Milankovitch Cycles

[CrusaderFrank]

The effect of black carbon has been noted on these diagrams for almost as long as they've been making them. Here seems to be the first appearance (as "Fossil fuel soot") in a graphic from the Second Assement Report in 1995


Shortly thereafter, the 1995 IPCC Second Assessment Report (pdf) added a couple of innovations:


Namely, an assessment of confidence, and the addition of aerosol forcings, while lumping the well-mixed gases all together. There is also the addition of the non-anthropogenic solar term.

Can this theory be tested in a lab where each item is isolated and controlled and changes in temperatures measured?

 

[Crick]

No problem. But make sure you take good notes because, afterwards, we'll have questions.

 

[ding]

AR6 (Pg 92 of the WG-I Technical Summary) shows black carbon at 0.16Wm^-2 but previous reports showed it consistently at 0.6 Wm^-2. In either case, you're claim that it was being suppressed to push CO2 as the sole threat is another unsupportable claim of yours.

View attachment 745987
From my local copy.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Figure-SPM5-Radiative-forcing-estimates-in-2011-relative-to-1750-and-aggregated_fig1_266208027

No. I'm claiming their entire model is fucked up and designed to give them the answer they are seeking. Which is why you have never been able to say what radiative forcing component was responsible for the previous interglacial period being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less CO2 than today.

 

[Crick]

No. I'm claiming their entire model is fucked up and designed to give them the answer they are seeking.

What model would that be?

Which is why you have never been able to say what radiative forcing component was responsible for the previous interglacial period being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less CO2 than today.

It wasn't ability, it was a choice.

 

[ding]

What model would that be?

It wasn't ability, it was a choice.

You aren't aware of the computer models the IPCC relies upon. And no, it wasn't your choice to not respond. It's that you have no good answer for which radiative forcing component was responsible for the previous interglacial period being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less CO2 than today.

 

[Crick]

You aren't aware of the computer models the IPCC relies upon. And no, it wasn't your choice to not respond. It's that you have no good answer for which radiative forcing component was responsible for the previous interglacial period being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less CO2 than today.

I'm perfectly aware of the models that various researchers use conducting studies that the IPCC then assesses. The IPCC conducts no research. The IPCC does not run GCMs. So, once again, it's all the climate scientists in their grand conspiracy to beggar the world so they can take a vacation at the best hotel in Ohio.

So, what number am I thinking of right now? Don't know? Then why the fuck are you claiming to be able to read my mind? You have a serious obsession issue that does not need encouragement.

 

[ding]

I'm perfectly aware of the models that various researchers use conducting studies that the IPCC then assesses. The IPCC conducts no research. The IPCC does not run GCMs. So, once again, it's all the climate scientists in their grand conspiracy to beggar the world so they can take a vacation at the best hotel in Ohio.

So, what number am I thinking of right now? Don't know? Then why the fuck are you claiming to be able to read my mind? You have a serious obsession issue that does not need encouragement.

And you still can't tell me which radiative forcing component was responsible for the previous interglacial period being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less CO2 than today because you have no good answer.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And you still can't tell me which radiative forcing component was responsible for the previous interglacial period being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less CO2 than today because you have no good answer.

I'll go with water vapor. Cavemen tended to take long hot showers and that added water vapor to the atmosphere

 

[Crick]

I'll go with water vapor. Cavemen tended to take long hot showers and that added water vapor to the atmosphere

Small problem. You can't add water to the atmosphere till you've already raised its temperature. That's the issue with its precipitability.

 

[ding]

Small problem. You can't add water to the atmosphere till you've already raised its temperature. That's the issue with its precipitability.

To precipitate means to cause (vapor) to condense and fall or deposit. You are thinking of evaporation. Evaporation occurs when sunlight warms the surface of the water.

 

[Crick]

To precipitate means to cause (vapor) to condense and fall or deposit. You are thinking of evaporation. Evaporation occurs when sunlight warms the surface of the water.

God are you FUCKING stupid.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Small problem. You can't add water to the atmosphere till you've already raised its temperature. That's the issue with its precipitability.

Really?? Even 120PPM additional H2O? Have you seen any studies?

 

[Crick]

Really?? Even 120PPM additional H2O? Have you seen any studies?

First, you're a fucking TROLL. There is simply no denying it. You don't have the faintest interest in this conversation other than causing hate and discontent.
Second, I know you don't know shit and that won't change, there may be other people who don't understand, so I'm going to explain.

