Imajulianutter, you are still confused about weather and climate.

Time series statistical analysis on at least 30 years of data shows unequivocally that the planet is indeed getting warmer. The trend line is UP, despite the fact there are bumps and troughs along the way.

You are only confusing yourself if you want to focus on cold weather last year or this winter (in Australia or anywhere else) and say the climate is cooling.

Moreover, anybody who tries to say the world has been cooling since 1998 (as they do) is either ignorant of statistical analysis or is deliberately distorting and misrepresenting the truth.

We know it’s getting warmer because we can measure very well the energy coming in, going out, and what humanity adds – from all known sources.

We have multitudes of experts in a range of disciplines that study the climate in extraordinary detail. You obviously haven’t.

If we take green-house gases out of the scenario, natural variability alone cannot explain the warming the planet is undergoing – this is well understood in the scientific community, imajulianutter.

In trying to maintain equilibrium (look up thermodynamics, conservation of energy, etc. in any school physics text) the atmosphere, oceans, biosphere and cryosphere ‘react’ – resulting in the changed weather patterns we are now seeing e.g. more dries/wets, winds/storms, etc.

Over the long term, these changed weather patterns define the changing (or not) climate.

I am happy you think you “understand how currents move and the effects large bodies of water have on the masses of air moving over them” yada yada.

However, you also now confuse CO2 in the oceans, with heat content of the oceans – in part resulting from the enhanced green-house effect.

Certainly, increased CO2 in the oceans leads to lower pH levels that in turn impacts the ‘food chain’ – in itself serious enough. However, increased atmospheric CO2 also means more heat is reflected back into the oceans and ice sheets where it is absorbed.

cont'd

Cont’d

As for “it’s cyclical”: Yes, some things are, some things are not.

May I suggest you look up “periodicity” with respect to climate and try to apply it to; ENSO, PDO, NAO, etc. Then, see if you get any correlation with global, hemi-spherical or regional mean temperatures.

For 20,000 years the CO2 concentration has been stable at 280 ppm. In just 200 years humanity has increased that to nearly 400 ppm. The planet is getting warmer.

May I also suggest (if you really want to understand, comment constructively, or contribute with any kind of credibility) you read Principles of Planetary Climate, Cambridge University Press, 2010.

<We know it’s getting warmer because we can measure very well the energy coming in, going out, and what humanity adds – from all known sources.>

Well, we dont know that because there is no system to measure it accurately. Even the climate models only assume an ocean depth of 3.5 metres, even though sunlight can penetrate several hundred metres of ocean. So there is a substantial amount that must be guessed at. But a rising sea level is a good proxy vote for a warming Earth. A few years ago the skeptics were insisting that sea levels were leveling off. Not so, unfortunately.

If you acknowledge that sea level is rising, it is very hard to then deny that the Earth is getting warmer.

Bonmot

You are making this easier all the time.

I don't really care about what the consensuel scientists claim is the science of climate change. There arguments have little relevance since this years record low temperatures, massive snows and floods.

It's the simple denialism of this that you exhibit that accentuates the points I make.

Nowhere in your latest post do you confront the issue of the largest deposits of snows and massive record flooding rains and their effects on the atmosphere, weather and climate. Are you pretending they are of no consequence?

You cannot even acknowledge the effect a fall in the amount of water (H2O) has on reflecting heat within the system back into the system.
You and your consensual scientists simply ignore the point and hark back to your 'science' that confirms your 'warmist rump's' position. (Well not so much your consensuel scientists anymore 'cos they've become largely invisible since the snows and rains)

Why?

Simply because when you factor in a substantial fall in the one element, ie H2O, that reflects most of the heat in the system back into the system ... well you know the science from this point onwards.

<Nowhere in your latest post do you confront the issue of the largest deposits of snows and massive record flooding rains and their effects on the atmosphere, weather and climate. Are you pretending they are of no consequence?>

Are you claiming that there is less water in the atmosphere? No doubt it would be a useful measure, but how do you measure it? And how do you know there has been more rain and snow in the world of late? Given that water spends about nine days in the atmosphere, it is hardly surprising that it always rains and snows. You need evidence to support your claim, and that evidence is hard to come by.

At least with sea level you have a quantity which can be measured fairly accurately. So if you are correct and the Earth is cooling, you should see sea level start to fall. But as 2011 is still the 12th hottest since 1880, that might still be a while.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/

Imajulianutter,
Liked your slouches with Squeers, your one two combination that promptly sat him on the canvas.And your early rounds with the IPCC flyweight champion, Bonmot --great stuff !

But just a whisper in your ear about the upcoming rounds.

The warmists have their own rule book – it’s not easy to score a points win, let alone a knockout.

Let me explain: If we have a chain of unusually hot days, the media will be full of Interviews featuring AGW promoters telling us how it is irrefutable evidence that the world is warming.
Like wise, if there is a harsh bushfire —. irrefutable evidence!
A major flood -- irrefutable evidence!
A major drought -- irrefutable evidence!
And, earthquakes –well, they’re working on that angle too, but it’s not finalised yet.

Now, a reasonable person might think that if a chain of hot days was evidence of global warming, a series of unusually cold days should be evidence to the contrary ---ahhahaha !
According to AGW lore it is STILL evidence of global warming.

How so? You might ask.
Well, in their models the pre-global warming world was a goldilocksesque place.
Never too hot and never too cold –always, just right
Until the evil industrial revolution pumped CO2 into the garden and caused disequilibrium.—hence the extremes.

The warmists are big on models. They have models that predict everything(often inaccurately mind you!).
And The IPCC chair (equivalent to the warmist pope) is writing what some describe as a erotic novel, which may also include models.
http://tinyurl.com/y9j8lf8

And, recently they’ve introduced a new tactic claiming their contenders have been gotten at .
It started out small with them painting the scientists behind the dicey emails as victims of harassment & misunderstanding.
But now its gained momentum with some of their champions claiming to have received death threats and seeking police protect –makes good headlines, and garners lot of sympathy.

Anyway, give it your best

Cheers!