Evidence supporting AGW

[Kosh]

And yet zero scientific evidence has been provided to prove the AGW religion.

Not one link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate, but the AGW faithful keep trying.

However all they do is show that real science in this area is dead.

Do tell, what will you do with this data and model?

Why don't you post the dataset and source code that proves CO2 drives climate and see..

 

[Crick]

And yet zero scientific evidence has been provided to prove the AGW religion.

Not one link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate, but the AGW faithful keep trying.

However all they do is show that real science in this area is dead.

Do tell, what will you do with this data and model?

And as I think we all know, Kosh's complaint here is a lie. He has been given a large set of data files and a large set of GCM source code files. Since then, he has repeatedly continued to make this asinine and now utterly false charge.

The truth is Kosh doesn't have the faintest idea what to do with those things. If you'd care to correct me on this Kosh, please feel free to let us know what you plan to do with them. Perhaps one of your buddies will be good enough to tell you how to compile and link a program and how to run a global scale GCM on your home laptop for a 30 year run or so and how to compare the output to.... well now I'm giving it all away. I want to leave something for you to figure out on your own. Have at it Kosh.

For the fourth time:

Climate datasets

General Circulation models code

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes we know the Vostock Ice Cores are DENIERS!!! because they show your God lagging temperature on the increase and decrease

Wake up Frank. Stop drinking. Stop smoking dope. Stop whacking yourself in the head with a rubber mallet. Stop doing whatever it is you're doing that's making you SO DUMB.

Your graph labeled Vostok ice core data as global data. "Earth's Temperature". That was bullshit Frank. Surely you can grasp the point there. Can't you Frank. Try real, real hard.

Its a data set over a 600,000 year period that shows CO2 lagging temperature changes. Moreover it shows temperatures COLLAPSING after a doubling of CO2, which runs totally contrary to everything your Cult holds sacred.

Are you really so insane as to tell us that a 600,000 year data set got the temperatures wrong? What do you offer in response, Mann's Fossilized tree rings?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I wonder how many of these warmer idiots will suicide out of sheer despair when the hoax finally comes tumbling down?

It never ends well for Death worshipong Cults, CO2 is their Jonesville and they will glady drink the KoolAid

Let's start a bet. We can put the money in trust for, say, 29 years. That will work nicely. Everyone puts in $100 a month for next 20 years. Then, when the twenty years are up, the winners divide it up.

What are we betting?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that when the AGWcult models incorporate the warming in the deep pacific ocean over a 600,000 year period it clearly shows mighty CO2 driving and forcing temperature...am I right?

 

[SSDD]

Evidence that the climate is changing...observational and incontrovertible.

Evidence that man is responsible for altering the global climate to any measurable degree....zero.

 

[jc456]

And yet zero scientific evidence has been provided to prove the AGW religion.

Not one link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate, but the AGW faithful keep trying.

However all they do is show that real science in this area is dead.

Do tell, what will you do with this data and model?

And as I think we all know, Kosh's complaint here is a lie. He has been given a large set of data files and a large set of GCM source code files. Since then, he has repeatedly continued to make this asinine and now utterly false charge.

The truth is Kosh doesn't have the faintest idea what to do with those things. If you'd care to correct me on this Kosh, please feel free to let us know what you plan to do with them. Perhaps one of your buddies will be good enough to tell you how to compile and link a program and how to run a global scale GCM on your home laptop for a 30 year run or so and how to compare the output to.... well now I'm giving it all away. I want to leave something for you to figure out on your own. Have at it Kosh.

For the fourth time:

Climate datasets

General Circulation models code

So, perhaps you could explain how 1940 to 1970 the earth cooled when CO2 was increasing? See there are data sets, we all see the actual temperatures. Please explain this to us.

 

[Kosh]

It never ends well for Death worshipong Cults, CO2 is their Jonesville and they will glady drink the KoolAid

Let's start a bet. We can put the money in trust for, say, 29 years. That will work nicely. Everyone puts in $100 a month for next 20 years. Then, when the twenty years are up, the winners divide it up.

What are we betting?

It was a plug to invest in Al Gores carbon program so you too can be carbon neutral.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I wonder how many of these warmer idiots will suicide out of sheer despair when the hoax finally comes tumbling down?

