Water vapour, the unknown factor, till now. [moved]
-
nick stern wrote:
It looks like the issue of water vapour, always discounted by the GCMs, is being explored more completely.
And we've blamed petrol for global warming all these years. :omg:
Me, I'm dishonest. And a dishonest man you can always trust to be dishonest.
Honestly. It's the honest ones you want to watch out for...Water is bad for you :laugh: drink beer!
-
Water Vapor Largely Responsible for Global Warming..."What I will say, is that this shows there are climate scientists round the world who are trying very hard to understand and to explain to people openly and honestly what has happened over the last decade." ...The research, facilitated by a state-of-the-art NASA satellite codenamed AIRS, suggests that water vapor is responsible for twice the global warming effect of carbon dioxide, both man-made and naturally occurring. While this theory was has been carried by climate change skeptics for some time, global warming advocates dismissed them, saying that water vapor in the atmosphere was only a feedback effect caused by human emissions. NASA scientist Eric Fetzer say that the new study created models much more accurate to past events than those previously used by climate change advocates, and proves that "water vapor is the big player in the atmosphere as far as climate is concerned." [^] It looks like the issue of water vapour, always discounted by the GCMs, is being explored more completely. Lets hope with the current fiasco taking pace at the IPCC, and CRU that we might see some more mature science, and prognostications, in the future.
moved on Wednesday, February 3, 2010 5:16 PM
About time! After all, the IPCC reduced CO2 forcing from 2.4 to 1.7 for the 4th AR. There is no reason it cant be reduced further now that more research is being done into previously mis-understood factors. Next solar. and coamic rays and CO2 can be put way at the back.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
XML?
-
Water is bad for you :laugh: drink beer!
-
XML?
ADA?
-
ADA?
Lovelace?
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
djj55 wrote:
drink beer!
Heretic! Beer production produces vast amounts of CO2! And bread! They must be banned immediately! :)
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
You need to drink up then. :laugh: By the way I am a teetotaler, just thought the comment needed made.
-
:suss: fat_boy?
-
Lovelace?
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
Yep, the first programmer! Disnt her sister write Frankenstein or some such?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
Youngster!
-
Yep, the first programmer! Disnt her sister write Frankenstein or some such?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
She was Byron's daughter - Mary Shelley befriended her father.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
Water Vapor Largely Responsible for Global Warming..."What I will say, is that this shows there are climate scientists round the world who are trying very hard to understand and to explain to people openly and honestly what has happened over the last decade." ...The research, facilitated by a state-of-the-art NASA satellite codenamed AIRS, suggests that water vapor is responsible for twice the global warming effect of carbon dioxide, both man-made and naturally occurring. While this theory was has been carried by climate change skeptics for some time, global warming advocates dismissed them, saying that water vapor in the atmosphere was only a feedback effect caused by human emissions. NASA scientist Eric Fetzer say that the new study created models much more accurate to past events than those previously used by climate change advocates, and proves that "water vapor is the big player in the atmosphere as far as climate is concerned." [^] It looks like the issue of water vapour, always discounted by the GCMs, is being explored more completely. Lets hope with the current fiasco taking pace at the IPCC, and CRU that we might see some more mature science, and prognostications, in the future.
moved on Wednesday, February 3, 2010 5:16 PM
http://www.ecofactory.com/news/noaa-nasa-water-vapor-largely-responsible-global-warming-012910[^]:
The research, facilitated by a state-of-the-art NASA satellite codenamed AIRS, suggests that water vapor is responsible for twice the global warming effect of carbon dioxide, both man-made and naturally occurring.
Pay close attention to the bit in bold...
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html[^]
Andrew Dessler and colleagues from Texas A&M University in College Station confirmed that the heat-amplifying effect of water vapor is potent enough to double the climate warming caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
...and again, the bit in bold. The second article, used as a source by the first, implies that water vapor acts as an amplifier on warming caused by CO2, not a separate and doubly-effective factor in warming. A small change in wording, but a rather large difference in meaning! Nate Kharrl needs to go back to grade school.
-
http://www.ecofactory.com/news/noaa-nasa-water-vapor-largely-responsible-global-warming-012910[^]:
The research, facilitated by a state-of-the-art NASA satellite codenamed AIRS, suggests that water vapor is responsible for twice the global warming effect of carbon dioxide, both man-made and naturally occurring.
Pay close attention to the bit in bold...
