V-for-Vendicar <Justice@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> >> C = A + B. Was the rise in C caused by a rise in A or a rise in B?
>
>
> "fritz" <fritz@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> Educate yourself... Moron.
>
Sigh. You will realise one day when you grow up and look back at
what you have posted, that mindless personal abuse just makes you look
stupid.
You are particularly stupid for assuming that everyone who disputes
the myths about GW must be pro-DubyaBush etc. Nothing could be further
from the truth.
> > If C is the temperature rise and A is the CO2 what is B then ?
> > You seem to have a problem with algebra, or maybe you just
> > cannot formulate a valid arguement.
>
> B = Well known, periodic changes in the Earth's orbital/rotational
> parameters.
OK let's make it clear:
C = temperature rise
A = CO2 concentration
B = Well known, periodic changes in the Earth's orbital/rotational
parameters.
C= A + B
So if these changes in C were caused JUST by A (CO2, which is increasing)
and by B (well known and periodic) then why did the 'experts' at the IPCC
fail
to predict the halt in warming that has already occurred ?
It seems that B is not as periodic (i.e. predictable) nor as well known as
the IPCC was told by the GW true believers.
We should use a new equation :
C= A + B + U
where U = everything that we cannot predict about the complex non-linear
atmospheric system.
Actually, the climate models have been using U for years, they sneak it
into the model as various 'fudge factors' that are calculated to make the
climate
data fit the model.
************************************************************************************
On April 21st, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory confirmed that an
impending phase ****ft in a natural climate event would likely bring
colder temperatures for as many as the next 20-30 years, noting that:
"The ****ft in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, with its widespread
Pacific Ocean temperature changes, will have significant implications
for global climate. It can affect Pacific and Atlantic hurricane
activity, droughts and flooding around the Pacific basin, marine
ecosystems and global land temperature patterns."
Well aware of the impact the news might have on the green-deity IPCC's
warming predictions, the JPL was quick to add that "Sea level rise and
global warming due to increases in greenhouse gases can be strongly
affected by large natural climate phenomenon such as the Pacific Decadal
Oscillation and the El Nino-Southern Oscillation." JPL oceanographer
and climate scientist Josh Willis explained:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/05/are_global_warmists_pulling_a.html
************************************************************************************
|
