Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1169490)	10/8/2019 6:50:19 PM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571219

I have not seen, in anything presented so far, the strong corrective nature of the Earth's equilibrium temperature as calculated by the Stephan Boltzamann radiative law. Just watch this... youtube.com and see the temperature calculated in the end... nicely put into Fahrenheit.. 55 degrees. Funny to watch. Hilarious in fact when you see how it is delivered. The calculation is almost bang on without any climate science calculations at all. Now the important bit is the equation... notice it is T (temperature in degrees Kelvin) to the fourth power. So if the Earth goes up by one extra degree, the extra radiation cooling the Earth back down is raised to the fourth power. i.e the temperature of the Earth is highly corrective when pushed out of balance. Where do I see any of that very important fact explained by any of the clap trap about global warming (or even cooling) ??? Likewise, if the Earth goes through a cold spell, the radiation outward drops by the fourth power meaning there is a highly corrective mechanism to restore the temperature upwards. Now I get the interaction effect from icecaps forming/melting too but I am sorry, I do not see the CO2 connection at all. See the paper I have shown below. It could just be as easily formed by changes in the cosmic ray index or changes in the suns activity of various sorts. It's not just a one dimensional sunspot thing. Where is that very important fact included in the models? Why dont us normal people ever hear about the nature of the equilibrium temperature of the earth? Unless I hear some sense from the climate "experts", they are like that person standing beside the hole in the ground that Mark Twain mentioned. Just looking for the money and will tell any lie to get it. You have studiously ignored any of the links I have shown and come up with kindergarten concepts of the suns influence on Climate and sunspots. I have given you links... maybe your should study them a little. Some great stuff from Brian Tinsley of the University of Texas. The main speaker is Ben Davidson. youtu.be Interactions. You also seem to be unaware of the sensitivity of interactions. Here is the Sun changing by just a very small amount, the AMO kicks in and we have the Maunder Minimum. The paper is by Climate scientist Drew Shindell . It is just a model and a theoretical analysis, but it illustrates a probable mechanism. earthobservatory.nasa.gov The Maunder minimum was real of course. download paper here. It's got your buddy Mann included. I think its the same guy. . ntrs.nasa.gov I used to believe in the CO2 warming concept, and I was thinking interactions were the important factor boosting the the effect of CO2. Over time though it's apparent it's all bollocks. Really. When I read a paper on IR transparency for aircraft sensors it became obvious that only water vapour, and clouds, aerosols particles, are the important factors. The reason why Climate scientists dont see this common piece of science in the same way is that they are financially encouraged not to see the common science. It's that simple. Sadly. Fortunately there are exceptions though. Thank goodness ! Here is the IR aircraft sensor paper. it's got some heavy duty maths in it, it was a PhD paper but the text and the diagrams are plain enough. Nice graphs! Just skip to the conclusions (7) if the paper is too technical. This is the paper tells me climate science needs some re evaluation. control.isy.liu.se