "9000 scientist with PhD's" delusion and "junk scientists" climate scientist insult.
Any number of PhDs with no or little knowledge of climate science never trumps PhDs with published peer reviewed papers on climate science.
Argument by insult and ignorance never wins.

5 June 2018 Roland: A link to an insane "Antarctic Ice Sheet is Actually… Growing By Billions of Tons?" blog in this rant.
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
The authors found that until 2008 the ice losses in the West Antarctica were exceeded by ice gains in the East Antarctica. That disagrees with measurements using other techniques. This has not been confirmed. The consensus remains that land ice is decreasing.
Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

While the interior of East Antarctica is gaining land ice, overall Antarctica has been losing land ice at an accelerating rate. Antarctic sea ice is growing despite a strongly warming Southern Ocean.

5 June 2018 Roland: A "East coast would be under water by now" prediction lie.

5 June 2018 Roland: A "This is a conspiracy involving governments..." delusion.

5 June 2018 Roland: Repeats the survey of non-experts ignorance (American Meteorological Society).
Scientific consensus is formed by the statement of experts in the field. We do not ask nuclear physicists for medical advice. We should not ask weathermen about climate!

5 June 2018 Roland: Complete idiocy of weather reports!
What climate science predicts is that global warming will cause a trend of colder winters and warmer summers. Listing colder winters is close to confirming global warming !

5 June 2018 Roland: Irrelevant idiocy about the Permian extinction.
The Permian extinction happened. A possible cause is a runaway greenhouse gas effect. That cause or a meteor impact or volcanism is climate science or astronomy or geophysics, not the theory of evolution.

5 June 2018 Roland: A "No warming in 18 years." lie.
This is a lie firstly because the post he replied to is not about any claim of no warming. He is parroting a typical climate change denier lie of starting with one of the warmest years on record (1998), using 1 dataset out of several datasets and basically lying about no warming trend.
Human activity continues to warm the planet over the past 16 years
Global warming hiatus is the scientific analysis.

 

[USincognito]

I gave evidence of the coldest temperatures around the globe last winter, not just one region - no match for the global warmist viewpoint though.

No, you gave cherry picked news articles about several localities and regions around the world that were cold this winter. I pointed out that at least two regions that were not only not cold, but had record breaking warmth (Alaska and Greenland).

I live in central Texas. This winter we had a few freezing weeks, I was walking my dog in 10 degree weather one day - colder than last year. But Texas is warm and in the south so, now its in the 90s. Our winters are short and relatively mild compared to most of the U.S.

Awesome. I live in Dallas and have lived in Texas for 32 years. I don't know where in Central Texas you live, but D-FW only had a handful of freezing days fro 2017/2018 so I have no idea how you live south of me but had 10° weather.

 

[Ronald]

Last week we had:
1 June 2018 Ronald: A quote that supports that you accusing Christian climate scientists with "knowledge AND wisdom" of the enormous scientific crime of faking data.

1 June 2018 Ronald: Accuses Christian and non-Christian scientists of "a conspiratorial effort to revise history, to remove God out of the picture...".

1 June 2018 Ronald: A fantasy of "nothing has ever disproved the Bible, archeology, paleontology, none of them" when archeology and paleontology have "disproved" bits of the Bible.

1 June 2018 Ronald: Climate ignorance - it is weather that changes every minute.

1 June 2018 Ronald: A "You all seem to want to disregard what all this will amount to if we went along with it" lie.

31 May 2018 Ronald: A post of Climategate lies (there was no faked or withheld data).

30 May 2018 Ronald: Lies about a "hoax" and no data.

So what has the weekend brought?
5 June 2018 Roland: Close to a "Most scientists do not agree with global warming alarmists, take a look at the survey." lie.
That was a new report about a 2013 survey of non-experts. It reflects what surveys have always shown. 97% of experts who have published climate science papers agree that we are causing global warming exists. As we get further from people who know what they are talking about the % drops.

As already pointed out, a sample of geoscientists who tend to work for oil industries is ignorant (they are not up to date on climate science) and a bit biased. In the past, oil companies have been responsible for anti-global warming propaganda. This has changed but leaves their employee opinions as dubious.

5 June 2018 Roland: The rather idiotic "2008 list of 31000 scientists" which includes medical doctors, food scientists and mechanical engineers!
How the OISM Petition Project casts doubt on the scientific consensus on climate change.

The rest are essentially anyone with an alleged Bachelors degree or above (there is no evidence that qualifications were verified by the organizers). The question is a political question about the Kyoto Agreement with a global warming denial statement.

