Do I understand much of this article? No, but I still reblog it as an example of a very comprehensive understanding by an expert.
There may be several reasons why warmists agree and support the AGW/Carbon Dioxide-Global Temperature relationship etc., none of which I agree with, but the one that is clearly a bogus reason is that “the science is settled”.
If this article does not make clear the complexity of our climate science – its range and variability of input factors, measurements, interactions, feedbacks, forcings and responses; its range of human assessments, scientific data compilation and computations; and finally the range of conclusions that can be reached, then I wonder what else might.
And yet, we have a world-wide political and financial mechanism in place, supported by the media and many corrupt organizations, which is based on a belief that the science is sufficiently understood and correct.
Your comments please!
Related articles
- Scientific American Agrees With Nazi Thought Clone (stevengoddard.wordpress.com)
- Consensus Argument Proves Climate Science Is Political. (wattsupwiththat.com)
- AGW – How can this multi-dimensional, multi-parameter, multi-variate climate science be settled? (tgrule.com)
Outline
Change in the planetary winds (conceptually documented in the diagram above) is the least remarked but most influential dynamic affecting surface temperature. Wind is a response to pressure differentials. So, a change in the wind is due to a change in these pressure differentials.
The following post describes why pressure differentials and the the planetary winds change over time.
From Wikipedia we have: “the troposphere is the lowest portion of Earth’s atmosphere. It contains approximately 80% of the atmosphere’s mass and 99% of its water vapor and aerosols. The average depth of the troposphere is approximately 17 km (11 mi) in the middle latitudes. It is deeper in the tropical regions, up to 20 km (12 mi), and shallower near the poles, at 7 km (4.3 mi) in summer, and indistinct in winter.”
The notion that there is a tropopause in high latitudes or that it is somehow ‘indistinct…
View original post 6,259 more words
The GOLDEN RULE 
Pingback: AGW – This is what global cooling really looks like | The GOLDEN RULE
Pingback: AGW – Global warming created by cooking the books | The GOLDEN RULE
Pingback: The GOLDEN RULE
We should focus more on climate change since we would be exposed to more typhoons, hurricanes and even famine.:
<a href="Most up to date article straight from our own web site
http://www.melatoninfaq.com/melatonin-overdose/
Hi Melita, thanks for your comment. Actually there is no evidence of weather extremes being related to “global warming”. You, believe it or not, are being told lies or at least being misled. The following links are scientifically correct.
Another inconvenient truth – 2012 US tornado count well below normal
Climate Alarmism – Using Our Fear of Hurricanes
AS FOR FAMINES – Similarly, conditions relating to famines are not connected to the small amount of warming that may be occurring, but has currently ceased. Increasing CO2 is in fact helping increased growth in agricultural food products. Man-made CO2 emissions are certainly not the claimed cause of so-called “climate change”, only higher population densities and development creating some localised urban heating, which is being incorrectly blamed on CO2.
Unfortunately it takes a lot of reading and some technical understanding to grasp all this. However, the best the public can do is to keep an open mind and not get brainwashed by the agenda-driven propaganda. Spending some time at the “wuwt” blog might be rewarding.
Once again thanks.
Global warming has become perhaps the most complicated issue facing world leaders. Warnings from the scientific community are becoming louder, as an increasing body of science points to rising dangers from the ongoing buildup of human-related greenhouse gases — produced mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and forests.-
Look at all of the most popular piece of writing on our personal internet site
<,http://www.caramoantourpackage.com
Hi Nickolas,
So you disagree with everything I say about CAGW, and all the scientific blogs and information I rely on, and the WUWT blog?
If you follow the path I and many others have followed, and you have some concept of scientific principles, you may come to realize that the risks of believing the mainstream are genuine.
I think you will find that the increasing body of science is actually proving the CAGW consensus to be untenable.
Anyway, thanks for your comment. we all need to be challenged in our thinking processes.
If you offer some scientific evidence that there are ” rising dangers from the ongoing buildup of human-related greenhouse gases — produced mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and forests.-” please advise.
Your site is just advertising your tour business.