Its got to be a power trip with these clowns.
If we could just deflate the egos of the specialists and were able to get straight answers from them we would have a good understanding of this climate deal in weeks.
I have the policy of still tending to trust these tax-eating science-workers in their specific field of specialisation.
But this particular bunch of idiot-savants have gone further and they have set up a website for world spiritual and economic domination and they call this website REALCLIMATE.
None of these guys would be worthy to lick the souls of the feet of a real scientist. But I cannot doubt them on their individual specialties.
So for the time being I’ll bitch-slap them on their appalling logic.
Now one of them has decided that a very minor averaged-out cooling in the Stratosphere supports their CO2-is-the-main-driver IDIOCY
You will be wearily familiar with this. If it cools its global warming. If it warms… its global warming… And if it stays the same… Well thats global warming too and industrial-CO2 is to blame.
At this point I think I’ll just quote the Field-Worker (whose lost all perspective and thinks he’s a Field Marshall) and let you figure out how good the logic is.
“A timely perspective article in Science this week addresses the issues of upper atmosphere change. ‘Upper’ atmosphere here is the stratosphere up to the ionosphere (~20 to 300 km). Laštovička et al point out that cooling trends are exactly as predicted by increasing greenhouse gas trends, and that the increase in density that this implies is causing various ionspheric layers to ‘fall’. This was highlighted a few years back by Jarvis et al (1998) and in New Scientist in 1999 (and I apologise for stealing their headline!).
The changes in the figure are related to the cooling seen in the lower stratospheric MSU-4 records (UAH or RSS), but the changes there (~ 15-20 km) are predominantly due to ozone depletion. The higher up one goes, the more important the CO2 related cooling is. It’s interesting to note that significant solar forcing would have exactly the opposite effect (it would cause a warming) – yet another reason to doubt that solar forcing is a significant factor in recent decades.”
A tiny averaged out change in temperature of the Stratosphere. And its……. (industrial-C02-based) Global Warming?!!! (you idiots).
Do any of you guys out in LAITY-LAND doubt……. that HAD the Stratosphere WARMED AT ALL during that time then that would also have been due to …………….. Global Warming?… At least in the testimony of realclimate.com?
Ambient CO2 levels have been rising since the industrial age for the most part. And particularly since the end of World War II.
So check out this chart of homogenised Stratospheric temperature changes… For a start they are tiny. Secondly the cooling bias only goes back to mid-1993. Thirdly the stats themselves go back scarcely further then that.
To BUY such an analysis with such lame evidence.
As I said: the ALLEGED cooling bias only goes back to mid-to-early 1993.
Thats not a whole lot earlier then when we had a phase-change in the North Atlantic Oscillation by the way.
Looking at the sloppiness of the inductive inferences of these guys might have to become an ongoing task for this blog.
Its a dirty job.
But somebody’s got to do it.
Gavin subsequently posted links which far more convincingly makes his case. Actually the site he linked is a very good site in its own right and a far better place to get information from then real-climate.