More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[skookerasbil]

More AGW k00k losing.............

Bundle Up: Winters May Be Getting Colder In The Northeast

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

More bad news for the climate crusading nutters.......


As Ive said many times and been 100% accurate......nobody cares about the science!!

Paris climate accord takes effect, delivering win to Obama
Source: The Hill

By Timothy Cama - 11/04/16 06:00 AM EDT

The Paris climate agreement took force on Friday, starting an ambitious, though largely non-binding, worldwide effort to fight climate change.

The pact is the first international accord of its kind, putting nearly 200 nations in the world on the same footing, with the same expectations for rich and poor nations to do their parts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Its entry into force represents a major victory for President Obama. He dedicated a large portion of his diplomatic energy in his second term to securing a worldwide climate deal that would not have an impact without requiring ratification in the Senate.

“Reaching the Paris agreement in December of last year was clearly a watershed moment for the international community,” John Morton, director for climate and energy at the White House National Security Council, told reporters Thursday.

-snip-

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/304256-paris-climate-accord-takes-effect-delivering-policy-win-to-obama

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

More bad news for the climate crusading nutters.......


As Ive said many times and been 100% accurate......nobody cares about the science!!

Paris climate accord takes effect, delivering win to Obama
Source: The Hill

By Timothy Cama - 11/04/16 06:00 AM EDT

The Paris climate agreement took force on Friday, starting an ambitious, though largely non-binding, worldwide effort to fight climate change.

The pact is the first international accord of its kind, putting nearly 200 nations in the world on the same footing, with the same expectations for rich and poor nations to do their parts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Its entry into force represents a major victory for President Obama. He dedicated a large portion of his diplomatic energy in his second term to securing a worldwide climate deal that would not have an impact without requiring ratification in the Senate.

“Reaching the Paris agreement in December of last year was clearly a watershed moment for the international community,” John Morton, director for climate and energy at the White House National Security Council, told reporters Thursday.

-snip-

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/304256-paris-climate-accord-takes-effect-delivering-policy-win-to-obama

Paris climate accord takes effect, delivering win to Obama

How many votes did it get in the Senate?

 

[skookerasbil]

Welp.......after last night, the level of winning is beyond ePiC!!

 

[skookerasbil]

More bad news for the climate crusading nutters.......


As Ive said many times and been 100% accurate......nobody cares about the science!!

Paris climate accord takes effect, delivering win to Obama
Source: The Hill

By Timothy Cama - 11/04/16 06:00 AM EDT

The Paris climate agreement took force on Friday, starting an ambitious, though largely non-binding, worldwide effort to fight climate change.

The pact is the first international accord of its kind, putting nearly 200 nations in the world on the same footing, with the same expectations for rich and poor nations to do their parts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Its entry into force represents a major victory for President Obama. He dedicated a large portion of his diplomatic energy in his second term to securing a worldwide climate deal that would not have an impact without requiring ratification in the Senate.

“Reaching the Paris agreement in December of last year was clearly a watershed moment for the international community,” John Morton, director for climate and energy at the White House National Security Council, told reporters Thursday.

-snip-

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/304256-paris-climate-accord-takes-effect-delivering-policy-win-to-obama

not binding...............duh

After last night, none of this shit matters!! And yes......Im laughing my balls off about it s0n!!

Bah.......bah.............booey.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Go look at who Trump has made his EPA transition chief.. He is a Skeptic and a realist..

Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition
Choosing Myron Ebell means Trump plans to drastically reshape climate policies

Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition

 

[Billy_Bob]

Say goodby to wind and solar subsidies... Say Goodby to Paris accord... Say Goodby to UN AGW funds..(wealth redistribution)...

This is going to be interesting to watch as real scientists take the helm and stop these CO2 charades..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Say goodby to wind and solar subsidies... Say Goodby to Paris accord... Say Goodby to UN AGW funds..(wealth redistribution)...

This is going to be interesting to watch as real scientists take the helm and stop these CO2 charades..

