Scientist: Do We Really Know?

[1stRambo]

Yo, typical of Scientist? Say anything, as long as the money keeps rolling in!!!

New cloud formation discovery may lessen warming forecast
Published Wednesday, May 25, 2016 | 10:16 a.m.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A new discovery about how clouds form may scale back some of the more dire predictions about temperature increases caused by man-made global warming.


That's because it implies that a key assumption for making such predictions is a bit off.

"What this will do is slightly reduce and sharpen the projections for temperature during the 21st century," said researcher Jasper Kirkby.

Nonetheless, he added, "We are definitely warming the planet."

Kirby works at the European Center for Nuclear Research, or CERN. He is the lead author of one of three studies on the topic released Wednesday by the journals Nature and Science.

Essentially, the work reveals a previously unknown natural process that in a complex way creates atmospheric particles around which clouds form. The most common source of particles is air pollution, usually sulfuric acid from the burning of fossil fuels. There are also natural sources, but they have been considered far less important for cloud formation.

The new work shows that a combination of cosmic rays from space and gases emitted by trees also creates particles, and then clouds, without man-made pollution. The scientists witnessed this in a cloud simulation chamber and from a Swiss mountaintop observatory more than two miles high (3.5 kilometers).

New cloud formation discovery may lessen warming forecast

"GTP"
Follow The Money!

 

[aaronleland]

The beautiful part about science is that scientists have proven themselves wrong many times throughout history. Others may read a 2,000 year old book about a sky wizard and say, "Got it! Nothing more to discuss."

 

[ScienceRocks]

They know a hell of a lot more then a taliban fool like you that knows nothing. Of course, science has only doubled humanities life span, created air travel and the internet you're bitching on. Why not go find a nice cave if you think science is so stupid and such a waste?

 

[ScienceRocks]

The beautiful part about science is that scientists have proven themselves wrong many times throughout history. Others may read a 2,000 year old book about a sky wizard and say, "Got it! Nothing more to discuss."

Well, science is all about progress of understanding. Of course, you'd like to see that end with the op above.

 

[The Irish Ram]

They can't use the old "global warming" excuse to redistribute our wealth. Polar bears are fine. Ice is fine.... so they changed it to "climate change" because you can't argue that climate doesn't change.

According to the UN official that redistributes our money, "climate change" has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with distributing our money. Period. Let's stop the hokes. And the money drain.

 

[aaronleland]

They can't use the old "global warming" excuse to redistribute our wealth. Polar bears are fine. Ice is fine.... so they changed it to "climate change" because you can't argue that climate doesn't change.

According to the UN official that redistributes our money, "climate change" has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with distributing our money. Period. Let's stop the hokes. And the money drain.

The term climate change was actually popularized by conservative activist Frank Luntz to make it sound less severe. Go climate change!

 

[turzovka]

The beautiful part about science is that scientists have proven themselves wrong many times throughout history. Others may read a 2,000 year old book about a sky wizard and say, "Got it! Nothing more to discuss."

"Nothing more to discuss" --- none of us are saying that.

"Got it." --- Right, that we claim. The evidence is overwhelming.

And if your best defense is that it cannot have meaning because it arrived 2,000 years ago --- well, that is a totally lame and unlearned position.

The Catholic Church has been the biggest contributor to the advance of science for countless centuries and the only preservers in Europe of the great books of learning from ancient times. All the while the heathens and boors of the dark ages and middle ages were wallowing in their own self-centered concerns of gaining more power or eating well.

 

[mamooth]

This bogus talking point has recently gone out in multiple conservative sources, so the parrots have done what the parrots here always do, and we're getting multiple threads on it.

Now, if someone would have asked the actual climate modelers -- which nobody did -- they'd have pointed out the newer science is already taken into account. The recent Nature article was written by particle physicists, with no input from climate scientists, and the physicists made assumptions about climate that aren't supported. For a good discussion from the climate side, go to this 2011 article. (Yep, 2011. This stuff isn't new.)

Cosmic rays and clouds: Potential mechanisms

 

[jc456]

This bogus talking point has recently gone out in multiple conservative sources, so the parrots have done what the parrots here always do, and we're getting multiple threads on it.

Now, if someone would have asked the actual climate modelers -- which nobody did -- they'd have pointed out the newer science is already taken into account. The recent Nature article was written by particle physicists, with no input from climate scientists, and the physicists made assumptions about climate that aren't supported. For a good discussion from the climate side, go to this 2011 article. (Yep, 2011. This stuff isn't new.)