There happen to be about 10 million science graduates a year. A biased sample is not representative. 84% of 10 million scientist members of the AAAS agree that climate disruption is human-caused.

5 June 2018 Roland: A "9000 scientist with PhD's" delusion and "junk scientists" climate scientist insult.
Any number of PhDs with no or little knowledge of climate science never trumps PhDs with published peer reviewed papers on climate science.
Argument by insult and ignorance never wins.

5 June 2018 Roland: A link to an insane "Antarctic Ice Sheet is Actually… Growing By Billions of Tons?" blog in this rant.
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
The authors found that until 2008 the ice losses in the West Antarctica were exceeded by ice gains in the East Antarctica. That disagrees with measurements using other techniques. This has not been confirmed. The consensus remains that land ice is decreasing.
Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?


5 June 2018 Roland: A "East coast would be under water by now" prediction lie.

5 June 2018 Roland: A "This is a conspiracy involving governments..." delusion.

5 June 2018 Roland: Repeats the survey of non-experts ignorance (American Meteorological Society).
Scientific consensus is formed by the statement of experts in the field. We do not ask nuclear physicists for medical advice. We should not ask weathermen about climate!

5 June 2018 Roland: Complete idiocy of weather reports!
What climate science predicts is that global warming will cause a trend of colder winters and warmer summers. Listing colder winters is close to confirming global warming !

5 June 2018 Roland: Irrelevant idiocy about the Permian extinction.
The Permian extinction happened. A possible cause is a runaway greenhouse gas effect. That cause or a meteor impact or volcanism is climate science or astronomy or geophysics, not the theory of evolution.

5 June 2018 Roland: A "No warming in 18 years." lie.
This is a lie firstly because the post he replied to is not about any claim of no warming. He is parroting a typical climate change denier lie of starting with one of the warmest years on record (1998), using 1 dataset out of several datasets and basically lying about no warming trend.
Human activity continues to warm the planet over the past 16 years
Global warming hiatus is the scientific analysis.

Wow, I guess the fact checker court of law ruled, guilty as charged. Bad Ronald must completely reverse course and join the rest of us. I can't. How many scientists claim there is no God? Should I believe them?
How many voted for Obama and his socialist, racist, anti-American ideologies? I suppose I should become a Democrat and march along with the abortionists, gay activists, BIG government socialists as well?
While we are at it, lets open the borders, take on illegal immigrants, Islamic refugees, dreamers and foot the bill for them too. And let's make sure and not be politically incorrect, we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.
I can't.

 

[Ronald]

No, you gave cherry picked news articles about several localities and regions around the world that were cold this winter. I pointed out that at least two regions that were not only not cold, but had record breaking warmth (Alaska and Greenland).



Awesome. I live in Dallas and have lived in Texas for 32 years. I don't know where in Central Texas you live, but D-FW only had a handful of freezing days fro 2017/2018 so I have no idea how you live south of me but had 10° weather.

It must have slipped by you.
Record Cold Temperatures
I was walking my dog on the morning it was 10%. Apparently it broke records set in 1913 that was 15%. Doesn't matter, they'll probably go back and revise that temperature - it doesn't fit their models.

 

[Ronald]

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0333.1
So the satellite DATA showed cooling in 18 year ... Eemmm ....that didn't work well with them SO THEY CHANGED THE DATA. Oh it must have been wrong, lets tweek it and bring it around to our way of thinking ... we'll get fancy, technical, make it sound confusing and deep ... satellite orbital decay ... bla, bla. bla. Sorry, just don't buy it.

 

[The Barbarian]

Awesome. I live in Dallas and have lived in Texas for 32 years. I don't know where in Central Texas you live, but D-FW only had a handful of freezing days fro 2017/2018 so I have no idea how you live south of me but had 10° weather.

Used to snow in Dallas, years ago. Lately, not so much. And I notice the hardiness zones have moved north again. Must be those anti-racist, socialist, Anti-American, Obama-loving petunias.

 

[USincognito]

Used to snow in Dallas, years ago. Lately, not so much. And I notice the hardiness zones have moved north again. Must be those anti-racist, socialist, Anti-American, Obama-loving petunias.

I don't think we've had any winter precipitation in the past couple. Had one nice snow in 2010 and a pretty good sleet event some time in the last eight years.

