Europe In Deep Freeze As Kerry Warns Of Rampant Global Warming

submitted by [deleted] from modernity.news

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Radiative efficiency can be determined precisely in a lab.

Not quite right. Radiative efficiency depends on the all other shit in the atmosphere, and for CO2 depends a lot on water vapor content, which varies a lot, including being related to temperature.

But also not quite relevant. Equilibrium climates sensitivity is related to radiative efficiency. But the increase in temperature due to an increase in radiative forcing encompasses a lot of feedback systems on the earth.

You are using numbers that are completely made up to fit a panic narrative created by people who want to control the world.

ECS is not made up. There's a long history of calculations by a large range of methods: Explainer: How scientists estimate ‘climate sensitivity’

But feel free to say some more wrong shit. It's getting funny.

[–]xoenix 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

For many years, estimates have put climate sensitivity somewhere between 1.5C and 4.5C of warming for a doubling of pre-industrial CO2 levels. This range has remained stubbornly wide, despite many individual studies claiming to narrow it.

They have no fucking clue.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Good one.

You've offered exactly no estimate of ECS. So it's fucking hilarious that you reckon that they have no clue.

See, unlike you they have used real world data to make the estimate.

[–]xoenix 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The lower bound of that estimate is no big deal. The actual lower bound should be lower but they de-personed Lindzen and Curry. Either way, it is just a wild guess.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The lower bound of that estimate is no big deal.

1.5°C per doubling?

It seems a pretty big deal to most people who understand it. On what basis do you call it no big deal?

Note that the upper bound is fucking horrific. Which is just as likely as the lower bound.

The actual lower bound should be lower but they de-personed Lindzen and Curry.

No, Lindzen's iris theory was just wrong. As paleoclimiate reconstructions show most clearly. It wasn't right in the past.

Curry has a lot to say about uncertainties, which apparently she hopes all pile up on the side of amelioration of climate change. But she has always accepted that the Earth is warming, largely due to human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, and that the plausible worst-case scenario is potentially catastrophic.

Both their work is considered. But so is that of many hundreds of others.