Darron the whole job of the IPCC is to create the guidance needed for scientists from around the world to work together.
Once again you are using words differently than everyone else. From the dictionary built into my computer "guidance"means:
advice or information aimed at resolving a problem or difficulty, especially as given by someone in authority: he looked to his father for inspiration and guidance.
The IPCC does not give guidance. When I asked you for an example you came up empty and instead deflected the discussion. I agree the IPCC does excellent work, but what they do is report the findings, not offer guidance or make recommendations. Just the facts, Mike.
I again note you still have not provided a link or citation to where the IPCC differentiates between Climate Change and Global Warming despite repeated requests. You mock yourself with your constant misuse of words, misunderstanding of facts, and contradictory statements.
No quibbling about Climate Change v Global Warming. No stating we need to wait for further data before taking action. Just a very clear statement about what is causing climate change.
You could apply that same thinking to starving people in the world. NO YOU CAN'T
You are being ludicrous again.
Without the computer models there is no real unquestionable data.
Absolute bullshit Yohe!
You ignore the physics based on real world observations.
incidentally
CO2 Science dependent modern marvels. For your consideration.
In light of recent 'dialogues' I've had with Dave NC-20 Burton and others which reveal a profound self-inflicted ignorance and an even worse disinterest
in giving climate science a fair shake, (that would be sans politically motivated fantasizing about grand conspiracy theories, slander towards accomplished
experts and such paranoid thinking.) I'd like to share the reasons I, a non-expert, feel comfortable trusting the scientific community rather than passionate
partisans of profits über alles.
This post is an interesting sort of one way collaborative effort. ...
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2016/06/co2-science-dependent-modern-marvels.html
You may ask, by what right am I so sure about it?
It comes down to, down to Earth reality over self-serving fantasizing.
Please consider the real life modern marvels that would be impossible without such understanding:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Weather satellites that can image heat and moisture and wind's effects into comprehensible images.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Precipitable water. Contrast brightness temperatures measured via oxygen emissions and via H2O emissions to back calculate how much water is present.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Heat seeking air to air missiles, they would not function if those guidence computers didn't have a complete description of how heat moves through the atmosphere.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Early-Warning satellites. How are they going to distinguish between a missile launch from lightning, over Siberia? Better look at IR in DETAIL!
Spectroscopic Databases such as HiTran and Geisa have military origins. Going back to WWII and the desire to do Night Bombing better. Then this continued during research programs in the 50's & 60's, with a lot of it through the Cambridge Research Laboratory.
The program ModTran that is an example of a narrow band Radiative Transfer Code, for calculating radiative transfer. Half the patents for this are held by the Pentagon. The company that develops it - Spectral Sciences Inc - does so under license to the United States Air Force.
http://modtran5.com/
http://www.spectral.com/MODTRAN.shtml
http://climatemodels.uchicago.edu/modtran/
For 20 years developments to ModTran were signed off by the Commandant of the USAF GeoPhysics Laboratory, Hanscom AFB, Ma. These days it is the responsibility of the Commandant, the USAF Laboratory, Kirtland AFB, NM.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Lasers wouldn't work if we had radiative physics wrong.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* The detection of specific chemicals in the atmospheres of exoplanets:
By modeling the gases at high pressures, you can produce an expected absorption for infrared from the planet and compare the model to the spectra recorded by the Spitzer space telescope.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
*Spectroscopy includes measurement of absorption of IR wavelengths
eg measurement of CO2 levels in the atmosphere and ice cores relies on IR absorption. (that would make using ice core records to "prove" GHE doesn't exists amusing)
"Each sample has a volume of 4~6 cm3. CO2 concentration was measured with IR tunable diode laser spectroscopy, scanning a single vibrational-rotational absorption line." https://nsidc.org/data/docs/agdc/nsidc0202_wahlen/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* And it's not just physics of the standard GH gases.
Microwave emissions of oxygen molecules gives us satellite temperature sensing of the atmosphere.
Nitrogen - Nitrogen collisions form part of the basis of the GH effect on places like Saturn's moon Titan.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Getting out of the IR range, but the Dobson spectrophotometer designed in 1924 to measure ozone (and the standard instrument for doing so, for many years) is based on the application of Beers Law. Using two close wavelengths that differ mainly in their O3 absorption coefficients, total column O3 is determined by the difference in transmission (sun view).
Careful selection of wavelengths allows measurement of many atmospheric gases.
IR instruments for CO2 and H2O are off-the-shelf items.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
But wait, there's more . . .