 

[sjastro]

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0333.1
So the satellite DATA showed cooling in 18 year ... Eemmm ....that didn't work well with them SO THEY CHANGED THE DATA. Oh it must have been wrong, lets tweek it and bring it around to our way of thinking ... we'll get fancy, technical, make it sound confusing and deep ... satellite orbital decay ... bla, bla. bla. Sorry, just don't buy it.

Why post a link you clearly do not understand.
Even the raw satellite data clearly shows that warming of the troposphere has occurred over the past 18 years, correcting for stratospheric cooling has not only revealed the problem to be worse but has improved the accuracy of the climate change models.

Thanks for providing a link that is informative, your conspiracy theory provides the comedy background for us that have a sense of humour.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Wow, I guess the fact checker court of law ruled, guilty as charged. ...

You wrote a Gish Gallop of at least misinformation about climate science and some paranoid conspiracy theory. So I addressed most of the Gish Gallop and added it to the existing ignorance and lies, e.g. the Climategate lie. You may just be parroting ignorance, lies and paranoia from other sources but that needs to be acknowledged.

1. 5 June 2018 Roland: Close to a "Most scientists do not agree with global warming alarmists, take a look at the survey." lie.
2. 5 June 2018 Roland: The rather idiotic "2008 list of 31000 scientists" which includes medical doctors, food scientists and mechanical engineers!
3. 5 June 2018 Roland: A "9000 scientist with PhD's" delusion and "junk scientists" climate scientist insult.
4. 5 June 2018 Roland: A link to an insane "Antarctic Ice Sheet is Actually… Growing By Billions of Tons?" blog in this rant.
5. 5 June 2018 Roland: A "East coast would be under water by now" prediction lie.
6. 5 June 2018 Roland: A "This is a conspiracy involving governments..." delusion.
7. 5 June 2018 Roland: Repeats the survey of non-experts ignorance (American Meteorological Society).
8. 5 June 2018 Roland: Complete idiocy of weather reports!
9. 5 June 2018 Roland: Irrelevant idiocy about the Permian extinction.
10. 5 June 2018 Roland: A "No warming in 18 years." lie.
11. 
    
12. 1 June 2018 Ronald: A quote that supports that you accusing Christian climate scientists with "knowledge AND wisdom" of the enormous scientific crime of faking data.
13. 1 June 2018 Ronald: Accuses Christian and non-Christian scientists of "a conspiratorial effort to revise history, to remove God out of the picture...".
14. 1 June 2018 Ronald: A fantasy of "nothing has ever disproved the Bible, archeology, paleontology, none of them" when archeology and paleontology have "disproved" bits of the Bible.
15. 1 June 2018 Ronald: Climate ignorance - it is weather that changes every minute.
16. 1 June 2018 Ronald: A "You all seem to want to disregard what all this will amount to if we went along with it" lie.
17. 31 May 2018 Ronald: A post of Climategate lies (there was no faked or withheld data).
18. 30 May 2018 Ronald: Lies about a "hoax" and no data.

 

[RealityCheck01]

It must have slipped by you.
Record Cold Temperatures

6 June 2018 Ronald: Repeats complete ignorance that weather is climate.

 

[RealityCheck01]

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0333.1
So the satellite DATA showed cooling in 18 year ....

6 June 2018 Ronald: A "the satellite DATA showed cooling in 18 year" lie when his sources says no.
Comparing Tropospheric Warming in Climate Models and Satellite Data

Next, the validity of the statement that satellite data show no significant tropospheric warming over the last 18 years is assessed. This claim is not supported by the current analysis: in five out of six corrected satellite TMT records, significant global-scale tropospheric warming has occurred within the last 18 years.

6 June 2018 Ronald: A "changing/tweaking the data" lie and insult
Satellite data has not changed. The conversion of satellite data to temperatures is constantly being improved. This 2017 paper used the improved conversion: "Updated and improved satellite retrievals of the temperature ...".
Accusing scientists of "tweaking" data to get results is a dumb insult. Dumb because anyone else (even knowledgeable amateurs) can do what they did. Dumb because this is a published, peer reviewed paper. Experts have checked that the techniques used in it are correct. More experts have read the paper and seen no "tweaking".

 

[sjastro]

Stratospheric cooling is a very complicated subject and is not fully understood.
A warming troposphere and cooling stratosphere not only seems to be counter intuitive but on the surface appears to violate the conservation of energy.
Energy is conserved for the simplest reason the troposphere and stratosphere is not a thermodynamically closed system yet the overall mechanism as to why energy is conserved is very complicated.

Here is another elementary explanation for stratospheric cooling.
https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/cl...tratospheric-cooling-ESPHERE-encyclopedia.pdf