Page 123 of 323 < 1 2 ... 121 122 123 124 125 ... 322 323 >
Topic Options
#1005831 - 13/08/2011 15:02 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
__PG__ Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 08/02/2010
Posts: 706
Originally Posted By: ROM

9 / More heat returning to earth; Not according to the latest satellite data; Fail

I'm not going to bother to debunk all the garbage you've posted, but I will point out that satellites do not measure downwelling radiation.

The evidence of increased downwelling longwave radiation comes from ground-based measurements.

Top
#1005846 - 13/08/2011 17:03 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: __PG__]
divho Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 26/09/2002
Posts: 373
Loc: Brisbane
Originally Posted By: __PG__
Originally Posted By: ROM

9 / More heat returning to earth; Not according to the latest satellite data; Fail

I'm not going to bother to debunk all the garbage you've posted, but I will point out that satellites do not measure downwelling radiation.

The evidence of increased downwelling longwave radiation comes from ground-based measurements.



'An improved algorithm for retrieving surface downwelling
longwave radiation from satellite measurements'


http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/~kratz/ref/p31jgr.pdf


Edited by divho (13/08/2011 17:06)

Top
#1005869 - 13/08/2011 19:21 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: divho]
S .O. Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 31/01/2011
Posts: 1539
Loc: Southern Victoria
From the Above Link .
" An improved version of
the algorithm prevents the large errors in the SDLWat low water vapor amounts by taking
into account that, under such conditions, the SDLW and water vapor amount are nearly
linear in their relationship. The new algorithm also utilizes cloud fraction and cloud liquid
and ice water paths available from the Cloud and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System
(CERES) single-scanner footprint (SSF) product to separately compute the clear and
cloudy portions of the fluxes. The new algorithm has been validated against surface
measurements at 29 stations around the globe for Terra and Aqua satellites. The results
show significant improvement over the original version. "

Does that make it Version 2.0 .....
just to think we are currently in the " Commodore 32 " stage of " Climate Computing " ..... a long ------ way off Tablets ayyyy !

Hardly convincing that they are still trying to improve one facet , that is only a tiny proportion of the overall highly complex feedbacks . Which inturn have to influence each other .
But i spose thats enough to pin our future living standards on !!!!
_________________________
" Solar Powered "

Top
#1005904 - 13/08/2011 23:07 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: roves]
Simmosturf Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 17/03/2008
Posts: 1620
Loc: Wangaratta
PG, I'd like to know how the authors ascertained the difference between man made carbon and naturally occurring carbon found in their crap research?

Top
#1005943 - 14/08/2011 11:10 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: __PG__]
Stevo59 Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 24/01/2009
Posts: 1037
Loc: Cairns
Originally Posted By: __PG__
I agree. Consensus counts for nothing without overwhelming evidence.

If that's the case...what do you say about documentaries about evolution? Should they discuss creationism and intelligent design in order to be 'balanced'? Do opinions about creationism and intelligent design count as much as the overwhelming evidence of natural selection and evolution?

There is an overwhelming body of evidence that
a) The earth's greenhouse effect is increasing
b) Anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide are causing it?

As I said, the evidence is overwhelming..and it in includes (but is not limited to) the following experimental observations





Now, if you can explain all of the observational evidence..without referencing AGW...then you will have re-written modern physics and our understanding of matter and the universe as we know it... and you'll get a Nobel Prize. Good luck!


Excellent summary diagrams about AGW, thanks for posting!
_________________________
"Some people are weather wise, but most are otherwise”. Benjamin Franklin.

Top
#1005952 - 14/08/2011 12:06 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Stevo59]
Cheers Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 26/05/2007
Posts: 1109
Loc: sevenhills nsw
Yes,thank you PG for that.

Top
#1005978 - 14/08/2011 14:32 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Simmosturf]
Stevo59 Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 24/01/2009
Posts: 1037
Loc: Cairns
Originally Posted By: Simmosturf
PG, I'd like to know how the authors ascertained the difference between man made carbon and naturally occurring carbon found in their crap research?


Isotope analyses....
_________________________
"Some people are weather wise, but most are otherwise”. Benjamin Franklin.