Say goodby to wind and solar subsidies... Say Goodby to Paris accord

Good. Use the money to deport the illegals.

Mexicans emit a quarter the CO2 per person that Americans do.
Deporting 20 million illegals will probably save the planet.
Do it now!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Billy............Ian.............Todd..........SSDD..........Frank.........et. al.........a great week indeed!!! Sorta puts an exclamation point on this thread it you really think about it!!

So I went through my library of Photobucket Classics trying to find the best one to depict where we are today in terms of this climate change crap.............


[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/Nobody%20cares.gif.html][/URL]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Billy............Ian.............Todd..........SSDD..........Frank.........et. al.........a great week indeed!!! Sorta puts an exclamation point on this thread it you really think about it!!

So I went through my library of Photobucket Classics trying to find the best one to depict where we are today in terms of this climate change crap.............

Yup, now the warmers won't have the government on their side anymore.

We can concentrate on teaching physics to our side.

 

[skookerasbil]

Billy............Ian.............Todd..........SSDD..........Frank.........et. al.........a great week indeed!!! Sorta puts an exclamation point on this thread it you really think about it!!

So I went through my library of Photobucket Classics trying to find the best one to depict where we are today in terms of this climate change crap.............

Yup, now the warmers won't have the government on their side anymore.

We can concentrate on teaching physics to our side.

^^ in medical research as well.........in other words, $$ not wasted like weve seen to puke yourself levels in the last 8 years.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Climate Change is all about the Benjamins

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," Edenhofer, co-chaired the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," -- Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change

 

[skookerasbil]

Climate Change is all about the Benjamins

"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," Edenhofer, co-chaired the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," -- Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change

Why I say the people who are OCD about AGW are k00ks. All the comments by these climate organizations caught in a Mitt Romney/Trump locker rom pwn yourself moment.........doesn't matter to the k00ks. Because the fuckers are globalist/communist assholes who get the agenda.

 

[skookerasbil]

Hey Frank....great find btw...........

And the word for the week is???????????????




WINNING

 

[Billy_Bob]

That is the problem with luke warmers.. They can not differentiate what is naturally caused and what is GHG caused. They have no clue as to what the origination of downward radiation in the LWIR band comes from (man made or natural causes). They also can not show, by empirical evidence, how it affects the earths open atmosphere.

The null hypothesis eviscerates the global warming theroy as, ONE, you can not show what is man made and what is naturally occurring down ward LWIR and, TWO, The theoretical amounts you say are being retained in the system are not causing measurable changes outside of what is expected from NATURAL VARIATION.

The fact that a mid troposphere hot spot has not manifested itself, as identified by IPCC documents and is the theoretical "bottle neck", disproves the DWLWIR theroy.

Now why would this not occur?

Convection and transport in the water cycle. Several studies are in progress showing that the amount of LWIR emanating from the upper troposphere has increased by 2.2%(point of water renucleation and LWIR release at a much longer wave length16-25um) and mid troposphere bandpass has declined by 1.3 - 2.2% (done by balloon direct measurement 12-16um). This energy had to go somewhere. The earth is acting like the earth and uses a secondary route of energy release keeping the energy in/out balance despite mans influence. The boys over at the Boulder, Co lab have been keeping a lid on this work in progress as it smashes the AGW hypothesis to bits.

They show that down ward LWIR is being countered and that its net result in warming is zero.

To answer many of the back and forths about theoretical's...

All matter radiates in all directions.. What that LWIR does is still an unknown and empirical evidence has not yet shown what it does and how it does it. All modeling of this, to date, fails empirical review (doesn't mesh with reality and observed behavior of matter).

Cooler black bodies can not warm warmer ones. Violates the laws of thermal energy travel.

Entropy (energy release) is dependent on the matter doing the transport and the temperature gradient of the matter or different types of matter through which it passes.