Cosmic rays and clouds: Potential mechanisms

sounds more like your side repeating thread after thread. Funny how that works eh?

 

[The Irish Ram]

They can't use the old "global warming" excuse to redistribute our wealth. Polar bears are fine. Ice is fine.... so they changed it to "climate change" because you can't argue that climate doesn't change.

According to the UN official that redistributes our money, "climate change" has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with distributing our money. Period. Let's stop the hokes. And the money drain.

The term climate change was actually popularized by conservative activist Frank Luntz to make it sound less severe. Go climate change!

Less severe than weather? Which is what we have called it since there was weather. Thing is, what they have named it isn't as important as the inconvenient truth that it is a money distributing scam:

United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“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,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.
“We redistribute de facto, the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.
(de facto - in reality, actually.)

So what the person in charge of "climate change" is telling you is,
1.This has nothing to do with climate.
2. We are handing out your paychecks.
3. Free yourself from the illusion that it is about environmental issues.

How incredibly uneducated of those who wish the fraud to continue, especially since it's our money that is leaving our pockets.

Free yourself aaronleland. It's a joke on America.

 

[RollingThunder]

They can't use the old "global warming" excuse to redistribute our wealth. Polar bears are fine. Ice is fine.... so they changed it to "climate change" because you can't argue that climate doesn't change.

Another crackpot denier cultist, full of bullshit and lies....as usual!

The Earth IS heating up, numbnuts, as the entire world scientific community confirms. Pull your head out of your ass, fool. 15 of the 16 hottest years on record have happened since the turn of the century. 2016 is almost certainly going to be the next new hottest year on record, surpassing 2015 and 2014 for that title. Every month for the last twelve consequetive months has been the hottest month of that name on record since at least 1880. Global warming is quite real.

No matter what lies your denier cult propaganda pushers tell you, polar bears are struggling to survive the loss of so much Arctic sea ice.

Polar bears in struggle to survive
29 Apr 2016


The Arctic ice extent and volume are going to collapse to new record lows this year. The Arctic is heating up faster than any other region on the planet.

Record-Breaking Arctic Melting Expected This Summer
Scientists anticipate rapid melt in the Arctic during the summer months
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT NEWS
Matt Mills
May 25, 2016
(excerpts)
The summer of 2016 is shaping up to be a hot one, and scientists are expecting record-breaking melt in the Arctic as global temperatures rise. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) just released its summer outlook for the U.S., which forecasted above average summer temperatures for the majority of the U.S.. Of all U.S. regions, Alaskas Aleutian Islands have the highest odds of experiencing a significantly hotter-than-average summer, according to the NOAA. The state of Alaska in its entirety experienced a record-setting winter this year, as temperatures averaged more than 11 degrees above normal. These winter temperatures in Alaska this year broke records that were set just one year earlier.

The NOAAs Barrow Observatory sits about 320 miles north of the Arctic Circle, and is typically one of the last places in the U.S. to lose snow cover. This year, staff at Barrow observed snowmelt on May 13, the earliest snowmelt date in 73 years of keeping records. Before this year, the earliest ever snowmelt at Barrow occurred on May 23, in 2002. scientists are expecting more records to be broken this summer. Specifically, they are expecting record-breaking Arctic melting.


Both of the terms 'global warming' and ' climate change' have been in use in the climate science literature since the 1960s, and they are both still in use, you ignorant brainwashed retard.

According to...toiletpaper://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/18/ipcc-official-%E2%80%9Cclimate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth%E2%80%9D/......

Riiiight.....according to your fraudulent, fossil fuel industry sponsored, denier cult propaganda sources.....

In the real world....according to real scientists....

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement, adopted by the society in 2003, revised in 2007,[59] and revised and expanded in 2013,[60] affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:

“Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.

While important scientific uncertainties remain as to which particular impacts will be experienced where, no uncertainties are known that could make the impacts of climate change inconsequential. Furthermore, surprise outcomes, such as the unexpectedly rapid loss of Arctic summer sea ice, may entail even more dramatic changes than anticipated."

 

[The Irish Ram]

Obama told you that 98% of scientists agree that global warming was a crisis and that it was man made. And you believe it.
The truth is only 43% believe that and the majority of those depend on government grants.

This is what you blindly accept:
When Obama told you that 98% of scientists agree that global warming is a man made catastrophe, here is how that % was arrived at. An online survey was sent to 10,257 scientists. Of which 3,000 responded. There were two questions.
1. Has the earth warmed since the Little Ice Age?
2. Do you think that man may have contributed to the warming?