Top
#1006004 - 14/08/2011 16:32 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Stevo59]
Simmosturf Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 17/03/2008
Posts: 1620
Loc: Wangaratta
So Steve, what's the difference between human produced Carbon and naturally occurring carbon?
* Name: Carbon
* Symbol: C
* Atomic number: 6
* Atomic weight: 12.0107 (8) [see notes g r]
* Standard state: solid at 298 K
* CAS Registry ID: 7440-44-0
* Group in periodic table: 14
* Group name: (none)
* Period in periodic table: 2
* Block in periodic table: p-block
* Colour: graphite is black, diamond is colourless
* Classification: Non-metallic

http://www.webelements.com/carbon/

Top
#1006032 - 14/08/2011 18:27 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Simmosturf]
MC Thomas Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 06/12/2004
Posts: 1119
Loc: Melbourne
Simmosturf, not going to get in to this global warming discussion. Haven't read enough to have my own opinions. I will say though, saying human produced carbon and naturally occurring carbon is a bit misleading (carbon, as in carbon atoms, are not being produced). I am going to assume you mean carbon dioxide, in which case, there can be different isotope ratios for different compounds depending on how they are formed. I believe this occurs due to kinetic isotope effects, that is slightly different reaction rates between different isotopes. Carbon has two stable isotopes, 12C and 13C, with the 13C isotope making up about 1% naturally occuring carbon. The atomic weight is actually a combination of 12C and 13C isotopes. It's quite a difficult thing to get your head around.


Edited by MC Thomas (14/08/2011 18:28)

Top
#1006034 - 14/08/2011 18:30 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Stevo59]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Originally Posted By: Stevo59
Originally Posted By: __PG__
I agree. Consensus counts for nothing without overwhelming evidence.

If that's the case...what do you say about documentaries about evolution? Should they discuss creationism and intelligent design in order to be 'balanced'? Do opinions about creationism and intelligent design count as much as the overwhelming evidence of natural selection and evolution?

There is an overwhelming body of evidence that
a) The earth's greenhouse effect is increasing
b) Anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide are causing it?

As I said, the evidence is overwhelming..and it in includes (but is not limited to) the following experimental observations





Now, if you can explain all of the observational evidence..without referencing AGW...then you will have re-written modern physics and our understanding of matter and the universe as we know it... and you'll get a Nobel Prize. Good luck!


Excellent summary diagrams about AGW, thanks for posting!


Is that AGW for kids?
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#1006058 - 14/08/2011 21:18 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Loopy Radar]
Simmosturf Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 17/03/2008
Posts: 1620
Loc: Wangaratta
Thanks for the input MC but tell me which version of the element C is man made? The argument is very much the same to creating or destroying water, it is impossible.

Top
#1006062 - 14/08/2011 21:58 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Simmosturf]
MC Thomas Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 06/12/2004
Posts: 1119
Loc: Melbourne
No isotope of carbon is man made. The idea is that a particular reaction or process can lead to the enrichment or depletion of a particular isotope in the reaction product. These differences are typically very small but with the right instrumentation all kinds of interesting info can be gained. This is getting beyond what I have a good understanding of though.

Also for making or destroying water, that is actually pretty easy. If you burn something (methane for example) you will produce a lot of water.

CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O
methane + 2 X oxygen -> carbon dioxide + 2 X water


Edited by MC Thomas (14/08/2011 22:00)

Top
#1006068 - 14/08/2011 22:31 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: MC Thomas]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
I had a post here on the C12 / C13 carbon isotopes and how they are questionable as indicators of calculating the anthropogenic CO2 component a couple of weeks ago.
[ Science in AGW climate change 6-8-2011 11.39 ]

The Chiefio alias E.M.Smith had a long post on the C12 / C13 carbon isotope ratios and the problems using them as indicators on his blog back in Feb 2009.
If you want to bone up somewhat on the Carbon isotopes this is a good a place as any to start.

The Trouble With C12 C13 Ratios

E.M.Smith is also right into the financial system and stocks and shares as well as climate matters so if you are interested in the S & S's scene right now just click through the heading and you will spend the rest of the night trying to absorb everything he has to say on the current global financial affairs.
Believe me, this guy ain't dumb!


