HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
<<  <  Page 43/54  >  >>
Cassiopeia
User Rank
Silver
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
Cassiopeia   2/7/2012 1:52:16 PM
NO RATINGS
There is plenty of raw and processed data at Realclimate, nearly all of this has actually been available well before the various 'fakegates'' invented by the media. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/

jeffbiss
User Rank
Gold
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
jeffbiss   2/7/2012 1:24:25 PM
NO RATINGS
Watashi,

You see pretty graphs but still refuse to participate or do anything for yourself, as evidenced by your question about needing to be told. Do yourself a favor and read the literature! Start there. There's tons.

smallpond
User Rank
Silver
where that plot...
smallpond   2/7/2012 12:59:51 PM
NO RATINGS
Well, we are seeing actual data plots now...  Where is the one i asked for -- someone has the information.  Simple chart -- sources for atmospheric CO2 for a year (or w/e) -- shown by percentage.  I think it would answer a lot of questions...

Watashi
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
Watashi   2/7/2012 12:59:41 PM
NO RATINGS
I saw actual data during research projects sourced from Texas Tech, UT, NASA, and JPL.  I don't have it now nor have a link since the "global warming" trade is not my job.

I know what I know based on facts I have seen and that were published about 10-12 years ago. Insulting and shouting me down only galvanize my assertions about your cause.

Watashi
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
Watashi   2/7/2012 12:51:24 PM
NO RATINGS
I see pretty graphs -but what is behind them?  they look very much like the dubious "hockey stick" graph.  Are they based on modeled data (i.e. ficticous) or real measurments?  I see a lot of technical looking things from you - but no actual data or reasoned explanations to answer our questions. 

And can you tell me how you come up with a "gloabl temperature"?  There will never be a consensus if we can't agree on the basics!

jeffbiss
User Rank
Gold
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
jeffbiss   2/7/2012 12:50:05 PM
NO RATINGS
Watashi,

Present your evidence for solar forced "global" warming around the solar system.

jeffbiss
User Rank
Gold
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
jeffbiss   2/7/2012 12:47:32 PM
NO RATINGS
Watashi,

You did "this"? Your compalint is that they present no data? You believe?

Have you ever tried to look anything up? Have you ever went to your local library and delved into the scientific journals kept there? Have you ever contacted a researcher for their source data? If you're dissatisfied with their data, have you ever tried to perform your own research?

I have to thank you for presenting a great example of the average denier. I don't know where you get your information but science is all about participating, and it is obvious that you have no such inclination. If you did, you would have done something more than listening to right-wing talking heads and reading right-wing blogs.

Stop being lazy and do some work. You claim to be an engineer yet have chosen to be spoon-fed denier talking points and have chosen to not do your own work, including understanding how climatologists have looked at the implications of solar activity on climate. So, how can you engage in a meanful discussion?

Watashi
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
Watashi   2/7/2012 12:42:05 PM
NO RATINGS
Sorry - I didn't fully address your point.

What I am saying, is that the sun is the primary heat source for our solar system and planet. There is evidence from other planets in our solar system that the earth's warming/cooling trends are not unique. The arbitrary decision to not consider the sun to a greater degree appears to be a suspect choice of "climatologists".

Cassiopeia
User Rank
Silver
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
Cassiopeia   2/7/2012 12:27:29 PM
NO RATINGS
Indeed all the forcings are taken into account and the solar component, which is insignificant anyway, has been diminishing for some time. 



 

However, less well publicised are the indirect and direct influence of aerosols mainly from poorly regulated coal burning sources which reflects sunlight and cancels a lot of the warming out. Reduce this to improve air quality in China for example, and the forcing gets even higher! This is our dilemma. 

Radiative forcings

Watashi
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
Watashi   2/7/2012 12:25:06 PM
NO RATINGS
I did about 10 years ago and the temp data correlated nicely with the measured solar activity.  This was, of course, from an astronomy perspective with objective data and data collectors at a limited number of sites.

My primary complaint with the whole "consesus" crowd is that they present NO DATA, just their analysis.  I don't take any analysis at face value without the raw data available to back it up.

I also beleieve that their analysis is based on flawed or skewed understanding of basic physics principles.  There is always room for discussion over the applicability of one principle over another, but the AGW crowd demands that we all bow at their alter instead of addressing valid complaints with their methods.

<<  <  Page 43/54  >  >>


Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
The phablet wars continue. Today we welcome the Nexus 6 -- a joint collaboration between Google and Motorola.
According to a study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, one of the factors in the collapse of the original World Trade Center towers on Sept. 11, 2001, was the reduction in the yield strength of the steel reinforcement as a result of the high temperatures of the fire and the loss of thermal insulation.
If you have a Gadget Freak project, we have a reader who wants to make it. And not only will you get your 15 minutes of fame on our website and social media channels, you will also receive $500 and be automatically entered into the 2015 Gadget Freak of the Year contest.
Robots are getting more agile and automation systems are becoming more complex. Yet the most impressive development in robotics and automation is increased intelligence. Machines in automation are increasingly able to analyze huge amounts of data. They are often able to see, speak, even imitate patterns of human thinking. Researchers at European Automation call this deep learning.
Thanksgiving is a time for family. A time for togetherness. A time for… tech?
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
11/19/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
11/6/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
10/7/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
12/11/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Dec 1 - 5, An Introduction to Embedded Software Architecture and Design
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Last Archived Class
Sponsored by Littelfuse
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service