Grey Bodies are cooler than black and thus their effect is null. (LWIR wave length is the main reason, theoretical energy contained in the wave)

What I am finding interesting about the new studies is the water cycle does not have to increase for water to hold greater energy. Water vapor has an incredible capacity for energy retention that is unused in cooler atmospheres. This goes to entropy and the matter used in transport.. They theorize that waters energy holding capability is barely being used and thus CO2 and its theoretical slowing of energy release will be easily countered upwards to 9,000ppm or greater and happens near surface totally negating any chance of a mid troposphere hot spot.

This is the reason the earth has never strayed form its roughly 12 deg C boundaries of temperature variation. And why we have seen glacial periods with CO2 levels of 7,000ppm..

Buffered systems always respond slower to abrupt changes in solar output. CO2 might cause a short term rise in temp but the buffer will always win the battle. Its the multiple release paths, the ability of the buffering agent to respond and how fast which determine what kind of rise we might get and how fast it is countered.

I am actually excited for publication of this one. It appears that they are actually using real science and controls in these studies.. Observed and quantifiable measurements in the real empirical world.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Been reading through this new study and they have applied the S/B equation to individual sections of the atmosphere. The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere. The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface globally.

This is going to leave a huge mark on the AGW theroy... FAILED!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Been reading through this new study and they have applied the S/B equation to individual sections of the atmosphere. The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere. The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface globally.

This is going to leave a huge mark on the AGW theroy... FAILED!

The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere.

Can you restate this in a clearer manner?

The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface

So the energy returned to the surface (back-radiation) remains the same, despite higher CO2?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Been reading through this new study and they have applied the S/B equation to individual sections of the atmosphere. The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere. The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface globally.

This is going to leave a huge mark on the AGW theroy... FAILED!

The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere.

Can you restate this in a clearer manner?

The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface

So the energy returned to the surface (back-radiation) remains the same, despite higher CO2?

The backscatter of re-emitted or reflected LWIR did not increase with CO2 increase, it decreased. This indicates a significant misunderstanding of how our atmosphere works.

The authors of the paper are now looking closely at water vapor energy absorption and retention. If what they suspect is true, CO2 will never cause a runaway effect due to water transport of energy in our atmosphere.

A net loss of energy directed towards the surface in the >6um bands was not expected.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Been reading through this new study and they have applied the S/B equation to individual sections of the atmosphere. The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere. The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface globally.

This is going to leave a huge mark on the AGW theroy... FAILED!

The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere.

Can you restate this in a clearer manner?

The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface

So the energy returned to the surface (back-radiation) remains the same, despite higher CO2?

The backscatter of re-emitted or reflected LWIR did not increase with CO2 increase, it decreased. This indicates a significant misunderstanding of how our atmosphere works.

The authors of the paper are now looking closely at water vapor energy absorption and retention. If what they suspect is true, CO2 will never cause a runaway effect due to water transport of energy in our atmosphere.

A net loss of energy directed towards the surface in the >6um bands was not expected.

The backscatter of re-emitted or reflected LWIR did not increase with CO2 increase, it decreased.

Link?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Been reading through this new study and they have applied the S/B equation to individual sections of the atmosphere. The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere. The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface globally.

This is going to leave a huge mark on the AGW theroy... FAILED!

The numbers show the energy loss in return from the lower troposphere.

Can you restate this in a clearer manner?

The rise in CO2 is not resulting in a net gain in energy returned to the surface

So the energy returned to the surface (back-radiation) remains the same, despite higher CO2?

The backscatter of re-emitted or reflected LWIR did not increase with CO2 increase, it decreased. This indicates a significant misunderstanding of how our atmosphere works.

The authors of the paper are now looking closely at water vapor energy absorption and retention. If what they suspect is true, CO2 will never cause a runaway effect due to water transport of energy in our atmosphere.

A net loss of energy directed towards the surface in the >6um bands was not expected.

The backscatter of re-emitted or reflected LWIR did not increase with CO2 increase, it decreased.

Link?

At this point I can only talk about what I see. I am not authorized to release the document.