Check out this power point for a complete review of what scientists understand, it's first class - perhaps the best summation for nonscientists I've seen:
Greenhouse Gas and Climate Science Measurements
The SIM Metrology School October 28 – November 1, 2013
James Whetstone
Special Assistant to the Director for Greenhouse Gas Measurements
National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA
http://www.nist.gov/iaao/upload/SIM_School_Climate_Final_James_Whetstone.pdf
Outline
• The Sun and The Earth
–Protection Mechanisms for Life on the Surface
• Properties of Earth’s Atmosphere
–Earth’s energy budget and greenhouse mechanisms – Greenhouses
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Atmospheric Propagation and Effect
The Atmospheric Propagation and Effect department focuses on laser applications in the open atmosphere. Main topics are the use of laser radiation over long distances, such as optical energy transmission (laser power beaming, laser-based air defence) and the remote detection of pollutants and hazardous substances.
Home: Institute:Departments:Atmospheric Propagation and Effect
http://www.dlr.de/tp/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-2789/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"CHRONOLOGY From the Cambridge Field Stations to the Air Force Geophysics Laboratory 1945-1985".
Liebowitz, Ruth P. | Hanscom Air Force Base Geophysics Laboratory.
Bedford, Massachusetts
(For highlights link to http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2016/02/archive-usaf-atmospheric-studies-afcrl.html)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Rise and Fall of Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories.
Edward E. Altshuler | January 2, 2013.
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Force-Cambridge-Research-Laboratories/dp/1481832514
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_homing
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
History of Australian research into Airborne Laser weapons systems
HIGH ENERGY LASER WEAPONS
Australian Aviation & Defense Review
by Carlo Kopp, December, 1981
http://www.ausairpower.net/AADR-HEL-Dec-81.html
Darron the whole job of the IPCC is to create the guidance needed for scientists from around the world to work together.
https://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.shtml
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change.
It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988
to provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts.
In the same year, the UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.
The IPCC reviews and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data or parameters. ...
As I pointed out the IPCC controls the data.
Pray tell, how does that work?
There are many hundreds if not over a thousand institutes spread across the globe studying aspects of manmade global warming and the climate change it is causing.
Got anything solid to share. Or just more vapors?
Without the computer models there is no real unquestionable data.
Absolute bullshit Yohe!
You ignore the physics based on real world observations.
Right now there are 20 complex climate models, which are under continuous development by national modelling centers like NASA, the UK Met Office and the Beijing Climate Center. Please contact them and inform them that you have it all figured out with observation science and they are wasting their time.
CC, its late and I have not checked out some of the data you gave. I will get back tomorrow night.
Without the computer models there is no real unquestionable data.
Absolute bullshit Yohe!
You ignore the physics based on real world observations.
Right now there are 20 complex climate models, which are under continuous development by national modelling centers like NASA, the UK Met Office and the Beijing Climate Center. Please contact them and inform them that you have it all figured out with observation science and they are wasting their time.
CC, its late and I have not checked out some of the data you gave. I will get back tomorrow night.
And not one of those models ignores the increasing atmosphere insulation and the heat that's holding within the global climate system!
And the differences between those various models and how they see the unfolding of our global situation are actually quite small,
chump change in fact, compared to the overall reality of the picture.
Try to learn about the real unquestionable evidence, regarding GHGs:
You may ask, by what right am I so sure about it?
It comes down to, down to Earth reality over self-serving fantasizing.
Please consider the real life modern marvels that would be impossible without such understanding:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Weather satellites that can image heat and moisture and wind's effects into comprehensible images.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Precipitable water. Contrast brightness temperatures measured via oxygen emissions and via H2O emissions to back calculate how much water is present.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Heat seeking air to air missiles, they would not function if those guidence computers didn't have a complete description of how heat moves through the atmosphere.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Early-Warning satellites. How are they going to distinguish between a missile launch from lightning, over Siberia? Better look at IR in DETAIL!
Spectroscopic Databases such as HiTran and Geisa have military origins. Going back to WWII and the desire to do Night Bombing better. Then this continued during research programs in the 50's & 60's, with a lot of it through the Cambridge Research Laboratory.
The program ModTran that is an example of a narrow band Radiative Transfer Code, for calculating radiative transfer. Half the patents for this are held by the Pentagon. The company that develops it - Spectral Sciences Inc - does so under license to the United States Air Force.
http://modtran5.com/
http://www.spectral.com/MODTRAN.shtml
http://climatemodels.uchicago.edu/modtran/
For 20 years developments to ModTran were signed off by the Commandant of the USAF GeoPhysics Laboratory, Hanscom AFB, Ma. These days it is the responsibility of the Commandant, the USAF Laboratory, Kirtland AFB, NM.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Lasers wouldn't work if we had radiative physics wrong.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* The detection of specific chemicals in the atmospheres of exoplanets:
By modeling the gases at high pressures, you can produce an expected absorption for infrared from the planet and compare the model to the spectra recorded by the Spitzer space telescope.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
*Spectroscopy includes measurement of absorption of IR wavelengths
eg measurement of CO2 levels in the atmosphere and ice cores relies on IR absorption. (that would make using ice core records to "prove" GHE doesn't exists amusing)
"Each sample has a volume of 4~6 cm3. CO2 concentration was measured with IR tunable diode laser spectroscopy, scanning a single vibrational-rotational absorption line." https://nsidc.org/data/docs/agdc/nsidc0202_wahlen/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* And it's not just physics of the standard GH gases.
