I see the pendulum's swinging back to the dire predictions of "Nuclear Winter" caused by the carbon in the atmosphere. As the man said: "What's past is prologue."
Biggest unknown with any mathematical model of the atmosphere, as I understand it, is how to account for the albedo or earth's reflectance... Looks like they got it wrong again....
The biggest unknown with any mathematical model of the atmosphere is _everything_. The "noise" in the data sampling is all either larger than the amount needed to force an effect (i.e. the data is of low enough quality, you can predict a warming atmosphere or a cooling atmosphere and still be "correct" in terms of the statistics) or the magnitude of the noise is unknown, which makes predictive forecasting null. Climate [so-called] scientists are TOTALLY correct when you say that the data indicates human activity is changing the planet. What they fail to mention is all the data is total garbage. It could indicate whatever you want it to. -Just A Chemist
this was proven in 2001 after 911. just three days w/o air traffic raised the average ambient temp in the u.s. real scientists had predicted just such an outcome. since about 1970 we've been cleaning up the air. yes, possibly too much. rain needs particles to latch on to.
I see the pendulum's swinging back to the dire predictions of "Nuclear Winter" caused by the carbon in the atmosphere. As the man said: "What's past is prologue."
ReplyDeleteErmagerd!!! EVERYONE needs to start rollin’ coal for the good of the planet!
ReplyDeleteI wish the “experts” could make up their fucking mind.
Biggest unknown with any mathematical model of the atmosphere, as I understand it, is how to account for the albedo or earth's reflectance... Looks like they got it wrong again....
ReplyDeleteThe biggest unknown with any mathematical model of the atmosphere is _everything_. The "noise" in the data sampling is all either larger than the amount needed to force an effect (i.e. the data is of low enough quality, you can predict a warming atmosphere or a cooling atmosphere and still be "correct" in terms of the statistics) or the magnitude of the noise is unknown, which makes predictive forecasting null.
DeleteClimate [so-called] scientists are TOTALLY correct when you say that the data indicates human activity is changing the planet. What they fail to mention is all the data is total garbage. It could indicate whatever you want it to.
-Just A Chemist
Democrat hot air will counterbalance that in no time.
ReplyDeletethis was proven in 2001 after 911. just three days w/o air traffic raised the average ambient temp in the u.s. real scientists had predicted just such an outcome. since about 1970 we've been cleaning up the air. yes, possibly too much. rain needs particles to latch on to.
ReplyDeletei thought that they had determined that flatulent cattle were to blame for all of our environmental woes
ReplyDelete