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html[^]
Andrew Dessler and colleagues from Texas A&M University in College Station confirmed that the heat-amplifying effect of water vapor is potent enough to double the climate warming caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
...and again, the bit in bold. The second article, used as a source by the first, implies that water vapor acts as an amplifier on warming caused by CO2, not a separate and doubly-effective factor in warming. A small change in wording, but a rather large difference in meaning! Nate Kharrl needs to go back to grade school.
pshaw. don't you know that some things are just too exciting to get right ?
-
:suss: fat_boy?
-
pshaw. don't you know that some things are just too exciting to get right ?
-
http://www.ecofactory.com/news/noaa-nasa-water-vapor-largely-responsible-global-warming-012910[^]:
The research, facilitated by a state-of-the-art NASA satellite codenamed AIRS, suggests that water vapor is responsible for twice the global warming effect of carbon dioxide, both man-made and naturally occurring.
Pay close attention to the bit in bold...
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html[^]
Andrew Dessler and colleagues from Texas A&M University in College Station confirmed that the heat-amplifying effect of water vapor is potent enough to double the climate warming caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
...and again, the bit in bold. The second article, used as a source by the first, implies that water vapor acts as an amplifier on warming caused by CO2, not a separate and doubly-effective factor in warming. A small change in wording, but a rather large difference in meaning! Nate Kharrl needs to go back to grade school.
No, no, no, no. You are supposed to read the text like a 100% dyslectic, claim that you have read it all and understood it all. Then you google for information that supports your claim, no matter what the source is, and exlaim QED. It'll take you a while though, because remember, you are 100% dyslectic. When people dismiss you as being a real spamming pain in the ass, you will start whining about it, just like 5 year olds do. You will then come to the conclusion that you are the martyr victim, and everybody else is actively out to get you. What were you thinking?
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
Water Vapor Largely Responsible for Global Warming..."What I will say, is that this shows there are climate scientists round the world who are trying very hard to understand and to explain to people openly and honestly what has happened over the last decade." ...The research, facilitated by a state-of-the-art NASA satellite codenamed AIRS, suggests that water vapor is responsible for twice the global warming effect of carbon dioxide, both man-made and naturally occurring. While this theory was has been carried by climate change skeptics for some time, global warming advocates dismissed them, saying that water vapor in the atmosphere was only a feedback effect caused by human emissions. NASA scientist Eric Fetzer say that the new study created models much more accurate to past events than those previously used by climate change advocates, and proves that "water vapor is the big player in the atmosphere as far as climate is concerned." [^] It looks like the issue of water vapour, always discounted by the GCMs, is being explored more completely. Lets hope with the current fiasco taking pace at the IPCC, and CRU that we might see some more mature science, and prognostications, in the future.
moved on Wednesday, February 3, 2010 5:16 PM
What concerns me, is that someone like fat boy would post a link like this, then the next day post a link to say the earth is cooling, not warming. In other words, is there a single scientific approach, or is there a scattershot approach to believe anything that rejects the current status quo ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Heh, don't be silly. I'm sure "nick" joined the site last Friday for the scintillating discussions that frequently pop up here... and just hasn't quite had time to participate in any of them yet... :rolleyes:
It sure is nice to see you, Chris, etc, back here. It's like the good old days. Perhaps all we need to do is annoy CSS once a week, so he goes off and sulks, and we could have REAL conversations back here.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
It sure is nice to see you, Chris, etc, back here. It's like the good old days. Perhaps all we need to do is annoy CSS once a week, so he goes off and sulks, and we could have REAL conversations back here.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Now Christian, a few questions. What are the requirements to join SoapBox 1? Who do applications to join SoapBox 1 go to for approval. If you knight the OP and use a full first name, then check Google, you will find certain interesting stuff. I know not the identity of the OP but there could be a bit of misinformation going on :rolleyes:
-
Now Christian, a few questions. What are the requirements to join SoapBox 1? Who do applications to join SoapBox 1 go to for approval. If you knight the OP and use a full first name, then check Google, you will find certain interesting stuff. I know not the identity of the OP but there could be a bit of misinformation going on :rolleyes:
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
What are the requirements to join SoapBox 1?
You mean this forum ? There are none, people just post. I am a mod because everyone else backed out. That IS interesting. I always thought it was a troll tho, if it's fat boy or not. The [moved] makes me think this was posted in the lounge and moved here.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.