If warmists said sun spots affected climate they might be found floating near the Maldives face down.
ClimateGate figure KevinTrenberth does say sun spots affect climate in an email to Joe Romm which Romm publishes, then deletes. You're supposed to blame the American middle class for global warming (mostly) and ridicule anyone who says sun spots affect climate. A Tom Nelson reader noticed the sun spot reference and its subsequent disappearance from Joe Romm's post:7/30/11, "SunspotGate: Warmist Kevin Trenberth admits in an email that sunspots are an external forcing of our climate system; Romm publishes this admission,
- then deletes it," Tom Nelson, TomNelson.blogspot.com
Tom Nelson
---------------------------------------
Above paragraph captured in the following:
7/29/11, "NEWSFLASH: Latest Anti-Climate Science Nonsense Debunked. Global Warming Continues Unabated." Sodahead, (see paragraph 29, middle of page)
----------------------------------------
Joe Romm deletes the paragraph in an "Update" of the post BUT MAKES NO MENTION TO READERS THAT A MATERIAL DELETION OR MODIFICATION HAS BEEN MADE in Trenberth's email and that he (Romm) has REMOVED the original version from his website:
"UPDATE: Trenberth and John Fasullo have a post at RealClimate debunking the piece, which I reprint below:"
Following appears to be part of the re-worked version of Trenberth's paragraph. It leaves out evil Sun Spots and drives the message that external factors such as clouds can't be blamed for climate. The new paragraph appears near the end of Romm's post.
"Even so, the Spencer interpretation has no merit. The interannual global temperature variations were not radiatively forced, as claimed for the 2000s, and therefore cannot be used to say anything about climate sensitivity. Clouds are not a forcing of the climate system (except for the small portion related to human related aerosol effects, which have a small effect on clouds). Clouds mainly occur because of weather systems (e.g., warm air rises and produces convection, and so on); they error of confounding forcing and feedback before and it leads to a misinterpretation of his results. The bottom line is that there is NO merit whatsoever in this paper....
Reference: 7/29/11, "Climate Scientists Debunk Latest Bunk by Denier Roy Spencer," Think Progress, Joe Romm
------------------------------------
11/23/09, "Climategate - A who's who of the scientists in the emails," Examiner.com, Tony Hake
"Kevin Trenberth
Head of the Climate Analysis Section - National Center for Atmospheric Research
Trenberth comes across in some of the messages as perhaps a bit of a skeptic and was particularly frustrated by computer models that failed to predict the cooling. He said, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” In a subsequent email he continues saying, “The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not!”"...
----------------------------------
Maldives president underwater trying to get money from the American middle class under the guise of criminal global warming.
via Tom Nelson, photo of Kevin Trenberth via Examiner.com
[After I wrote the post at the link above, a reader pointed out that Romm evidently deleted this interesting paragraph from warmist Kevin Trenberth from Romm's original post]The deleted paragraph currently still lives on here (approx. para. 29) and here."
(Kevin Trenberth):
"In addition, I find the whole discussion to be out of touch with reality. The external radiative forcing of the climate system is mostly well known and comes from the changes in atmospheric composition (greenhouse gases) andThe part not so well known is the pollution (aerosol), but that is small. Nearly all of the variations in water vapor and clouds, except for those affected by aerosol, are a response to the weather and climate variations; they are NOT a forcing. This is a major error that continues in Spencer’s work."...
- the sun spot cycle etc.
---------------------------------------
Above paragraph captured in the following:
7/29/11, "NEWSFLASH: Latest Anti-Climate Science Nonsense Debunked. Global Warming Continues Unabated." Sodahead, (see paragraph 29, middle of page)
----------------------------------------
Joe Romm deletes the paragraph in an "Update" of the post BUT MAKES NO MENTION TO READERS THAT A MATERIAL DELETION OR MODIFICATION HAS BEEN MADE in Trenberth's email and that he (Romm) has REMOVED the original version from his website:
"UPDATE: Trenberth and John Fasullo have a post at RealClimate debunking the piece, which I reprint below:"
Following appears to be part of the re-worked version of Trenberth's paragraph. It leaves out evil Sun Spots and drives the message that external factors such as clouds can't be blamed for climate. The new paragraph appears near the end of Romm's post.
"Even so, the Spencer interpretation has no merit. The interannual global temperature variations were not radiatively forced, as claimed for the 2000s, and therefore cannot be used to say anything about climate sensitivity. Clouds are not a forcing of the climate system (except for the small portion related to human related aerosol effects, which have a small effect on clouds). Clouds mainly occur because of weather systems (e.g., warm air rises and produces convection, and so on); they error of confounding forcing and feedback before and it leads to a misinterpretation of his results. The bottom line is that there is NO merit whatsoever in this paper....
Reference: 7/29/11, "Climate Scientists Debunk Latest Bunk by Denier Roy Spencer," Think Progress, Joe Romm
------------------------------------
- Kevin Trenberth on October 12, 2009, said in a ClimateGate email that the CRU had no proof for the claims they were making:
Trenberth: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't," adding that "we can't definitively explain why surface
- temperatures have gone down in the last few years.
11/23/09, "Climategate - A who's who of the scientists in the emails," Examiner.com, Tony Hake
"Kevin Trenberth
Head of the Climate Analysis Section - National Center for Atmospheric Research
Trenberth comes across in some of the messages as perhaps a bit of a skeptic and was particularly frustrated by computer models that failed to predict the cooling. He said, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” In a subsequent email he continues saying, “The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not!”"...
----------------------------------
Maldives president underwater trying to get money from the American middle class under the guise of criminal global warming.
via Tom Nelson, photo of Kevin Trenberth via Examiner.com
No comments:
Post a Comment