Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) (sci.geo.meteorology) For the discussion of meteorology and related topics. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 5, 9:51*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
Wake up, Al! *I've answered this question for you before. On Aug 5, 6:02*pm, Al Bedo ? wrote: Great! 1.5K/Century Not even at the IPCC best estimate of the "Low Scenario" To look at acceleration of a climate trend, one needs about 5 decades to achieve statistical significance. *We'll need to wait another two decades to collect enough satellite data. Meanwhile, there are more than enough conventional ground data to see that the warming is clearly accelerating. http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Slope1952-2007.jpg http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/hadSlope1850-2008.jpg •• As usual Roger is wrong and is trying to validate his stupidity on his own site. The present cooling trend, in 50 years, will clearly reflect the start of the new ice age. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 05:34:09 -0700 (PDT), Last Post
wrote: On Aug 5, 9:51Â*pm, Roger Coppock wrote: Wake up, Al! Â*I've answered this question for you before. On Aug 5, 6:02Â*pm, Al Bedo ? wrote: Great! 1.5K/Century Not even at the IPCC best estimate of the "Low Scenario" To look at acceleration of a climate trend, one needs about 5 decades to achieve statistical significance. Â*We'll need to wait another two decades to collect enough satellite data. Meanwhile, there are more than enough conventional ground data to see that the warming is clearly accelerating. http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Slope1952-2007.jpg http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/hadSlope1850-2008.jpg •• As usual Roger is wrong and is trying to validate his stupidity on his own site. He said he doesn't have a web site, so that must just be his home page and cox.net must be an ISP. The present cooling trend, in 50 years, will clearly reflect the start of the new ice age. We can do something about that easier than we can reduce CO2 emissions. I was looking at the underbrush growth today and wondered if a lot more vegetation could cause cooling, a tree might evaporate 30 gallons a day, and at 1000 BTU per pound, that could mean 240,000 BTU per day of evaporative cooling over an area of maybe 20000 square feet, and that may represent as much as 70,000 watt hours per day. Maybe woger could convert that to watts per square meter. There are lots of trees. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
RSS Satellite Data Very Clearly Show A Warming Global Climate | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
RSS Satellite Data Clearly Show A Warming Global Climate | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
RSS Satellite Data Clearly Show A Warming Global Climate | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
RSS Satellite Data Show A Warming Global Climate | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
RSS Satellite Data Show A Warming Global Climate | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) |