Microwave emissions of oxygen molecules gives us satellite temperature sensing of the atmosphere.
Nitrogen - Nitrogen collisions form part of the basis of the GH effect on places like Saturn's moon Titan.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
* Getting out of the IR range, but the Dobson spectrophotometer designed in 1924 to measure ozone (and the standard instrument for doing so, for many years) is based on the application of Beers Law. Using two close wavelengths that differ mainly in their O3 absorption coefficients, total column O3 is determined by the difference in transmission (sun view).
Careful selection of wavelengths allows measurement of many atmospheric gases.
IR instruments for CO2 and H2O are off-the-shelf items.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
But wait, there's more . . .
Check out this power point for a complete review of what scientists understand, it's first class - perhaps the best summation for nonscientists I've seen:
Greenhouse Gas and Climate Science Measurements
The SIM Metrology School October 28 – November 1, 2013
James Whetstone
Special Assistant to the Director for Greenhouse Gas Measurements
National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA
http://www.nist.gov/iaao/upload/SIM_School_Climate_Final_James_Whetstone.pdf
Outline
• The Sun and The Earth
–Protection Mechanisms for Life on the Surface
• Properties of Earth’s Atmosphere
–Earth’s energy budget and greenhouse mechanisms – Greenhouses
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Atmospheric Propagation and Effect
The Atmospheric Propagation and Effect department focuses on laser applications in the open atmosphere. Main topics are the use of laser radiation over long distances, such as optical energy transmission (laser power beaming, laser-based air defence) and the remote detection of pollutants and hazardous substances.
Home: Institute:Departments:Atmospheric Propagation and Effect
http://www.dlr.de/tp/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-2789/
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"CHRONOLOGY From the Cambridge Field Stations to the Air Force Geophysics Laboratory 1945-1985".
Liebowitz, Ruth P. | Hanscom Air Force Base Geophysics Laboratory.
Bedford, Massachusetts
(For highlights link to http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2016/02/archive-usaf-atmospheric-studies-afcrl.html)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Rise and Fall of Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories.
Edward E. Altshuler | January 2, 2013.
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Force-Cambridge-Research-Laboratories/dp/1481832514
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_homing
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
History of Australian research into Airborne Laser weapons systems
HIGH ENERGY LASER WEAPONS
Australian Aviation & Defense Review
by Carlo Kopp, December, 1981
http://www.ausairpower.net/AADR-HEL-Dec-81.html
Without the computer models there is no real unquestionable data.
Absolute bullshit Yohe!
You ignore the physics based on real world observations.
Right now there are 20 complex climate models, which are under continuous development by national modelling centers like NASA, the UK Met Office and the Beijing Climate Center. Please contact them and inform them that you have it all figured out with observation science and they are wasting their time.
CC, its late and I have not checked out some of the data you gave. I will get back tomorrow night.
Someone who is wrong about almost everything should not be so condescending, Mike. You have this bass ackwards. Without real data there would be no computer models. I won't even ask where you got the "20 complex climate models" because I'm 99.99 percent sure you can't provide a citation.
Edit: Just so you'll know I'm not making this up, here it is straight from the IPCC (which you support). From Assessment Report 4, Chapter 8, Climate Models and Their Evaluation.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter8.pdf
Climate models are based on well-established physical principles and have been demonstrated to reproduce observed features of recent climate (see Chapters 8 and 9) and past climate changes (see Chapter 6).
Italics mine because this is the key phrase. Climate models are based on data, they do not produce data. That is obvious to anyone who knows the meaning of the word "data," but you have previously demonstrated you do not.
Second Edit: After a few minutes of looking through other hits when I searched on "how many climate models are there" I found this.
http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/
Around the world there are 28 or so research groups in more than a dozen countries who have written 61 climate models.
So Mike, where did you get your number?
I guess we’re not asking nicely enough. Mike has been back to the forums since his last reply on this thread but he hasn’t responded to us. Let me try this.
Mike, will you please explain where you got the number of complex models you posted? Pretty please? If you provide a citation to the IPCC explaining the difference between climate change and global warming I’ll add a dollop of homemade whipped cream on top.
There. Is that nice enough?