Out of the 3,000, the AGU took 77 of them for their statistic analysis. All answered the first question with a yes.
75 of the 77 scientists they pulled out of the 3,000 answered yes to the second question. Man may have something to do with it.

So the bullshit you were handed is actually, 98% of 77 people (including those scientists living on grants) believe man may be contributing to global warming. And you believe it.

I tend to believe these guys. They have no dog in the fight. In fact, not believing it gets you banned. They are standing up anyway:

....more than 31,000 American scientists from diverse climate-related disciplines, including more than 9,000 with Ph.D.s, have signed a public petition announcing their belief that “…there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.” Included are atmospheric physicists, botanists, geologists, oceanographers, and meteorologists.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Another crackpot denier cultist, full of bullshit and lies....as usual!

Actually, the man who gives away our money, for the UN, under the guise of climate change, is your crackpot denier cultist, full of shit bullshit and lies. Discredit him.........
Again:

United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“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,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.
“We redistribute de facto, the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.
(de facto - in reality, actually.)

dumbass. This is the stupid we are know for now. The, prove it and I still won't believe it, cause I saw it on the internet, mentality.

 

[RollingThunder]

Obama told you that 98% of scientists agree that global warming was a crisis and that it was man made. And you believe it.

Well, of course I do. It is a fact that has been established by multiple studies over the years, using different methodology, and all getting about the same results.

It is your fraudulent denier cult myths about it that are totally bogus, you poor deluded moron.

In the real world of actual science....

Yes, there really is scientific consensus on climate change
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
13 APRIL 2016
(excerpts)
While a number of past studies have measured the level of scientific consensus on climate change, no one has published a summary of the many consensus estimates until now. In a paper published in Environmental Research Letters on April 13, I collaborated with the authors of seven of the leading consensus studies to perform a meta-study of meta-studies synthesising the research into scientific consensus on climate change. (A meta-study combines the findings from multiple studies.) Among climate scientists, the estimates of consensus varied from 90 to 100 percent, with a number of studies converging on 97 percent, the very figure derided by Cruz, Santorum, and others opposed to action on global warming. A key finding from our meta-study was that scientific agreement was highest among scientists with the most expertise in climate science. This meant that groups with lower climate expertise showed lower agreement on climate change. The group with the lowest level of agreementat only 47 percent were economic geologists, who study metals and minerals that can be used for industrial and economic purposes. Conversely, the group with the highest level of agreement at 97 percent were climate scientists who were actively publishing climate research.

In short, the greater the expertise, the greater the consensus. The dark side of this relationship is that it allows misinformers to cast doubt on consensus by selecting sub-groups of scientists with lower expertise in climate science, in order to argue that scientific agreement on human-caused global warming is low. Our study finds that multiple studies have found an overwhelming consensus among climate scientists. The level of scientific agreement is overwhelmingly high because the evidence is overwhelmingly strong. The anti-science crowd has deployed the 'fake experts technique' - using non-specialists to undermine what the most relevant experts say to cast doubt on consensus. Our hope is that our new study will both improve public perception of consensus and inoculate people against misinformation.

 

[mamooth]

Actually, the man who gives away our money, for the UN, under the guise of climate change, is your crackpot denier cultist, full of shit bullshit and lies. Discredit him.........

So, you're proudly declaring that a man named Ottmar secretly controls the world. Do you have any idea of how insane you sound?

If you didn't, I just told you. You're a loony. The nonsense you spew is insanely stupid and defies all common sense. You need to learn that just because you read something crazy on your cult's website, that doesn't mean it makes sense and you should be repeating it.

If you'd tell me now how DreadLordOttmar will surely smite me for denying his MostAwesomePower, please proceed.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Well, of course I do. It is a fact that has been established by multiple studies over the years, using different methodology, and all getting about the same results.

No it has not, in fact the opposite is the case. Add to that Solar flares that are subsiding, and it is the sun that determines our temperature, always has been, always will be. You don't hear much about the sun from the "experts". You've just been told that man is responsible for the temp., when it has been the sun all along. Our earth warms, our earth cools.
But let us say you are correct. It still wouldn't matter. All this money we have spent, and have pledged in the future, has nothing to do with climate. Again, this is not your opinion or mine. These are the facts according to the UN climate official:

United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“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,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.
“We redistribute de facto, the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.
(de facto - in reality, actually.)

