I'm almost 75 years old and have lived in the same place for almost 50 years. I've seen the climate change dramatically over those 50 years. What do you attribute those changes to?
Read the article I posted, .. and you'll have 1/5 of the equation. Clouds have way more significant impact than CO2. .. and clouds have been decreasing.
According to the two studies ... since the 80s. "A 2022 paper reported a similar decrease in cloud cover, noticing the rise in global temperatures correlated with decreasing cloud cover. Thus, researchers also argued cloud cover has a greater radiative effect on global warming than rising CO2." A 2014 study determined there was a 6.8% decrease in cloud cover over the northern hemisphere which increased solar heating by 5.4 watts. That declining cloud effect adds twice as much solar energy than what the IPCC attributes to rising greenhouse gases, and over 3 times the heating attributed to rising CO2.
OK I will play. So since the 80's if these charts are correct we are talking about a 44 year time span. The earth is 4,500,000,000 years old. So are you making an assumption that less cloud cover has never happened many times before? Do you know this did or didn't happen say 500, 1000, 10,000, 100,000, 1,000,000 or 1,000,000,000 years ago? Would you agree to judge earths climate bad or good over such a miniscule 44 years is bad science? Would you agree that a human was who born say the year 1320 and lived 80 years to 1400 that he would think that the cold planet at that time was normal? Would a human born in say the year 1275 and lived 80 years he would think the earth is in a new ice age in 1355? Would a human born in say 950 that lived 80 years would think the earth is into global warming? Not trying to trip you up just wondering how you would answer these common sense questions.
First ... I never said changes in cloud cover never happened before. I said the data of the two papers (and their authors conclusions) where that the current rise in temperature is more likely due to a natural influence from changes in cloud cover than any alterations in Greenhouse Gases (there are other natural forcings as well). Unlike previous periods, we have these things called SATELITES, that previous people didn't have. They record real time data ...no tree rings, or stalagmites, and magical statistics, etc needed. This is consistent with a previous report in Geology at Stanford looking at "young earth" conditions back when the sun was only 70% as bright and CO2 was practically non-existent. Temperatures were similar as they are today. The conclusion in that paper was that the earth's temperature is dominated by the water cycle. According to their data, the oceans receive and store solar heat, and it is the OCEAN that serves as the primary heating element of the atmosphere, as the stored heat moves from the ocean to the atmosphere, then back out to space. Clouds are the regulator of incoming solar energy, particularly in the tropics and subtropics. Lindzen showed this with the Iris Effect that operates in the ITCZ, and how it serves as a "chimney" of sorts, transporting massive amounts of heat away from the surface while shutting off incoming short wave solar radiation. It's interesting, The surface temperature in the Tropics NEVER goes above 30C When it hits that point, .the clouds take over. In fact, Willis has even shown how this process works. As for "Judging" the Climate good or bad, as well as your question about 44 years. The Climate is easily within its normal range at the moment. "Good" or "Bad" is not relevant, but if you consider that it is the Climate Optimums of each epic that are conducive to life, and where life flourishes, I'd say it is pretty damn good. Ice core data from Vostok clearly show that the optimums were considerably warmer than today. The last 150 years, and for that matter even the last 2000 years, to include both the Sporer, Maunder and Dalton minimums and the Roman, MWP, and modern warm period are nothing more than wiggles in the longer record. There are those who actually say we are living in an Ice Age, defined by the presence of Ice at one or more of the poles at anytime during the year. The Ice Caps did not exists during the Optimums, and hence why sea level is nowhere near it's highest point recorded in geology. That perspective as well is consistent with the longer term ice core data that clearly show rapid warming to the optimum, then a gradual cooling off back to ice age conditions over the next thousands of years. On your last question ... about people being born, given that we only live 80 years or so, there is no person who will experience climate on climate's scale. As you said, a person born in the MWP would think the earth is quite warm, one born in the Maunder or Dalton would think it is quite cold, one born today would again think it is quite warm. But as I said, compared to the Halocene Climate Optimum, we are ALL freezing to death! Satisfied?
YES! Wasn't sure where you were coming from with the cloud cover thing. I have no argument with your reply you obviously don't listen to MSM, The U.N., and academia and just take their word for what they say. You have educated yourself unlike 3 or 4 here. My point with the 80 year life span references is that one could think we are headed for an ice age or global warming depending on when you were born. The left knows this and with the advantage of a compromised mass media and the internet they can use natural climate changes to scare useful idiots into believing this fraud. You mentioned the Vostok Ice Cores. That study is what sealed the deal for me that the DEMOCRATS are lying to a guliable public. Man made global warming and climate change are a giant worldwide fraud perpertrated by DEMOCRATS, the U.N. and academia.
These people are insane or diabolical. So now if Nigerian Muslim extremist attack a Catholic church and slaughter 40 it's the fault of yes climate change. How did the Irish people wind up with this clown as president? https://abcnews.go.com/Internationa...ack-catholic-church-nigeria/story?id=85231500
Climate change causing sharks to be right handed which makes them more dangerous. Be afraid be very afraid. https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/0...hange-is-making-sharks-right-handed-deadlier/