Water on the Earth goes through a dynamic cycle. In its simplest depiction, it evaporates from the surface, goes up into the sky, cools off, precipitates and falls back to the ground. It is always raining somewhere on the planet thus the planet as a whole is in an equilibrium state. Over time, the same amout of water falls as rain as is evaporated. If you add more water vapor to the air, more water will precipitate out as rain until equilibrium is restored. Without a change of parameters, such as temperature or pressure and atmospheric volume, you cannot permanently transfer water from liquid on the surface to vapor in the air.

 

[ReinyDays]

The IPCC lists carbon soot as the greatest radiative forcing factor after water vapor, CO2 and methane. So, you're once again wrong.

The IPCC does not allow for rebuttals ... dissent is not allowed within it's reports ... it's not a scientific source ...

These reports contain science ... and that science should be referenced ... but the report itself is political ...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

First, you're a fucking TROLL. There is simply no denying it. You don't have the faintest interest in this conversation other than causing hate and discontent.
Second, I know you don't know shit and that won't change, there may be other people who don't understand, so I'm going to explain.

Water on the Earth goes through a dynamic cycle. In its simplest depiction, it evaporates from the surface, goes up into the sky, cools off, precipitates and falls back to the ground. It is always raining somewhere on the planet thus the planet as a whole is in an equilibrium state. Over time, the same amout of water falls as rain as is evaporated. If you add more water vapor to the air, more water will precipitate out as rain until equilibrium is restored. Without a change of parameters, such as temperature or pressure and atmospheric volume, you cannot permanently transfer water from liquid on the surface to vapor in the air.

H2O is far more powerful GHG than CO2 so maybe only 60PPM of H2O will cause the warming?

 

[Crick]

The IPCC does not allow for rebuttals ... dissent is not allowed within it's reports ... it's not a scientific source ...

These reports contain science ... and that science should be referenced ... but the report itself is political ...

Each of their documents are reviewed by dozens and dozens of scientists
The IPCC conducts assessment of published science. They conduct NO science themselves.

Here is a list of the people involved in assembling AR6's Technical Summary, which I happened to have open in Adobe.