Edited by ROM (14/08/2011 22:37)

Top
#1006176 - 15/08/2011 21:43 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
As carbon seems to be the flavour of the thread at the moment I came across another research project that like so many such projects that are turning up on an almost daily basis now, proceeds to shoot large holes in another favorite shibboleth of the greens and global warmers.
And that is that the planting of large areas of trees will take up and sequester that terribly destructive element that is the fourth most common element in the universe and the 15th most abundant element in the earth's crust.
That element is "Carbon", one of the most basic of elements that forms the backbone of all the compounds that go to make up life on this planet.
I have expressed myself before here at the stupidity of some [ most ?? ] do gooder so called environmentalists who rush out and plant trees where trees haven't grown maybe for tens of decades at least.
They of course are "saving the environment"!
I say what utter bull crap!

All they are doing is destroying another complete eco system that has developed with it's innumerable tiny critters and creepy crawlies, it's mosses and fungi and tiny plants of every type and description, all of which are just as much a part of Earth's biology and life forms as any damn trees, of which the planted species are usually of a species foreign to the area.
Those do gooders in fact destroy entire and unique non tree eco systems whenever they rush out and plant trees of any sort in a long established grasslands or formerly non tree supporting area.
And unlike forests, each of those patches of grasslands and other unique treeless areas which have never been properly studied as trees get all the money, will in all likelihood have an ecosystem that is different and unique, each in it's own way compared to the others so I suspect that often there are compounds and chemicals that the tiny inhabitants and the flora and fauna in those small unique grassland niche systems produced and secreted that might one day be proven to be of extraordinary value to the human race.
But they get destroyed in the feel good rush to plant trees.

But of course trees are renown for taking up that CO2 , the Earth destroying carbon that will fry the planet in about 100 years time with a temperature rise of, was that 2 degrees or has that now shrunk to about 1.2 C in 100 years time?
Doesn't matter! The earth will be destroyed if not by carbon then they will think of something else very soon and they will prove it with the models !
Just send more money!

But do trees take up all that carbon they claim they do is that just another unquestioned output from the increasingly disparaged preordained in outcome models used in climatology.
Around 30 years ago a paper in the then highly respected Scientific American came to the conclusion that the annual "Long Prairie Grasses [ Long, Medium and Short prairie grasses depending on the longitude where grown across the Great Plains of the USA ] actually sequestered greater amounts of carbon than a forest of the same area and over the lifetime of that forest.

Grasses of every type including mankind's food crops such as wheat, barley , sugar cane and etc plus some tree species do this carbon sequestration through the medium of Phytoliths or Plantstones

So do trees actually take up and sequester all that carbon?
In some or maybe a lot of situations maybe not as much as the greens and global warmers might like to think.

Just browsing through the EurekAlert site, the online news outlet for the AAAS , to see what research papers were of interest this evening and I came across this paper.

Increased tropical forest growth could release carbon from the soil.
Quote:
A new study shows that as climate change enhances tree growth in tropical forests, the resulting increase in litterfall could stimulate soil micro-organisms leading to a release of stored soil carbon.

The research was led by scientists from the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology and the University of Cambridge, UK. The results are published online today (14 August 2011) in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change.

The researchers used results from a six-year experiment in a rainforest at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama, Central America, to study how increases in litterfall - dead plant material such as leaves, bark and twigs which fall to the ground - might affect carbon storage in the soil. Their results show that extra litterfall triggers an effect called 'priming' where fresh carbon from plant litter provides much-needed energy to micro-organisms, which then stimulates the decomposition of carbon stored in the soil.
Lead author Dr Emma Sayer from the UK's Centre for Ecology & Hydrology said, "Most estimates of the carbon sequestration capacity of tropical forests are based on measurements of tree growth. Our study demonstrates that interactions between plants and soil can have a massive impact on carbon cycling. Models of climate change must take these feedbacks into account to predict future atmospheric carbon dioxide levels."

The study concludes that a large proportion of the carbon sequestered by greater tree growth in tropical forests could be lost from the soil. The researchers estimate that a 30% increase in litterfall could release about 0.6 tonnes of carbon per hectare from lowland tropical forest soils each year. This amount of carbon is greater than estimates of the climate-induced increase in forest biomass carbon in Amazonia over recent decades. Given the vast land surface area covered by tropical forests and the large amount of carbon stored in the soil, this could affect the global carbon balance.

Tropical forests play an essential role in regulating the global carbon balance. Human activities have caused carbon dioxide levels to rise but it was thought that trees would respond to this by increasing their growth and taking up larger amounts of carbon. However, enhanced tree growth leads to more dead plant matter, especially leaf litter, returning to the forest floor and it is unclear what effect this has on the carbon cycle.

