Loss of sea ice leads to unprecedented Arctic warming

[ding]

Do you reject the published absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide or do you think it to be the work of sky fairies?

I reject the radiative forcing of water vapor feedback due to CO2 being 2 to 3 times times the radiative forcing of CO2 and their lumping it in with CO2. It’s dishonest and intentionally misleading and lacks transparency.

 

[Redfish]

Aside from the albedo effects in summer, the loss of sea ice over winter leads to atmospheric heating from the warmer sea water.

December serving up baked Alaska and warming most of Arctic

Much of the Arctic is in a burst of freak December warming. Temperatures in Alaska’s northernmost community hit 40 degrees Monday morning.

apnews.com

what a crock of shit. There is more polar ice today than there was 20 years ago.

 

[Redfish]

Okay, let's talk about sky fairies.

Do you reject the published absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide or do you think it to be the work of sky fairies?

Do you reject the spectrum of radiation that the earth and sea give off when warmed by the sun? or is this more work of the sky fairies?

Do you reject the Keeling curve showing steadily increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere or is that more work of the sky fairies?

Do you reject the global temperature data collected since the Industrial Revolution showing a consistent warming or is that more work of the sky fairies?

Do you reject the multiple proxy studies showing that the Earth had been steadily cooling for thousands of years prior to the Industrial Revolution or is that more work of the sky fairies?

Do you reject the multiple studies showing no correlation whatsoever with the Earth's increasing temperature or is that more work of the sky fairies?

Do you reject the multiple studies comparing the spectrum of incoming solar radiation, outgoing IR and IR backscatter from the atmosphere providing direct evidence of the Greenhouse Effect or is that more work of the sky fairies?

Do you reject the absence of political or religious influence in the conduct of mainstream, peer reviewed climate science or do you believe in sky fairies?

You would seem to be the one who wants to believe things without evidence or even despite evidence. Attempting to use that basis to criticize those who demand such things from science only marks you as an ignorant, bigoted fool.

See www.ipcc.ch if you have any interest in actually knowing what the fuck you're talking about.

those are all THEORIES. speculation, none of that is actually happening, your prophet the great algore said that Florida would be under water by now-----------its not. Was he lying or just plain stupid----------------or was he just trying to milk more dollars out of you gullible idiots?

 

[ding]

Do you reject the spectrum of radiation that the earth and sea give off when warmed by the sun? or is this more work of the sky fairies?

Last time I looked the earth’s energy budget only included infrared radiation from land.

 

[ding]

Do you reject the Keeling curve showing steadily increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere or is that more work of the sky fairies?

No. I reject the ridiculous notion that atmospheric CO2 drives climate change. The geologic record doesn’t support it.

 

[Redfish]

No. I reject the ridiculous notion that atmospheric CO2 drives climate change. The geologic record doesn’t support it.

these idiot libs forget that without CO2 there would be no life on earth. CO2 is not a pollutant.

 

[ding]

Do you reject the global temperature data collected since the Industrial Revolution showing a consistent warming or is that more work of the sky fairies?

No. I reject the urban heat island being attributed to CO2, their use of low variability solar output dataset in their models and their tuning the models to remove natural variations.

 

[ding]

Do you reject the multiple proxy studies showing that the Earth had been steadily cooling for thousands of years prior to the Industrial Revolution or is that more work of the sky fairies?

Yes because it ignores the fact that every 4th eccentricity cycle is nearly circular and the last eccentricity cycle had limited orbital forcing to trigger a glacial cycle so the planet is in a prolonged interglacial cycle.

And our previous temperature is 2C cooler than previous interglacial cycles with 26 ft shallower seas with 120 ppm more atmospheric CO2.

But the truly amazing part of your belief is that you believe CO2 saved the planet from a glacial cycle. Interglacial cycles never slowly descend into glacial cycles. When the planet transitions from an interglacial cycle to a glacial cycle it does so rapidly. Look at the data, dummy.