Coordinating Authors:
Paola A. Arias (Colombia), Nicolas Bellouin (United Kingdom/France), Erika Coppola (Italy),
Richard G. Jones (United Kingdom), Gerhard Krinner (France/Germany, France), Jochem Marotzke
(Germany), Vaishali Naik (United States of America), Matthew D. Palmer (United Kingdom),
Gian-Kasper Plattner (Switzerland), Joeri Rogelj (United Kingdom/Belgium), Maisa Rojas (Chile),
Jana Sillmann (Norway/Germany), Trude Storelvmo (Norway), Peter W. Thorne (Ireland/United
Kingdom), Blair Trewin (Australia)
Authors:
Krishna Achuta Rao (India), Bhupesh Adhikary (Nepal), Richard P. Allan (United Kingdom),
Kyle Armour (United States of America), Govindasamy Bala (India/United States of America),
Rondrotiana Barimalala (South Africa/Madagascar), Sophie Berger (France/Belgium),
Josep G. Canadell (Australia), Christophe Cassou (France), Annalisa Cherchi (Italy), William Collins
(United Kingdom), William D. Collins (United States of America), Sarah L. Connors (France/United
Kingdom), Susanna Corti (Italy), Faye Cruz (Philippines), Frank J. Dentener (EU/The Netherlands),
Claudine Dereczynski (Brazil), Alejandro Di Luca (Australia, Canada/Argentina), Aida Diongue
Niang (Senegal), Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes (Spain), Alessandro Dosio (Italy), Hervé Douville (France),
François Engelbrecht (South Africa), Veronika Eyring (Germany), Erich Fischer (Switzerland), Piers
Forster (United Kingdom), Baylor Fox-Kemper (United States of America), Jan S. Fuglestvedt
(Norway), John C. Fyfe (Canada), Nathan P. Gillett (Canada), Leah Goldfarb (France/United States
of America), Irina Gorodetskaya (Portugal/Russian Federation, Belgium), Jose Manuel Gutierrez
(Spain), Rafiq Hamdi (Belgium), Ed Hawkins (United Kingdom), Helene T. Hewitt (United Kingdom),
Pandora Hope (Australia), AKM Saiful Islam (Bangladesh), Christopher Jones (United Kingdom),
Darrell S. Kaufman (United States of America), Robert E. Kopp (United States of America),
Yu Kosaka (Japan), James Kossin (United States of America), Svitlana Krakovska (Ukraine),
June-Yi Lee (Republic of Korea), Jian Li (China), Thorsten Mauritsen (Sweden, Denmark), Thomas
K. Maycock (United States of America), Malte Meinshausen (Australia/Germany), Seung-Ki Min
(Republic of Korea), Pedro M. S. Monteiro (South Africa), Thanh Ngo-Duc (Vietnam), Friederike
Otto (United Kingdom/Germany), Izidine Pinto (South Africa/Mozambique), Anna Pirani (Italy),
Krishnan Raghavan (India), Roshanka Ranasinghe (The Netherlands/Sri Lanka, Australia), Alex
C. Ruane (United States of America), Lucas Ruiz (Argentina), Jean-Baptiste Sallée (France), Bjørn
H. Samset (Norway), Shubha Sathyendranath (UK/Canada, United Kingdom, Overseas Citizen of
India), Sonia I. Seneviratne (Switzerland), Anna A. Sörensson (Argentina), Sophie Szopa (France),
Izuru Takayabu (Japan), Anne-Marie Treguier (France), Bart van den Hurk (The Netherlands),
Robert Vautard (France), Karina von Schuckmann (France/Germany), Sönke Zaehle (Germany),
Xuebin Zhang (Canada), Kirsten Zickfeld (Canada/Germany)
Contributing Authors:
Guðfinna Aðalgeirsdóttir (Iceland), Lincoln M. Alves (Brazil), Terje Berntsen (Norway),
Sara M. Blichner (Norway), Lisa Bock (Germany), Gregory G. Garner (United States of America),
Joelle Gergis (Australia), Sergey K. Gulev (Russian Federation), Mathias Hauser (Switzerland),
Flavio Lehner (United States of America/Switzerland), Chao Li (China), Marianne T. Lund
(Norway), Daniel J. Lunt (United Kingdom), Sebastian Milinski (Germany), Gemma Teresa
Narisma (Philippines), Zebedee R. J. Nicholls (Australia), Dirk Notz (Germany), Sophie Nowicki
(United States of America/France, United States of America), Bette Otto-Bliesner (United States
of America), Brodie Pearson (United States of America/United Kingdom), Adam S. Phillips
(United States of America), James Renwick (New Zealand), Stéphane Sénési (France), Lucas Silva
(Portugal/Switzerland), Aimee B. A. Slangen (The Netherlands), Thomas F. Stocker (Switzerland),
Claudia Tebaldi (United States of America), Laurent Terray (France), Sabin Thazhe Purayil (India),
Andrew Turner (United Kingdom), Steven Turnock (United Kingdom), Carolina Vera (Argentina),
Cunde Xiao (China), Panmao Zhai (China)
Review Editors:
Valérie Masson-Delmotte (France), Gregory M. Flato (Canada), Noureddine Yassa (Algeria)

It's simply not possible that this many people could work on a common project without disagreements on every topic imaginable.

 

[ding]

God are you FUCKING stupid.

I'm not the one who confused precipitation for evaporation. That was you.

 

[ding]

Each of their documents are reviewed by dozens and dozens of scientists
The IPCC conducts assessment of published science. They conduct NO science themselves.

Here is a list of the people involved in assembling AR6's Technical Summary, which I happened to have open in Adobe.

