U. of Chi. Professor and "Scientist" Wants to Block Sunlight to Cool Earth

[Crick]

Why is solar irradiance positive instead of negative if orbital forcing is such that the planet should be cooling?

View attachment 994005

I just fucking explained it. Are you ACTUALLY that stupid?!?!?

 

[ding]

I just fucking explained it. Are you ACTUALLY that stupid?!?!?

I don't think you did. Can you say it in 25 words or less? If the planet's orbital forcing predicts the planet should be cooling (like you and the IPCC claim). It can't have a positive radiative forcing, dummy.

Why is solar irradiance positive instead of negative if orbital forcing is such that the planet should be cooling?

View attachment 994005

 

[JBG]

Crick and Ding, can you briefly summarize your positions? As interesting as they are I'm not going to wade through almost 100 posts of back and forth?

 

[ding]

Crick and Ding, can you briefly summarize your positions? As interesting as they are I'm not going to wade through almost 100 posts of back and forth?

They have confused a natural warming trend for AGW. Is that brief enough?

 

[Crick]

Crick and Ding, can you briefly summarize your positions? As interesting as they are I'm not going to wade through almost 100 posts of back and forth?

Ding has contended that the glacial-interglacial cycle is driven by changes in ocean currents. He has found NO source supporting that statement. I hold the dominant position of mainstream science, that it is driven by Milankovitch orbital forcing. I have posted multiple sources making that specific statement. Ding is now trying to claim that he only contended ocean currents were responsible for "abrupt climate changes" such as D-O and Heinrich Events but his past posts show otherwise.

Ding has also contended that changes in ocean currents are responsible for the warming of the past 150 years and that the warming of added CO2 is inadequate to have produced the observed warming. He has repeatedly stated that the warming of the past 150 years is part of normal interglacial warming. Here also I hold the dominant position of mainstream science, that the warming of the past 150 years is almost entirely due to the greenhouse effect acting on human CO2 emissions.

 

[ding]

They have confused a natural warming trend for AGW.

I win the brevity contest!!!!

 

[Crick]

They have confused a natural warming trend for AGW.

I win the brevity contest!!!!

That is not what we have been arguing about. Once again, you LIE

 

[ding]

He has repeatedly stated that the warming of the past 150 years is part of normal interglacial warming.

I allow for 0.22C to 0.5C from an incremental 120 ppm of atmospheric CO2. I'm not a monster.

 

[ding]

That is not what we have been arguing about. Once again, you LIE

I wasn't recapping the disagreement. I was recapping my belief about AGW.

 

[ding]

He has found NO source supporting that statement.

There you go again trying to create a distraction.

Are ocean currents responsible for abrupt warming and cooling? Is there evidence for that?

 

[Crick]

There you go again trying to create a distraction.

Are ocean currents responsible for abrupt warming and cooling? Is there evidence for that?

You are the one trying to create a distraction. Our contention is the cause of the glacial-interglacial cycle. Ever since you realized you could find no evidence to support your claim in the regard, you have never mentioned it. Now it's always "abrupt" climate change. How about answering me this question right now:

What does mainstream science believe causes the glacial-interglacial cycle?

 

[ding]

You are the one trying to create a distraction. Our contention is the cause of the glacial-interglacial cycle. Ever since you realized you could find no evidence to support your claim in the regard, you have never mentioned it. Now it's always "abrupt" climate change. How about answering me this question right now:

What does mainstream science believe causes the glacial-interglacial cycle?

