tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196554259323465442.post8051698845021090077..comments2023-06-09T07:35:22.118-07:00Comments on Warning Signs: Obama ad NauseumAlan Carubahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10901162110385985193noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196554259323465442.post-22304282145830181812015-01-29T18:49:46.100-08:002015-01-29T18:49:46.100-08:00Climate sensitivity? CO2 has no significant effect...Climate sensitivity? CO2 has no significant effect on climate. Here’s an easy way to tell.<br /><br />In climate science, a forcing is defined as something which, if applied for a finite period of time will result in a change in the energy content of the planet. Energy change divided by the effective thermal capacitance equals (with consistent units) the change in average global temperature (AGT). Although any consistent set of units could be used, forcing (per unit area) could be in Joules/sec and energy change in Joules. <br /><br />If forcing is constant, the energy change is simply the forcing times the duration of the forcing. If the forcing varies with time then the energy change is the time-integral of the forcing. If some average forcing results in an average temperature, the temperature will fluctuate in response to the time-integral of the forcing ‘anomaly’ (the difference between the forcing of each year and the average forcing for many years).<br /><br />Pick any two points separated in time that have the same average global temperature (AGT) anomaly. The cumulative forcing is the time-integral of the forcing (or the time integral of the forcing anomaly) times a scale factor. Because the AGT at the beginning and end of the time period are the same and the time-integral of CO2 level is not zero, the scale factor must be zero. As a consequence, the effect of the forcing is zero. <br /><br />The two points could be during the Holocene thousands of years apart which would avoid significant influence from ocean oscillations. If the forcing in question is atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), the effect of CO2 below about 285 ppmv is demonstrated to be zero. If the time period spans several interglacials, this is increased to about 300 ppmv. If the time period spans the Phanerozoic this is increased to several times the present 400 ppmv.<br /><br />Climate sensitivity, (the increase in AGT due to doubling of CO2) is therefore not significantly different from zero.<br /><br />The two natural factors that do explain average global temperature since before 1900 (including the flat since before 2001) with 95% correlation are disclosed at http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com.<br />Dan Pangburnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07898549182266117774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196554259323465442.post-51045043057856701122015-01-29T13:46:39.061-08:002015-01-29T13:46:39.061-08:00The National Geographic sold out to all the global...The National Geographic sold out to all the global warming lies decades ago. It used to be a magazine one could trust, but no longer.Alan Carubahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10901162110385985193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196554259323465442.post-58045543474030207372015-01-29T12:17:39.901-08:002015-01-29T12:17:39.901-08:00Alan, we all know he is a serial liar, and I too c...Alan, we all know he is a serial liar, and I too can't stand to watch or listen to the man.<br />If you have a chance, read the current national Geographic article about how Florida will be severely impacted by 5-6' higher seas by 2100. Enough to make you gag!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11704235176130183342noreply@blogger.com