"Who has noticed that the period 2014-2015 keeps on turning up in the debate on greenhouse science?
"That is when greenhouse proponents say the long-delayed global warming apocalypse will start happening. In addition, that general date has turned up in forecasts made by an arch sceptic, and two researchers in the US have forecast that sunspot activity will cease entirely by 2014..."
Mark Lawson, a journalist with the Australian Financial Review, discusses the significance of the year 2015 to both 'warmaholics' and 'skeptics' in a piece published today in On Line Opinion entitled 'Activity is Quiet on the Sunspot Front', read more here.
That all sounds right to me barry. But we can look at the implausibility of the whole racket from a number of angles. And I concentrate on the angles I'm absolutely dead certain of. And since the oceans can lose at least 100 times more thermal energy than the troposphere ever held it makes sense to isolate imbedded oceanic energy as the only source of CUMULATIVE WARMING.......
......The only source of CUMULATIVE WARMING that could outlast a single weak solar cycle.
Hence when these dummies think about cumulative warming via water vapour feedback they are talking about something that quite literally CANNOT HAPPEN.
Hence daydreams about catastrophic warming must rely on notions of primary greenhouse effect alone...... Which itself appears to be 95%bullshit, or alternatively at least 1 and probably 2 orders of magnitude overated.... but thats most likely an angle of implausibility best left to others to explain at the moment.
I'm not a leftwinger and so I prefer to make strident claims where I have the understanding sufficient to do so.
And I can tell everyone with absolute certainty that cumulative warming due to water-vapour feedback, on the basis of a primary change in greenhouse, is just impossible and something that CANNOT happen. Not something that won't happen but something that CANNOT happen.
To even think it might happen is proof that they aren't taking an ocean-centric approach. Its a logical error beyond the reaches of any further empirical experience to alter the verdict upon.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"........but the question is what would happen if the trapped methane got into the atmosphere (in significant quantities.)....."
Nothing bad could POSSIBLY come out of such a scenario. See above. What you worried about? Little Yukos sees his first butterfly?
That what keeps you awake at nights?
Have some human feeling man.
Steven: "but the question is what would happen if the trapped methane got into the atmosphere (in significant quantities.)"
There is still the causation issue the sea bed has to warm significantly for that to happen. Mean time we can keep on looking for means to harvest it.
Graeme I think the point that is totally missed when poeple start talking about runaway warming is that as soon as a molecule or aerosol radiates any energy its temperature goes down then the recipient of that energy registers an increase in proportion so they average out. All that takes place is an exchange with zero loss or gain so how can you have an increase in temperature from zero energy gain. To have a runaway you would have to stop the energy from escaping into space which is impossible. As the temperature increases the energy loss escalates in proportion to the 4th. power.
"Steven, I don't think we're on the same page. The direct effect of CO2 warming is supposed to be small. No one denies this. Its the feedbacks that cause runaway warming."
Thats utterly impossible. It quite literally CANNOT happen. Since the water vapour feedback is proof of refrigeration of the oceans.
The mistake comes from only thinking about the tail of tropospheric temperature and not the dog of cumulative oceanic energy.
"The current phase is not different to the historical, measured record of AGW. It warms and warms, then it cools, then it warms and warms, then it cools. The net effect is it gets warmer. That's the historical record."
No thats just you lying all the time SJT. Any of the laity ought to get used to the idea that these people just lie all the time and the science means nothing to them.