The argument isn't the cause of glacial cycles. The argument is that the ocean is responsible for abrupt temperature changes. That's the point of these papers. It's well known and well understood. Chock full of physical evidence.



https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaf5529?adobe_mc=MCMID=24445298415631476812898182430771639861|MCORGID=242B6472541199F70A4C98A6%40AdobeOrg|TS=1723213472

Sudden climate changes in the recent geological record

https://www.science.org/content/article/crippled-atlantic-currents-triggered-ice-age-climate-change

Collapse and rapid resumption of Atlantic meridional circulation linked to deglacial climate changes - Nature

Destabilisation of the Subpolar North Atlantic prior to the Little Ice Age - Nature Communications

Snapshots of mean ocean temperature over the last 700 000 years using noble gases in the EPICA Dome C ice core

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0031018285800201

Deep Atlantic Circulation During the Last Glacial Maximum and Deglaciation​

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/PA005i004p00469

Collapse and rapid resumption of Atlantic meridional circulation linked to deglacial climate changes - Nature​

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2010PA0020

 

[Crick]

The argument isn't the cause of glacial cycles. The argument is that the ocean is responsible for abrupt temperature changes. That's the point of these papers. It's well known and well understood. Chock full of physical evidence.

You lying piece of shit

You need to face the fact that changing ocean currents explain all of the climate events of the past 3 million years.

To which I responded

Then you need to answer the two obvious questions: why does every expert on the fucking planet say the cycle is driven by orbital forcing? Why does NO ONE beside YOU say it is driven by ocean currents?

Which was the beginning of this argument.

 

[JBG]

Ding has contended that the glacial-interglacial cycle is driven by changes in ocean currents. He has found NO source supporting that statement. I hold the dominant position of mainstream science, that it is driven by Milankovitch orbital forcing. I have posted multiple sources making that specific statement. Ding is now trying to claim that he only contended ocean currents were responsible for "abrupt climate changes" such as D-O and Heinrich Events but his past posts show otherwise.

Ding has also contended that changes in ocean currents are responsible for the warming of the past 150 years and that the warming of added CO2 is inadequate to have produced the observed warming. He has repeatedly stated that the warming of the past 150 years is part of normal interglacial warming. Here also I hold the dominant position of mainstream science, that the warming of the past 150 years is almost entirely due to the greenhouse effect acting on human CO2 emissions.

Thanks. Do you both disbelieve AGW?

 

[ding]

You lying piece of shit


To which I responded

Which was the beginning of this argument.

The most recent ice age was characterized by rapid and hemispherically asynchronous climate oscillations, whose origin remains unresolved. Variations in oceanic meridional heat transport may contribute to these repeated climate changes, which were most pronounced during marine isotope stage 3, the glacial interval 25 thousand to 60 thousand years ago. We examined climate and ocean circulation proxies throughout this interval at high resolution in a deep North Atlantic sediment core, combining the kinematic tracer protactinium/thorium (Pa/Th) with the deep water-mass tracer, epibenthic δ13C. These indicators suggest reduced Atlantic overturning circulation during every cool northern stadial, with the greatest reductions during episodic Hudson Strait iceberg discharges, while sharp northern warming followed reinvigorated overturning. These results provide direct evidence for the ocean’s persistent, central role in abrupt glacial climate change.

 

[Crick]

The most recent ice age was characterized by rapid and hemispherically asynchronous climate oscillations, whose origin remains unresolved. Variations in oceanic meridional heat transport may contribute to these repeated climate changes, which were most pronounced during marine isotope stage 3, the glacial interval 25 thousand to 60 thousand years ago. We examined climate and ocean circulation proxies throughout this interval at high resolution in a deep North Atlantic sediment core, combining the kinematic tracer protactinium/thorium (Pa/Th) with the deep water-mass tracer, epibenthic δ13C. These indicators suggest reduced Atlantic overturning circulation during every cool northern stadial, with the greatest reductions during episodic Hudson Strait iceberg discharges, while sharp northern warming followed reinvigorated overturning. These results provide direct evidence for the ocean’s persistent, central role in abrupt glacial climate change.

This was not the beginning of this argument. This was your attempt to dodge your losing proposition that changes in ocean currents were responsible for virtually everything seen in the geological record for the past 3 million years. Now you want to pretend you never said any such thing. That makes you, as I just noted, a LYING piece of SHIT.