Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming! Please help with a gift by clicking the button below.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Killing Cows To Save The Climate
- arn on Killing Cows To Save The Climate
- Kevin M on Killing Cows To Save The Climate
- Kevin M on Killing Cows To Save The Climate
- GWS on Killing Cows To Save The Climate
Archives
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- March 2015
- January 2015
New Video : The Climate Control Knob
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Excellent video. Thank you.
Have a look at a video called “the Cloud Mystery” the whole mechanism is there.
Tim
Terrific as always, Tony, and I marvel at your ability to crank out compelling videos like this time after time after time. Truly amazing.
My question is this:
If temperature drives CO2, how do you reconcile it with the well-known graphs like the one below indicating that over some 6oo million years, there is no correlation whatever between global temperatures and atmospheric CO2. And should we not be gasping in thanks for the present uptick in both, regardless of the reason?
http://www.biocab.org/Geological_Timescale.jpg
DeeDub,
Rather than trying to proxy 600 million years to find your correlation, try looking at the correlation between temperature changes and CO2 changes, from empirical data on a much shorter scale, say over the last 6 decades: http://tech-know-group.com/papers/Carbon_dioxide_Humlum_et_al.pdf
There seems to be a 9-12 month lag between changes in global temperature and changes to atmospheric CO2.
Up-to-date graph (Feb 2018):
http://climate4you.com/images/DIFF12%20GlobalCO2%20HadCRUT4%20HadSST3%20Since1958.gif
Since 1958, changes in atmospheric CO2 have been following changes to global surface air temperature and sea surface temps, with approximately a 9 to 12 month lag.
Thanks, Disillusioned,
To be clear, I wasn’t trying to find a correlation; I was just pointing out (via one of many such graphs that, to my knowledge, are not contested by the Alarmist-Warmist community) that with no correlation whatever between global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 over geologic time, there is no reason to believe that there is one now — i.e., over the course of mere decades — to say nothing of the fact that correlation is not causation.
On the other hand, if, as you are pointing out, whatever correlation there presently is between the two is the opposite of what A-Ws persist in believing, I say to them, Deal With It.
They won’t, of course, but as their predictions continue to fall like dominoes — such that “Global Warming” was replaced by “Climate Change” (and who doesn’t believe in THAT?), only to have “Climate Disruption” make its appearance (now ANYTHING can be blamed on anthropogenic CO2), one can expect that the general public will tire of the hysteria to the point that A-Ws finally STFU and go away.
The Climate Industry is based on Power, Control, Lies n Bullshit…
Not Science.
This Model shows Hotness in 2018…
#Scyience
In this day and age you still think its OK to post juvenile stuff like that?
Envy is pretty infantile, Sparkie!
Hey cis-griff, why do you still think its OK to post all your JUVENILE and scientifically illiterate posts…
Don’t worry, Ms Griff, nobody will post you picture.
… your picture.
And people doubted whether or not Ms Griff was a woman…
Gator – I think Griff is some cross gender mutant with multiple penises and vaginas. Climate change is wot done it!!
Griff is a MAN
Prove it.
cis-griff might have the male chromosomes…
….. but never a MAN !!
Lighten up Griff. Just because you are a boring, humorless twit and a mindless, obsessive alarmist propagandist doesn’t mean that anyone else is. No one here would miss you one bit if you were to disappear from this blog. Or from this planet for that matter.
No Sunspots
drouth… that’s a good old word we don’t see much of these days!
Of course you would like drouths…
‘Twas a dearth of drouth…
‘Twas brillig….
A bloody brilliant compilation Tony. As I’m presently in hospital getting a hip fix i’be been torturing myself reading a few facts behind the political “fix” of the “consensus” going back to the 1980/1990s – Christopher Booker/Donna Laframboise just for starters. I really shouldn’t do it because it puts up the blood pressure as the sheer chicanery and fraud of a few inadequate personalities seeking to massage their egos, whilst at the same relishing the lovely money coming their way (complete with Nobel Prizes and political “clout”.
So, far from there beings “thousands of climate scientists” there would seem to be a mere handful of opportunistic charlatans who have taken advantage of the gullible public who “Want to do the right thing” to “save the planet” so “groupthink” is in control. Future generations are going to this in exactly the same way “Tulip Mania”, “The South Sea” and, example par excellence: Nazism!
Mind you, your resident real-denier Griff will want to quibble with this. Religious group fanatics always do!
Those in power always want to control “groupthink”.
Now that I’m back on the Internet I’ve been able to discuss ice melting on Greenland” with several young nurses separately. I shown them the webcam at Summit Camp where the temperature today has been varying from between -45C and -4 7C, as shown clearly on the webcam: http://www.summitcamp.org/status/webcam/
In both cases the reaction was identical: they couldn’t grasp what they were seeing, with comments in both cases: “That can’t be right! The ice is melting in the Arctic.”
The power of propaganda …..
Fighting fraud 1 nurse at a time.
Antarctica
http://www.martingrund.de/pinguine/pinguincam1.htm#2
Correct me if, i’m wrong, but as pointed out in this video, the warming precedes, the co2, right?
As i’ve read, there is also a lag, like 800 years. That make sense, cause warming of the oceans, takes time.
Now if we are to have a longer period of cooling, the co2 levels will drop, in sync with the cooling oceans, but the full effect, will show in, about 800 years.
Todays levels will then, correspond with the MWP, approximately.
You’re referring to the lag in ice core proxy data. And you’re right, that temperature changes precede changes to CO2 – both to cooling and warming temperatures.
But, there’s no need to wait 800 years to see changes. There is apparently a much shorter lag, of 9-12 months, in contemporary atmospheric and ocean data: http://tech-know-group.com/papers/Carbon_dioxide_Humlum_et_al.pdf
It makes sense, because CO2 seems to react to temperature rather immediately. Try your own test – pop a beer after setting it in the sun and see how the CO2 in the beer reacts to the heat.
Thanks. Absolutely make sense, also. Hvat doesn’t make sense is that co2 produse warming.
F…phone..what doesen’t make sense, typo.
Well, at current concentrations of CO2, yes.
There does seem to be a radiative forcing effect with CO2, however. But it also seems that that effect has shot most of its wad well before 100 ppm. So, at atmospheric concentrations of 400 ppm and above, yes – temperature is going to be the leader, and not CO2.