Ocean acidifcation .

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Me I stand by my solar activity and cosmic rays theorem .
And all of the associated effects thereof .

CERN says you are wrong. There is not mechanism for GCR is affect climate.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

all of the proper nods to the MMGWC overlords . (The ones that control the purse strings)

the quote about cooling from solar minima not being more than the model projected agw warming is based on flawed models. They have been proven by actual readings to be incorrect high by a factor of 5.

Try again and you really should read everything with a really skeptical mindset not just the studies that don't align with your personal views.
It will really open your mind ( if its not already to solidly closed )

So your answer is: "I know of no astrophysicists who support my claim."

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Exile

Socrates would hardly have approved of your manner of presenting "evidence" in support of your transparently biased, predetermined conclusions.

That would be you.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Exile

Better yet, simply informing the reader about the composition of the dataset would have potentially forestalled further challenge, as might not ignoring the correlation vs. causation problems inherent therein.

That is an admission you fail to read links. You are no skeptic. You are a cynic who dismisses climate science.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

The sun provides the earth with most of its energy. Solar activity varies 0.1% which is insufficient to affect climate change.

That is a fact..

we have had this discussion before and you are wrong .
There is a lot more to it than just the variation in the suns visible light.
I have told you what those are several times .

And we are cooling.
Slowly for now but it will accelerate rapidly as the ocean looses its built up residual heat.
Before its over we will be real close to the pre industrial temperatures.
You really should read studies that are not ipcc approved. You will learn a lot .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

CERN says you are wrong. There is not mechanism for GCR is affect climate.

the cloud study is wrong / incomplete they can't duplicate atmospheric and cosmic ray conditions.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

So your answer is: "I know of no astrophysicists who support my claim."

many do but most are still employed therefore they must still give the nod to the powers that be . ( the politicians that control the money)

if you think otherwise you really need to study more .

Here is a current interview with Dr Zharkova . Watch it . I doubt you will but gotta try.
Actually listen not just the part you want to hear.
https://youtu.be/4-wEbgESlh4

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That would be you.

really kettle ??

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Exile

Someone once posted -- at least a 100 times actually -- that correlation doesn't equal causation. In this case the consensus is about 1.5 - 1.8ºC since we started burning fossil fuels in earnest in the late 19th century. Warming -- whether human or natural caused -- produces more atmospheric CO2 all on its own. Notwithstanding, we are being told not only that this amount of temperature rise over the past 150 years is aberrant & abnormal, but that it is also a contributing cause of every severe storm, flood, species extinction, sea level fluctuation, glacial retreat, unusual snowfall, and record heat. [ ] All on account of a warming trend that scientists cannot agree on how much is from natural vs. human forces.

A strengthening correlation does often point to causation. Particularly in the continued absence of a credible alternative hypothesis. IOW... what and where are these natural causes? Please show why the current CO2 buildup and warming are not aberrant or abnormal.

The science is not as divided on cause as you imply.

Originally Posted by Exile

"No credible alternative hypothesis" would only work as a substitute for causation if warming & cooling cycles amidst warming & cooling trends were not a natural feature of earth's history. You're right that there seems to be little controversy over CO2 rise (except for maybe the ice core vs. stomata theories), but all of the assumptions & conclusions you make after that express more certainty than much of the mainstream science itself. That merely shows bias & predetermined conclusions, and are therefore not reliable.

Those natural cycles/trends/whatever have not shown themselves to be capable of the current CO2 increase (eg speed, magnitude) and there's strong indications that the current warming from added CO2 will swamp or even disrupt natural cycles. Until you finally unveil that special natural force that no one else seems to have found yet.

Unfounded skepticism isn't terribly useful either.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

the cloud study is wrong / incomplete they can't duplicate atmospheric and cosmic ray conditions.

Please provide evidence that CLOUD experiment is wrong. You have never done so.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

many do but most are still employed therefore they must still give the nod to the powers that be . ( the politicians that control the money)

if you think otherwise you really need to study more .

Here is a current interview with Dr Zharkova . Watch it . I doubt you will but gotta try.
Actually listen not just the part you want to hear.
https://youtu.be/4-wEbgESlh4

will watch it later, when I have 90 minutes to spare.

So you are implying that she contradicts her own Nature paper?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Slowly for now but it will accelerate rapidly as the ocean looses its built up residual heat.

If the ocean loses its residual heat, it will go into the atmosphere resulting in warming. That is called thermodynamics.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

will watch it later, when I have 90 minutes to spare.

So you are implying that she contradicts her own Nature paper?

actually she explains it and fills in a lot of the blanks in a manner that even you should be able to understand . Just please listen with your bias turned off . You will learn so much more .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

If the ocean loses its residual heat, it will go into the atmosphere resulting in warming. That is called thermodynamics.

And that heat is already being lost to space quite rapidly relatively speaking.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Exile

Someone once posted -- at least a 100 times actually -- that correlation doesn't equal causation.

Correlation + mechanism = evidence of a causal relationship.

We have known the mechanism of CO2 as a GHG for 2 centuries.

READ THIS LINK: https://history.aip.org/history/climate/index.htm