250 Peer Reviewed Papers in 2015 Alone Cast Doubt on AGW Hypothesis

[Crick]

They did no such thing. You have NO idea what that gauge was connected to when that video was shot. If they'd shown you a shot showing 0 CO2, the gauge bottomed, would you have believed that was the level used?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Someone wasted a great deal of effort accomplishing nothing. What does your animation show that the text would not? Photons leaving dashed trails? And Searcher44 is absolutely correct about the Mythbusters experiment. They STATED levels were at 350 ppm and 1800 ppb. The idea that this was a lie (with the expert and his employer both named) and that they then decided for unknown reasons to include a two second clip showing the actual values used is simply nonsense.

We're not sure what the Mythbusters experiment was. I made several calls and emails the lab that conducted the experiment, to ask them specifically about the CO2 levels because at one point in the Mythbusters Experiment it show a CO2 reading much, much higher than the 350PPM CO2 mentioned on the tape

I also emailed mythbusters , they don't do shows anymore. Maybe that's why no feedback

Universal Studios, the producer of Mythbusters, refused to comment on the video as they describe it "were in the buisness of giving people what they want and entertaining". Without directly saying it, they implied that it was stage craft only. Jammie Dupree has not responded to any letters or questions.

Duck, Dodge, Weave, and Bobb.....

They did show us it was faked when they gave us the screenshot at 1:36 showing 7.351% CO2.

And that measurement was in percent of atmosphere not parts per million. Those are very different measurements.

 

[Billy_Bob]

They did no such thing. You have NO idea what that gauge was connected to when that video was shot. If they'd shown you a shot showing 0 CO2, the gauge pegged, would you have believed that was the level used?

Your going to make me screen shot it and show you the CO2 marker? Open your dam eyes.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's the closest anytime the AGW Cult has come to published one of their many many failed experiments attempting to validate their "a 120PPM increase in CO2 will end all life on Earth" hypothesis

 

[mamooth]

Now you're saying it's there? Last time we talked about this you said stratospheric cooling was the REAL signature of CO2 warming.

Okay, post up your evidence, we can go through this again.

Now you're pretending I said the hotspot wasn't there?

Bizarre, given how I have so consistently pointed out the failure of that denier myth.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Now you're saying it's there? Last time we talked about this you said stratospheric cooling was the REAL signature of CO2 warming.

Okay, post up your evidence, we can go through this again.

Now you're pretending I said the hotspot wasn't there?

Bizarre, given how I have so consistently pointed out the failure of that denier myth.

This ought to be rich... Show Me the HOT SPOT! using empirical evidence, and the data location so I can replicate their science...

 

[mamooth]

I've done so before, and you simply screamed the data was fraudulent. So why should I do so again? After all, we all know you'll simply scream your conspiracy theory again and then run.

 

[Crick]

Global Warming Causes Stratospheric Cooling | Weather Underground

Data: Upper Air - December 2015 | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

 

[Billy_Bob]

I've done so before, and you simply screamed the data was fraudulent. So why should I do so again? After all, we all know you'll simply scream your conspiracy theory again and then run.

You won't, simply because you cant... And it is very easily refuted by outgoing LWIR that many satellites measure, which shows it does not exist.

Nice deflection... but no cigar....

 

[Billy_Bob]

Global Warming Causes Stratospheric Cooling | Weather Underground

Data: Upper Air - December 2015 | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

Funny.. Now Global Warming causes global cooling and everything else... And not one shred of empirical evidence man is doing anything to cause it.. And yet stratospheric cooling has been seen during other El Niño events but this one is somehow different and man caused this one..

You guys have got to be hurting... your all tied up in knots..

 

[Old Rocks]

Changes in solar irradiance over the North Atlantic would be amplified through atmospheric feedbacks including the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, which would in turn affect the formation of persistent atmospheric blocking events. The latter factor would also affect the predominant circulation patterns (i.e. NAO), with the consequent differential regional influence for heavy precipitation. Less interaction between cosmic rays and the ozone in the stratosphere during periods of maximum solar activity would increase ozone presence, diminish UV radiation arriving on the Earth’s surface, and increase the stratospheric temperature in some regions, with a consequent impact on the dynamics of the high atmosphere. -

Which proves beyond doubt the existence of manmade global warming

Actually, NO!