Coordinating Authors:
Paola A. Arias (Colombia), Nicolas Bellouin (United Kingdom/France), Erika Coppola (Italy),
Richard G. Jones (United Kingdom), Gerhard Krinner (France/Germany, France), Jochem Marotzke
(Germany), Vaishali Naik (United States of America), Matthew D. Palmer (United Kingdom),
Gian-Kasper Plattner (Switzerland), Joeri Rogelj (United Kingdom/Belgium), Maisa Rojas (Chile),
Jana Sillmann (Norway/Germany), Trude Storelvmo (Norway), Peter W. Thorne (Ireland/United
Kingdom), Blair Trewin (Australia)
Authors:
Krishna Achuta Rao (India), Bhupesh Adhikary (Nepal), Richard P. Allan (United Kingdom),
Kyle Armour (United States of America), Govindasamy Bala (India/United States of America),
Rondrotiana Barimalala (South Africa/Madagascar), Sophie Berger (France/Belgium),
Josep G. Canadell (Australia), Christophe Cassou (France), Annalisa Cherchi (Italy), William Collins
(United Kingdom), William D. Collins (United States of America), Sarah L. Connors (France/United
Kingdom), Susanna Corti (Italy), Faye Cruz (Philippines), Frank J. Dentener (EU/The Netherlands),
Claudine Dereczynski (Brazil), Alejandro Di Luca (Australia, Canada/Argentina), Aida Diongue
Niang (Senegal), Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes (Spain), Alessandro Dosio (Italy), Hervé Douville (France),
François Engelbrecht (South Africa), Veronika Eyring (Germany), Erich Fischer (Switzerland), Piers
Forster (United Kingdom), Baylor Fox-Kemper (United States of America), Jan S. Fuglestvedt
(Norway), John C. Fyfe (Canada), Nathan P. Gillett (Canada), Leah Goldfarb (France/United States
of America), Irina Gorodetskaya (Portugal/Russian Federation, Belgium), Jose Manuel Gutierrez
(Spain), Rafiq Hamdi (Belgium), Ed Hawkins (United Kingdom), Helene T. Hewitt (United Kingdom),
Pandora Hope (Australia), AKM Saiful Islam (Bangladesh), Christopher Jones (United Kingdom),
Darrell S. Kaufman (United States of America), Robert E. Kopp (United States of America),
Yu Kosaka (Japan), James Kossin (United States of America), Svitlana Krakovska (Ukraine),
June-Yi Lee (Republic of Korea), Jian Li (China), Thorsten Mauritsen (Sweden, Denmark), Thomas
K. Maycock (United States of America), Malte Meinshausen (Australia/Germany), Seung-Ki Min
(Republic of Korea), Pedro M. S. Monteiro (South Africa), Thanh Ngo-Duc (Vietnam), Friederike
Otto (United Kingdom/Germany), Izidine Pinto (South Africa/Mozambique), Anna Pirani (Italy),
Krishnan Raghavan (India), Roshanka Ranasinghe (The Netherlands/Sri Lanka, Australia), Alex
C. Ruane (United States of America), Lucas Ruiz (Argentina), Jean-Baptiste Sallée (France), Bjørn
H. Samset (Norway), Shubha Sathyendranath (UK/Canada, United Kingdom, Overseas Citizen of
India), Sonia I. Seneviratne (Switzerland), Anna A. Sörensson (Argentina), Sophie Szopa (France),
Izuru Takayabu (Japan), Anne-Marie Treguier (France), Bart van den Hurk (The Netherlands),
Robert Vautard (France), Karina von Schuckmann (France/Germany), Sönke Zaehle (Germany),
Xuebin Zhang (Canada), Kirsten Zickfeld (Canada/Germany)
Contributing Authors:
Guðfinna Aðalgeirsdóttir (Iceland), Lincoln M. Alves (Brazil), Terje Berntsen (Norway),
Sara M. Blichner (Norway), Lisa Bock (Germany), Gregory G. Garner (United States of America),
Joelle Gergis (Australia), Sergey K. Gulev (Russian Federation), Mathias Hauser (Switzerland),
Flavio Lehner (United States of America/Switzerland), Chao Li (China), Marianne T. Lund
(Norway), Daniel J. Lunt (United Kingdom), Sebastian Milinski (Germany), Gemma Teresa
Narisma (Philippines), Zebedee R. J. Nicholls (Australia), Dirk Notz (Germany), Sophie Nowicki
(United States of America/France, United States of America), Bette Otto-Bliesner (United States
of America), Brodie Pearson (United States of America/United Kingdom), Adam S. Phillips
(United States of America), James Renwick (New Zealand), Stéphane Sénési (France), Lucas Silva
(Portugal/Switzerland), Aimee B. A. Slangen (The Netherlands), Thomas F. Stocker (Switzerland),
Claudia Tebaldi (United States of America), Laurent Terray (France), Sabin Thazhe Purayil (India),
Andrew Turner (United Kingdom), Steven Turnock (United Kingdom), Carolina Vera (Argentina),
Cunde Xiao (China), Panmao Zhai (China)
Review Editors:
Valérie Masson-Delmotte (France), Gregory M. Flato (Canada), Noureddine Yassa (Algeria)

It's simply not possible that this many people could work on a common project without disagreements on every topic imaginable.

The IPCC does not allow dissenting opinions in their reports. Their reports are fake news.

 

[Crick]

I'm not the one who confused precipitation for evaporation. That was you.

No, I am afraid it WAS you. I said PRECIPITATION because I fucking MEANT PRECIPITATION you fucking moron.

 

[Crick]

The IPCC does not allow dissenting opinions in their reports. Their reports are fake news.

So you think that pages long list of authors and reviewers were all in complete and total agreement of every sentence of that report. How about this then, WHAT makes you think dissent is not allowed? Where did you read that? Who said that was the case?