The Anthropogenic Climate Change Thread

[pigseye 899]

A little light reading for you,

http://www.co2science.org/subject/other/clim_hist_2million.php

Quote

In Greenland, rapid warming - approximately 7°C in a few decades - was observed around 11,500 years ago (Dansgaard et al., 1989; Johnsen et al., 1992; Grootes et al., 1993). Alley et al. (1993) also report evidence of even more rapid shifts in precipitation patterns, and other authors have noted swift changes in atmospheric circulation (Taylor et al., 1993; Mayewski et al., 1993).  Sea surface temperature changes of around 5°C, associated with sudden changes in oceanic circulation, also occurred in a few decades in the Norwegian Sea (Lehman and Keigwin, 1992).  Similar warming following the latest deglaciation occurred in regions of the Southern Hemisphere, though the warming there was less abrupt (Suggate, 1990; Denton and Hendy, 1994; Salinger, 1994; Jouzel et al., 1995).

 

[wanna-b-fanboy 2122]

28 minutes ago, pigseye said:

 

 

This is climate glacial - interglacial, the scale is about 100,000 years, everything else is just noise, so excuse me if I don't sound the alarm bells. 

Interesting- if you take what you posted relating temperature and compare it to this graph of CO2...

 

 

... If you correlate those peaks of temperatue (2 - 2.75 C) add in that last peak and we might be looking at... what 4-7 degress? Maybe you should sound those alarm bells.

Edited February 11 by wanna-b-fanboy

[pigseye 899]

sigh.....all previous interglacial periods had a mean average temperature of 2+ C above the running average, how do you expect to change this current one? 

[pigseye 899]

sigh.....CO2 is logarithmic, after the first doubling, the effects are virtually negligible due to the increased radiance of the earth. In fact, you get about 70% of the warming out of the first 40% of doubling CO2. You would need close 1200 ppm of CO2 to generate 7.4 W/mm for another 1C in temperature which would take you about 500 years to reach.

Like I said, nothing to see here. 

[wanna-b-fanboy 2122]

50 minutes ago, pigseye said:

sigh.....all previous interglacial periods had a mean average temperature of 2+ C above the running average, how do you expect to change this current one? 

Thanks for your views on this. Keep up the great work.

21 minutes ago, pigseye said:

sigh.....CO2 is logarithmic, after the first doubling, the effects are virtually negligible due to the increased radiance of the earth. In fact, you get about 70% of the warming out of the first 40% of doubling CO2. You would need close 1200 ppm of CO2 to generate 7.4 W/mm for another 1C in temperature which would take you about 500 years to reach.

 Like I said, nothing to see here. 

That is really interesting- I would love to see the moath on this- could you please point me in the right direction of your support?

[pigseye 899]

2 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

54 minutes ago, pigseye said:

sigh.....all previous interglacial periods had a mean average temperature of 2+ C above the running average, how do you expect to change this current one? 

Thanks for your views on this. Keep up the great work.

Why not answer the question?

3 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

26 minutes ago, pigseye said:

igh.....CO2 is logarithmic, after the first doubling, the effects are virtually negligible due to the increased radiance of the earth. In fact, you get about 70% of the warming out of the first 40% of doubling CO2. You would need close 1200 ppm of CO2 to generate 7.4 W/mm for another 1C in temperature which would take you about 500 years to reach.

 Like I said, nothing to see here. 

That is really interesting- I would love to see the moath on this- could you please point me in the right direction of your support?

Any first year radiative physics textbook or

https://knowledgedrift.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/co2-is-logarithmic-explained-3/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/08/the-logarithmic-effect-of-carbon-dioxide/

https://www.skepticalscience.com/C02-emissions-vs-Temperature-growth.html

https://climateaudit.org/2008/01/07/more-on-the-logarithmic-formula/

https://motls.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-is-greenhouse-effect-logarithmic.html

https://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-logarithmic-effect-of-carbon-dioxide_19.html

https://skepticalscience.com/why-global-warming-can-accelerate.html

https://geosciencebigpicture.com/2017/12/03/is-the-saturation-of-co2-logarithmic/

 

[wanna-b-fanboy 2122]

2 hours ago, pigseye said:

Why not answer the question?

I did. 

 

2 hours ago, pigseye said:

Any first year radiative physics textbook or

https://knowledgedrift.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/co2-is-logarithmic-explained-3/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/08/the-logarithmic-effect-of-carbon-dioxide/

https://www.skepticalscience.com/C02-emissions-vs-Temperature-growth.html

https://climateaudit.org/2008/01/07/more-on-the-logarithmic-formula/

https://motls.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-is-greenhouse-effect-logarithmic.html

https://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-logarithmic-effect-of-carbon-dioxide_19.html

https://skepticalscience.com/why-global-warming-can-accelerate.html

https://geosciencebigpicture.com/2017/12/03/is-the-saturation-of-co2-logarithmic/

 

Oh- I was hoping for your own words and work. ah well. Thanks anyways.

[wanna-b-fanboy 2122]

Holy crap... 

William Happer is to chair new climate panel...

this guy:

 

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/retired-physicist-leading-new-trump-effort-question-climate-threat-security

https://qz.com/1556485/william-happer-trumps-climate-denying-advisors-zaniest-quotes/

https://www.vox.com/2019/2/20/18233378/william-happer-trump-climate-change-panel

 

Damn.... I wonder what he is going to find. 

 

 

[Mark F 2640]

1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

I wonder what he is going to find. 

Another fox guarding hen house Trump appointment.

Wait till he's gone and people are no longer afraid to speak.

Environmental concerns are non existent at the present time in the US federal government

Edited 10 hours ago by Mark F