With the recent proving of magnetic waves and thier influence on earths climate, primarily the oceans heat uptake, it lays it waste. Now the amount of warming that might be attributed to mans influence has dropped to below all physically measurable thresholds.

The confluence of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation along with static flux created during solar maximum conditions maximizes the differences between the Icelandic Low and Azores High increase, while the Greenland High decreases supporting the hypothesis of manmade climate change with a 86.2 % probability at 80% confidence levels

You don't have the slightest clue as to what that means.

For sure you do not.

 

[bripat9643]

Changes in solar irradiance over the North Atlantic would be amplified through atmospheric feedbacks including the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, which would in turn affect the formation of persistent atmospheric blocking events. The latter factor would also affect the predominant circulation patterns (i.e. NAO), with the consequent differential regional influence for heavy precipitation. Less interaction between cosmic rays and the ozone in the stratosphere during periods of maximum solar activity would increase ozone presence, diminish UV radiation arriving on the Earth’s surface, and increase the stratospheric temperature in some regions, with a consequent impact on the dynamics of the high atmosphere. -

Which proves beyond doubt the existence of manmade global warming

Actually, NO!

With the recent proving of magnetic waves and thier influence on earths climate, primarily the oceans heat uptake, it lays it waste. Now the amount of warming that might be attributed to mans influence has dropped to below all physically measurable thresholds.

The confluence of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation along with static flux created during solar maximum conditions maximizes the differences between the Icelandic Low and Azores High increase, while the Greenland High decreases supporting the hypothesis of manmade climate change with a 86.2 % probability at 80% confidence levels

You don't have the slightest clue as to what that means.

For sure you do not.

Of course I do. However, it's pure AGW abracadabra, so that's meaningless.

 

[IanC]

They did no such thing. You have NO idea what that gauge was connected to when that video was shot. If they'd shown you a shot showing 0 CO2, the gauge bottomed, would you have believed that was the level used?

I dont know who you intended this for but I would like to answer.

if the instrument was reading close to zero, and trending up because of leakage to the outside, then I would have no argument that at least one of the control boxes had been charged with gas that contained no CO2. it would make sense.

unfortunately, it didnt. the instrument was reading over 7% CO2 (70,000 ppm) and trending down, as if the box being read had been charged with a large concentration of CO2 that was leaking out.

your explanation that the instrument was reading something else, not affiliated with the experiment simply does not make sense.

what common type of gas would be 7% CO2? exhaled air is only ~4%. can you give me an example of something that is 7% CO2? at least then it would be somewhat more plausibly deniable. I cannot really imagine that they would bring in that machine and not use it to make readings of some integral part of the experiment though. what would be the point?

 

[Crick]

You have no idea - because they showed nothing but the gauge face - TO WHAT that gauge was connected. They stated the levels they were using and named the parties responsible for determining and maintaining those levels. Any conclusions drawn from that drop of video are simply unsupportable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mythbusters was another in a long series of Bill Nye fake the AGW experiment experiments. They either add in massive amounts of CO2 and alters the pressure or, like Mythbusters, they use editing to fake the results

 

[IanC]

You have no idea - because they showed nothing but the gauge face - TO WHAT that gauge was connected. They stated the levels they were using and named the parties responsible for determining and maintaining those levels. Any conclusions drawn from that drop of video are simply unsupportable.

hahahahahahahaha. that's it? the best you can do?

what a joke you are! you want us to believe that they brought in an instrument that is capable of of reading down to parts per million, or even parts per billion, and yet you claim they were just measuring some random thing uninvolved with the experiment! hahahahaha

 

[IanC]

Mythbusters was another in a long series of Bill Nye fake the AGW experiment experiments. They either add in massive amounts of CO2 and alters the pressure or, like Mythbusters, they use editing to fake the results

yup, this was entertainment, not science.

it could have been both but they didnt want to tell the audience that they were using 2000x (edit- 200 times) the amount of CO2 in the air to get a one degree rise.

 

[Crick]

Why do you lie Ian? Do you really find it necessary?

 

[IanC]

Why do you lie Ian? Do you really find it necessary?

Quote the supposed lie. We can go from there.

 

[IanC]

The (missing) tropical hot spot « Climate Dialogue

so I can find it later. interesting discussion by three scientists in the field.

Mears of RSS makes a good case for Willis' theory, and the IRIS effect too.

Sherwood seems to want to 'just stop talking about it, already'

Christy decimates the models again