What percentage of zero warming is Mann-made?
- Mostly Mann-made
- Equally Mann-made and natural
- Mostly natural
- Not interested in troposphere temperatures. Only do Urban Heat Island temperatures
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
Recent Comments
- GW on A Giant Eyesore
- conrad ziefle on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Greg in NZ on Making Themselves Irrelevant
- arn on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Trevor on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- czechlist on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- arn on COP29 Preview
- arn on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on Making Themselves Irrelevant
# tree
How would anyone know?
“What percentage of zero warming is Mann-made?”
5, All but 300% of it is natural.
#6 Only interested in temperature inside my house and how much it costs to get it that way.
Of the TOTAL greenhouse effect of 33 degrees C maybe 10% is caused by CO2 and of that amount only 1/3 is at most from burning fossil fuels; so maybe today the total effect at 400 ppm is 1.1 degree C from burning fossil fuels. Natural cycles account of the rest which is 97% and I’d say that is conservative its probably more. The current pause is 100% natural.
“so maybe today the total effect at 400 ppm is 1.1 degree C from burning fossil fuels”
Observations do not support even a doubling of CO2 to 560PPm to be more then 1 degree C. Not when ocean cycles are taken into account.
Look at Ben Santer’s chart with ENSO and volcanic events removed, the bottom chart.
But I think he got the CIMP 5 multi model mean wrong, as it only shows .2 degrees in twenty years, and I think the model warming for CO2 exclusive of ENSO and volcanism is about .3 per decade?
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/ngeo2098f1.jpg
Note the grey area in Ben Santer’s charts. If you consider error there has been no warming especially when you push the older readings down to the bottom of the error range and raise the newer readings to the top of the error range. Lots of prestidatatation in Climate Science®.
From Anthony Watts Surface Station Project:
http://www.surfacestations.org/Figure1_USHCN_Pie.jpg
Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
Of the TOTAL greenhouse effect of 33 degrees C maybe 10% is caused by CO2 and of that amount only 1/3 is at most from burning fossil fuels; so maybe today the total effect at 400 ppm is 1.1 degree C from burning fossil fuels. Natural cycles account of the rest which is 97% and I’d say that is conservative its probably more. The current pause is 100% natural.
The entire CO2 forcing is 32 to 44 W m–2 [cf., Reid, 1997]. and all but 5 to 6 W m–2 of that forcing occurs in the first 200 ppm CO2 (modtran) Out of the 5 to 6 W m–2 of that forcing that occurred from 200 ppm to 400 ppm Mankind contributed maybe 4 to 5% or at most 0.25 W m–2.
To put that in context:
NOAA: gives the calculated orbital forcing variations at 60°N
hyyp://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/climate_forcing/orbital_variations/berger_insolation/insol91.jun
Holocene peak insolation: 523 Wm-2
……………………………………………..decrease = 47 Wm-2
NOW (modern Warm Period) 476 Wm-2
…………………………………………….. decrease = 12 Wm-2
Depth of the last ice age – around 464 Wm?2
It takes about 5 Watts per square metre to raise the worlds temperature from 15°C to 16°C so the entire forcing from CO2 for 200 ppm to 400 ppm cause a one degree warming. CO2 would have to rise to 800 ppm (another doubling) to raise the temperature another degree and that is only if the ClimAstrologists have the physics correct. Dr Happer says they do not. See my old comments: Dr Robert bBrown and Gallopingcamel (also a physicist) and Dr. Happer
http://joannenova.com.au/globalwarming/graphs/log-co2/log-graph-lindzen-choi-web.gif
You had better ask an expert like Gavin, it’s complicated and will require adjustments. We will likely not know until at least AR7, or 8 or 9. How much money can we print?
Thats an easy one: 97 pct of the zero warming is man made. The other 3 pct of zero are caused by nature. Finally I see the light.
Rgds from Chile
Zero percent warming is an illusion. It’s warming faster than ever, but it’s a special kind of warming that can’t be measured with thermometers. And everybody knows that special warming is 100% man made.
Yes the new measuring instrument is called a Gavinator, or Grantometer. It’s complicated, and homogenized for your deception.
That must be the “Dark Warming”. All those climate physicist hear about it from the star gazers and figured if it could explain all the screwed up astro-problems, it would work for the warmers too.
It all started before the Babylonians discovered the number zero.
I blame the Minoans and their half Mann Minotaur. His hoof-prints are all over this zero warming.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3038573/Bronze-Age-civilisation-destroyed-perfect-storm-Ancient-Egypt-societies-collapsed-climate-change-war-earthquakes.html#ixzz3XQvLnO9F
“We got a little complacent about shifting hardiness zones,” said Larry Hurly, of Behnke Nurseries in Beltsville, Md. After all of their ‘cute’ plants grew too large to cover and froze. Ha, Ha, Y’all think you are sooo smart. Try growing tomatoes at 7,000 ft above sea level or anything besides root crops really.
I suspect that there are some strong negative feedbacks going on, because with the amount of hot air Mann and his fellow cronies have been blowing the past few decades, we should be living in a sauna by now.
I’m afraid most CO2-phobic believers in the Sky is Falling hype-pothesis (which is settled science) won’t understand the survey questions. They cannot read any graph that isn’t designed by Grantology or Gavination, so they’ll have no idea what you’re asking and will be especially clueless about question #4. You might as well be speaking Martianese.
In order to provide any survey answers at all, they’ll have to ask their political religious leaders, some of whom will at least understand the survey. After which, they may be provided a gobbledygook, sciency sounding answer (basically that that chart you provided has not been adjusted by the proper authorities to conform to “the science” – which needs to happen first before the questions can be properly answered. Then would they be able to take your survey.
On second thought, they’ll just be told to ignore the survey altogether, because you’re a fossil-fueled climate denier and that the survey is propaganda.
(I had no idea those bicycles ran on fossil fuels.)
David A: can you provie a link to the graphs you presented?
100% of zero temp trend is manmade. Error bars 0% to 200%.
I am 97% sure of it.
60% of the time, it works everytime.
I recall Mann stating somewhere (Twitter, I believe) that it was greater than 100% lol.
i vote for 4. Not interested in troposphere temperatures. Only do Urban Heat Island temperatures. I always put my thermometer above the stove and only read while my wife is cooking so i can remind her of how warm it is in the house during the Wisconsin Winters. http://www.bobbyshred.com/fools/falsetemps.html
Doug,
You may be interested in this know-how thread on wives and heating:
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/04/18/scientists-solve-the-solar-energy-storage-problem/#comment-515910
NaN%
10^10^10 x 0 = 0.