Dr Sayer added, "Soils are thought to be a long-term store for carbon but we have shown that these stores could be diminished if elevated carbon dioxide levels and nitrogen deposition boost plant growth."

Co-author Dr Edmund Tanner, from the University of Cambridge, said, "This priming effect essentially means that older, relatively stable soil carbon is being replaced by fresh carbon from dead plant matter, which is easily decomposed. We still don't know what consequences this will have for carbon cycling in the long term."

Top
#1006208 - 16/08/2011 09:49 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
__PG__ Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 08/02/2010
Posts: 706
Originally Posted By: ROM

E.M.Smith is also right into the financial system and stocks and shares as well as climate matters so if you are interested in the S & S's scene right now just click through the heading and you will spend the rest of the night trying to absorb everything he has to say on the current global financial affairs. Believe me, this guy ain't dumb!


Is this the same guy who couldn't compute a spatial average of global temperatures?

Top
#1006209 - 16/08/2011 09:55 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: __PG__]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
And P_G, your contribution to the sum of human knowledge is ???

Top
#1006210 - 16/08/2011 09:58 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: __PG__]
__PG__ Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 08/02/2010
Posts: 706
Seminar being held tonight at the University of Melbourne by ANZAAS, the Australian & New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science. Former Bureau director and WMO President John Zilman will speak.

Originally Posted By: ANZAAS

Dr John Zillman

"The IPCC story: science versus politics in the climate change debate

-how governments learn from the science"

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is almost universally regarded as the definitive source of information on the science of climate change. Its assessments of the science are accepted by governments and widely supported by the climate science community. But it has also been criticised for politicising the science and for having become captive to both the proponents and the opponents of greenhouse gas reduction. This talk will explain the origins of the IPCC, describe how it works and offer some comment on the scientific integity of its reports. The speaker was involved in the establishment of the IPCC in 1988 and served as Principal Delegate of Australia to its sessions and a member of its Bureau for most of its first 20 years.

John W. Zillman is former President of the World Meteorological Organization and the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE). He has contributed to raising awareness to the consequences of global climate change through involvement in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).


He holds a BSc in Physics and a BA (Political Science and Public Administration) Queensland University; a Master of Science (Meteorology) from the University of Melbourne; and a PhD (Meteorology and Oceanography) from the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

He was Director of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology from 1978 to 2003 and Chairman of the Commonwealth Heads of Marine Agencies from 1994 to 2003. From 1978 to 2004 he was Permanent Representative of Australia with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

He was elected as a Fellow of ATSE in 1980 and Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science in 2006.


Perhaps some to the sceptics would like to go and ask him a few questions as to why the IPCC is full of fraudulent scientists just in it for the money, who are pushing their own socialist agenda and aiding the new world order to implement a one-world government.

Please leave your nooses and rifles at the door.

Top
#1006215 - 16/08/2011 10:10 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
__PG__ Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 08/02/2010
Posts: 706
Originally Posted By: ROM
And P_G, your contribution to the sum of human knowledge is ???


Two journal articles (one more currently under review), a book chapter, various technical reports, and a few cars and submarines with my handiwork attached to them.

Top
#1006219 - 16/08/2011 10:23 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: __PG__]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
Aha! We prise some personal information loose at last.

Top
#1006222 - 16/08/2011 10:39 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
Bill Illis Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 11/07/2010
Posts: 1003

_PG_,

You could ask them about the missing energy / the negative 2.8 Watts/m2 of radiative feedback (they might not know what a "negative radiative feedback" is though, nobody does, but it is there - deep oceans might be absorbing about 0.3 W/m2 of this negative feedback, another 0.1 W/m2 in land and ice leaving 2.4 missing).





Impressive resume however.


Edited by Bill Illis (16/08/2011 10:43)

Top
Page 123 of 323 < 1 2 ... 121 122 123 124 125 ... 322 323 >


Moderator:  Lindsay Knowles 
Who's Online
10 registered (Hailin, Pacman, Pete R, Summ3r, Knot, whynot, GringosRain, Kino, dan, NotsohopefulPete), 299 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
cyclops, dylan_dawg, dylzi, Farmer, GrizzlyBear, Sailfish, tonzo
Forum Stats
29495 Members
32 Forums
23816 Topics
1480365 Posts

Max Online: 2925 @ 02/02/2011 22:23
Satellite Image