 

[ding]

Do you reject the multiple studies showing no correlation whatsoever with the Earth's increasing temperature or is that more work of the sky fairies?

No. I accept that there is no correlation between CO2 and temperature post Industrial Revolution. Post Industrial Revolution CO2 correlates with emissions. Prior to the Industrial Revolution CO2 correlated with temperature due to solubility of CO2 in water. We know that CO2 has never led temperature because there is no mechanism for CO2 to lead temperature. And we know CO2 does not correlate to temperature now because the planet is 2C cooler with 120 ppm more atmospheric CO2.

 

[Crick]

those are all THEORIES. speculation, none of that is actually happening, your prophet the great algore said that Florida would be under water by now-----------its not. Was he lying or just plain stupid----------------or was he just trying to milk more dollars out of you gullible idiots?

No, they are NOT. The absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide, the spectrum of incoming solar radiation, the spectrum of outgoing IR, the spectrum of atmospheric backscatter, the Keeling curve, total solar irradiation and the temperature trends are all OBSERVATIONS.

And theories are NOT speculation. This comment tells me you know absolutely NOTHING about science.

And nothing I have posted for the last five years has been based on the work of Al Gore. This comment, on top of all the rest tells me you are nothing but another fucking idiot.

 

[ding]

Do you reject the multiple studies comparing the spectrum of incoming solar radiation, outgoing IR and IR backscatter from the atmosphere providing direct evidence of the Greenhouse Effect or is that more work of the sky fairies?

No. I accept the planet is net warming by 0.6 W/m^2 because we are in an interglacial cycle which is still 2C cooler than previous interglacial cycles. I reject the dishonest models which predict the warming to accelerate beyond what the earth would naturally warm to in an interglacial cycle.

 

[Crick]

what a crock of shit. There is more polar ice today than there was 20 years ago.

From nsidc.org

You are a fucking idiot.

 

[ding]

Do you reject the absence of political or religious influence in the conduct of mainstream, peer reviewed climate science or do you believe in sky fairies?

Yes because this has become a religion to them and is 100% motivated by politics. Time will be their undoing.

 

[Redfish]

No, they are NOT. The absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide, the spectrum of incoming solar radiation, the spectrum of outgoing IR, the spectrum of atmospheric backscatter, the Keeling curve, total solar irradiation and the temperature trends are all OBSERVATIONS.

And theories are NOT speculation. This comment tells me you know absolutely NOTHING about science.

And nothing I have posted for the last five years has been based on the work of Al Gore. This comment, on top of all the rest tells me you are nothing but another fucking idiot.

that post deserves nothing but a laughing smiley face. you are a brain washed puppet and a sheep to your lib masters.

 

[Redfish]

From nsidc.org
View attachment 737233
You are a fucking idiot.

so it hasn't changed, even better.

 

[Crick]

these idiot libs forget that without CO2 there would be no life on earth. CO2 is not a pollutant.

So you wouldn't mind sitting for ten minutes in a room with, say, 10% CO2? You are a fucking idiot. I don't know what topics you might actually be familiar with, but this topics of this forum aren't included.

 

[Crick]

that post deserves nothing but a laughing smiley face. you are a brain washed puppet and a sheep to your lib masters.

You are a fucking idiot with absolutely nothing relevant to say.

 

[Crick]

so it hasn't changed, even better.

Unable to read. Unsurprising.

 

[ding]

So you wouldn't mind sitting for ten minutes in a room with, say, 10% CO2? You are a fucking idiot. I don't know what topics you might actually be familiar with, but this topics of this forum aren't included.

That’s a pretty big leap from 400 ppm to 100,000 ppm. And you don’t believe you are emotional about this.

 

[Redfish]

So you wouldn't mind sitting for ten minutes in a room with, say, 10% CO2? You are a fucking idiot. I don't know what topics you might actually be familiar with, but this topics of this forum aren't included.

the CO2 in earth's atmosphere is .039% virtually the same as it was 50,000 years ago according to ice cores and fossils. what you are seeing is water vapor, is water now a pollutant?