So while you think that selling one of our natural resources like coal to China, dirt cheap, for them to burn there instead of here is in anyway better for the environment, or that the billions being collected by the UN has anything to do with weather, you are sadly mistaken. It is our wealth, in China and anywhere else that wants it. Just like Ottmar said. Our water is being sucked out the the Great Lakes, for pennies on the dollar, and then sold to Pakistan for top dollar. And soon, our gas, to whom ever they feel like giving it to.

They want this to continue to the point that Obama is banning books that contain any science to the contrary that might be read by the next generation. Obama's Julia will never question why the money she wished she could buy a house with, is on it's way to Brussels.

 

[Old Rocks]

Of course them thar pointy headed librul scientists are not nearly as smart as that obese junkie on the AM radio, or that wonderful fake British Lord. So much better to get you information from sources like than than people that have spent decades of their lives actually becoming experts in their discipline.

 

[RollingThunder]

Well, of course I do. It is a fact that has been established by multiple studies over the years, using different methodology, and all getting about the same results. It is your fraudulent denier cult myths about it that are totally bogus, you poor deluded moron.
In the real world of actual science....
Yes, there really is scientific consensus on climate change
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
13 APRIL 2016

No it has not, in fact the opposite is the case.

That is your fraudulent denier cult myth...and I debunked it, with evidence, in post #14. An event that a brainwashed, retarded mental midget like yourself is apparently mentally unable to see or comprehend.

Add to that Solar flares that are subsiding, and it is the sun that determines our temperature, always has been, always will be. You don't hear much about the sun from the "experts". You've just been told that man is responsible for the temp., when it has been the sun all along. Our earth warms, our earth cools.

Unsupported denier cult bullshit. Solar irradiance has not gone up, as all of the actual "experts" understand quite well.....in fact the sun has gotten slightly dimmer over the last 30 years, just as temperatures have rapidly risen. 2016 will almost certainly be the next new 'hottest year on record', which, with 2014 and 2015, will make three consecutive 'hottest years on record' in a row....a new record in itself.

'No Sun link' to climate change
BBC
By Richard Black - BBC Environment Correspondent
July 10, 2007
(excerpts)
A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change. It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen. It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed. Writing in the Royal Society's journal Proceedings A, the researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present. The scientists' main approach on this new analysis was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature, which has risen by about 0.4C over the period.

Temperatures have continued rising irrespective of cosmic ray flux

The Sun varies on a cycle of about 11 years between periods of high and low activity. But that cycle comes on top of longer-term trends; and most of the 20th Century saw a slight but steady increase in solar output. However, in about 1985, that trend appears to have reversed, with solar output declining. Yet this period has seen temperatures rise as fast as - if not faster than - any time during the previous 100 years. "This paper reinforces the fact that the warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity," said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment of climate science.

But let us say you are correct. It still wouldn't matter. All this money we have spent, and have pledged in the future, has nothing to do with climate.

Your denier cult propaganda is utterly demented and meaningless....but you are too stupid to see that.



,

So while you think that selling one of our natural resources like coal to China, dirt cheap, for them to burn there instead of here is in anyway better for the environment

Nobody "thinks" that, you flaming retard. CO2 is quite global, rapidly diffusing throughout the atmosphere.

You are insane and your bogus bullshit is so stupid, it would offend the intelligence of retarded dogs.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Here is NASA:

Even small changes in solar activity can impact Earth's climate in significant and surprisingly complex ways, researchers say.

The sun is a constant star when compared with many others in the galaxy. Some stars pulsate dramatically, varying wildly in size and brightness and even exploding. In comparison, the sun varies in the amount of light it emits by only 0.1 percent over the course of a relatively stable 11-year-long pattern known as the solar cycle.

Still, "the light reaching the top of the earth's atmosphere provides about 2,500 times as much energy as the total of all other sources combined," solar physicist Greg Kopp at the University of Colorado told SPACE.com. As such, even 0.1 percent of the amount of light the sun emits exceeds all other energy sources the Earth's atmosphere sees combined, such as the radioactivity naturally emitted from Earth's core, Kopp explained.

Have they convinced you that the Industrial age in the mid 1800's started this warming?
What they didn't tell you about was the 'little ice age", caused by a 70 year period of no solar flares from the mid 1700's to the mid 1800's, that caused unusually bitter winters until the flares started back up again (in the mid 1800's) and we began to steadily warm back up.

But if some one were to ask you what you thought happened in the mid 1800's to cause the switch from colder to warmer, you'd envision gray rusty steel mills with smoke billowing out of the stacks, because that is what you have been led to believe.

 

[HUGGY]

Sorry IrishLambChop! The other guy has bigger and bolder type font! You lose!