It never ends well for Death worshipong Cults, CO2 is their Jonesville and they will glady drink the KoolAid

Let's start a bet. We can put the money in trust for, say, 29 years. That will work nicely. Everyone puts in $100 a month for next 20 years. Then, when the twenty years are up, the winners divide it up.

AGWCult making the necessary adjustments to a DENIER Thermometer that refused to acknowledge the Truth and Righteousness of Manmade Climate Change Disruption

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

And of course the first assumption is wrong. they have no real idea how GHG's work. They just know what gasses are GHG's, they have no idea of the mechanism.

Uhh, that's not at all true. Molecules absorb radiation depending on what frequencies excite certain energy levels within the molecule.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And of course the first assumption is wrong. they have no real idea how GHG's work. They just know what gasses are GHG's, they have no idea of the mechanism.

Uhh, that's not at all true. Molecules absorb radiation depending on what frequencies excite certain energy levels within the molecule.

So the radiation stays stuck in the Sticky Glue CO2 molecule?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

And of course the first assumption is wrong. they have no real idea how GHG's work. They just know what gasses are GHG's, they have no idea of the mechanism.

Uhh, that's not at all true. Molecules absorb radiation depending on what frequencies excite certain energy levels within the molecule.

So the radiation stays stuck in the Sticky Glue CO2 molecule?

Its re-emitted isotropically.

 

[Katzndogz]

NOAA had to quietly correct their myth by admitting that it was hotter in 1936 than in 2012, which they had said was the hottest year on record.

NOAA Reinstates July 1936 As Hottest Month On Record | The Daily Caller

Oh the poor cultists!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Uhh, that's not at all true. Molecules absorb radiation depending on what frequencies excite certain energy levels within the molecule.

So the radiation stays stuck in the Sticky Glue CO2 molecule?

Its re-emitted isotropically.

But only towards Earth, right?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

NOAA had to quietly correct their myth by admitting that it was hotter in 1936 than in 2012, which they had said was the hottest year on record.

NOAA Reinstates July 1936 As Hottest Month On Record | The Daily Caller

Oh the poor cultists!

LOL! I thought the conspiracy was the NOAA was cooling the past and warming the present! The link you show has them doing the exact opposite!!!

LOL!!!

 

[jc456]

Uhh, that's not at all true. Molecules absorb radiation depending on what frequencies excite certain energy levels within the molecule.

So the radiation stays stuck in the Sticky Glue CO2 molecule?

Its re-emitted isotropically.

How much is absorbed to re-emit? If there is 120PPM of CO2, how much absorption is there? and, is the absorption the same everywhere?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

So the radiation stays stuck in the Sticky Glue CO2 molecule?

Its re-emitted isotropically.

But only towards Earth, right?

You don't even know what the fuck you're talking about, do you?

 

[mamooth]

So, perhaps you could explain how 1940 to 1970 the earth cooled when CO2 was increasing? See there are data sets, we all see the actual temperatures. Please explain this to us.

Because CO2 isn't the only factor driving climate.

And if you fail this hard at the basics, you shouldn't be bothering the grownups.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

So the radiation stays stuck in the Sticky Glue CO2 molecule?

Its re-emitted isotropically.

How much is absorbed to re-emit? If there is 120PPM of CO2, how much absorbtion is there? and, is the absorbtion the same everywhere?

It depends more on the depth of the optically thick layer in the atmosphere. As we extend this layer, the cooling rate at the interface between thick and thin decreases, so the temperature underneath that layer increases to compensate.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Do tell, what will you do with this data and model?

And as I think we all know, Kosh's complaint here is a lie. He has been given a large set of data files and a large set of GCM source code files. Since then, he has repeatedly continued to make this asinine and now utterly false charge.

The truth is Kosh doesn't have the faintest idea what to do with those things. If you'd care to correct me on this Kosh, please feel free to let us know what you plan to do with them. Perhaps one of your buddies will be good enough to tell you how to compile and link a program and how to run a global scale GCM on your home laptop for a 30 year run or so and how to compare the output to.... well now I'm giving it all away. I want to leave something for you to figure out on your own. Have at it Kosh.

For the fourth time:

Climate datasets

General Circulation models code

So, perhaps you could explain how 1940 to 1970 the earth cooled when CO2 was increasing? See there are data sets, we all see the actual temperatures. Please explain this to us.

Particulates in the air.