Here's a suggested study for climate change scientists: Forget CO2 for a moment. It seems reasonable (if not axiomatic) that global cloud coverage should track global temperature rises. More heat = more water vapor = more clouds.
Is this testable?
I mean, we have satellites out there taking photos 24/7 of the whole surface. Surely a program/algore-rythym exists for measuring the percentage of global surface covered by clouds at any given time.
Chip could have done this by taking a photo from his balcony every day for a year and counting the days that had clouds. Compare to previous years. Rinse, repeat.
I take pictures of the sky all the time here where I live. Never dawned on me that I was doing science. But I do know that a decent sunrise or sunset picture requires clouds. No clouds, blah sunrise.
Water vapor is a much better gas to modify the atmosphere than CO2, I think. Plus the reflectivity of clouds will act as a brake on rising temperatures.
Also ocean currents are pretty much ignored by the AGW hysteria crowd. Their "science" is anything but.
The long term historical record of warming and cooling on earth shows that CO2 is also a lagging indicator. So what are the leading indicators? Those are the cause. Of course. the lagging indicators could accentuate the problem, and cause a run away system. That is, I think, the global warming proponents' best and most powerful argument, even though it does not really support an anthropogenic cause. Even with that, the resulting increase in clouds should mitigate the warming , except that H2O is an even stronger greenhouse gas than CO2. This is all why alarmist and denier certainty are both mistakes. More science, and reasonable concern with reasonable measures taken over time makes the most sense to me. If I had to make a bet on it all, which we are, I would expect that the climate will self-regulate as always, as we gradually reduce our effect through technology and time. This is what will happen, anyway regardless of all the politics, gnashing of teeth and fighting that will happen to little effect of it's own.
10 comments:
Clouds are -- of course - a lagging indicator.
Is this testable?
I mean, we have satellites out there taking photos 24/7 of the whole surface. Surely a program/algore-rythym exists for measuring the percentage of global surface covered by clouds at any given time.
Is this testable?
Chip could have done this by taking a photo from his balcony every day for a year and counting the days that had clouds. Compare to previous years. Rinse, repeat.
I take pictures of the sky all the time here where I live. Never dawned on me that I was doing science. But I do know that a decent sunrise or sunset picture requires clouds. No clouds, blah sunrise.
Water vapor is a much better gas to modify the atmosphere than CO2, I think. Plus the reflectivity of clouds will act as a brake on rising temperatures.
Also ocean currents are pretty much ignored by the AGW hysteria crowd. Their "science" is anything but.
Mare's tails and mackerel scales make tall ships carry low sails.
Is chick a Russian agent?!
“Is chick a Russian agent?!”
I know, the whole thing is Cyreal!
My color vision is not so good - is that written in cerulean blue? Maybe using acrylic paint?
You two should take your show on the road :)
"Clouds are -- of course - a lagging indicator."
The long term historical record of warming and cooling on earth shows that CO2 is also a lagging indicator. So what are the leading indicators? Those are the cause. Of course. the lagging indicators could accentuate the problem, and cause a run away system. That is, I think, the global warming proponents' best and most powerful argument, even though it does not really support an anthropogenic cause. Even with that, the resulting increase in clouds should mitigate the warming , except that H2O is an even stronger greenhouse gas than CO2. This is all why alarmist and denier certainty are both mistakes. More science, and reasonable concern with reasonable measures taken over time makes the most sense to me. If I had to make a bet on it all, which we are, I would expect that the climate will self-regulate as always, as we gradually reduce our effect through technology and time. This is what will happen, anyway regardless of all the politics, gnashing of teeth and fighting that will happen to little effect of it's own.
Post a Comment