« The YouTube Davos Debates – How can we take this to scale?
236.com: The First Presidential Debate in a Minute »

Al Gore Debates Global Warming

Al Gore debates expert climatologists (at last) on whether carbon dioxide causes global warming.

Duration : 0:8:52


[youtube XDI2NVTYRXU]

This entry was posted on Thursday, February 4th, 2010 at 4:26 am and is filed under debate. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

25 Responses to “Al Gore Debates Global Warming”

  1. Global Warming is …
    Global Warming is the biggest lie of the century

  2. “8.6.2.1 Defi …
    “8.6.2.1 Defi nition of Climate Sensitivity
    As defi ned in previous assessments (Cubasch et al., 2001)
    and in the Glossary, the global annual mean surface air
    temperature change experienced by the climate system after
    it has attained a new equilibrium in response to a doubling of
    atmospheric CO2 concentration is referred to as the equilibrium
    climate sensitivity (unit is °C), and is often simply termed the
    climate sensitivity.”

    the ipcc definition

  3. National Snow and …
    National Snow and Ice Data Center

    “Warm air keeps ice extent low”

    December air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean region, eastern Siberia, and northwestern North America were warmer than normal. In contrast, temperatures in Eurasia, the United States, and southwestern Canada were below average.

  4. “The equilibrium …
    “The equilibrium climate sensitivity refers to the equilibrium change in average global surface air temperature following a unit change in the radiative forcing. ”

    this is the definition…you can certainly use 1watt/m*2 if you desire but the rest of the world seems to like using easily managed numbers so it is done in increments of 37watts/m*2 or 1C’s worth of forcing…just because it’s a lot easier that way…go figure

  5. @capemall oh and I …
    @capemall oh and I guess I better say feedbacks aren’t the same as first order forcing or you will be all confused again…now answer my original question and stop being an ass…or just admit you have no observational evidence to support a climate sensitivity of 2C

  6. @drkstrong why …
    @drkstrong why don’t you formulate a real argument…knowing things as basic as what climate sensitivity means would be a good start

  7. @drkstrong it …
    @drkstrong it doesn’t matter to what..if the climate sensitivity is 2C and you use a forcing that increases the temperature by 0.1C then you get a 0.2C total increase…get it yet?

  8. @drkstrong again it …
    @drkstrong again it doesn’t matter what the source of the force is..also your reply earlier that it was stupid to assume a forcing causing 1C change can only cause 1C change indicates you have never heard of feedbacks which are not forcings

  9. @drkstrong you …
    @drkstrong you apparently can’t answer anything other then to argue about how I word things…well my first question was quite plain and you seemed very confused and still do

  10. @drkstrong it takes …
    @drkstrong it takes 3,7 watts/m*2 to increase the worlds temperature by 1C…it matters not what forcing provides that watt

    so your question as to what provides the forcing was stupid

  11. In just FIVE YEARS …
    In just FIVE YEARS between 2004-2009 thick perennial arctic sea ice DROPPED 42%. This was discovered by NASA satellite measurements. Reported 7/7/09
    Search:
    New NASA Satellite Survey Reveals Dramatic Arctic Sea Ice Thinning

    Global Warming is changing our world NOW. CO2 is 35% above levels for 650,000 years. In just 30 years CO2 will be over 450ppm, enough to acidify oceans to the point of stopping the growth of many planktons and corals. They are at the base of the oceans’ food chain.

  12. Climate sensitivty …
    Climate sensitivty to WHAT? a ceratin amount of forcing increase, doubling of CO2, changes in solar radiation, volcanic eruptions of a certain size, ……?

    You seem incapable of specifiying the question. The IPCC talks a lot about climate sensitivity. Each factor has its own sensitivity.

    If you double CO2 you get a number if you double CH4 you get another number. If you increase aerosols you get a -ve number.

    Then is it the sensitivity of that factor alone or does it include feedbacks?

  13. This first refuge …
    This first refuge of the disengenuous is to accuse others of being so

    I just asked you to formulate the question properly and forget the semantics. But you want to continue the argument about who know more about the subject. You been unable to ask the question without making factual errors.

    I say again formulate the question properly and i will answer it if I can. Frankly we started this useless exchange so long ago I forgot why this was relevant

    If you cant, admit it.

  14. Climate sensitivity …
    Climate sensitivity is DEFINED (as i have been saying) as:

    Change in temperture (C) = Climate sensitivity * change in radiative forcing (watts/m^2).

    Thus climate senitivity has units of deg C * M^2/watt. So to calculate climate sensitivity you need not only to specifty the DT but the amount the forcing energy has changed or the factor changing it to make a conversion.

    EG the doublling of CO2 produces a positive forcing of ~4 watt/m^2 thus DT = +1C w/o feedbacks included.

  15. wow yes al gore we …
    wow yes al gore we can tell the temperature of the year. no clearly it changes. an co2 does not cause global warming, but like he said there were many ice ages, and we, humans were not there so how did the earth cool with out. oh because the earth goes through warming an cooling phases, so I feel everyone should calm down

  16. @drkstrong “I …
    @drkstrong “I challenge you to show any observational evidence the climate has a sensitivity of 2C or above which is what is claimed” my original question..I will add claimed by the ipcc so you don’t get all confused again…this is a complete and unmistakable question…so answer it in a forthright manner or go read

  17. @drkstrong I can …
    @drkstrong I can only assume you are ignorant of what climate sensitivity means or you intend to avoid my initial question with arguments over semantics when my meaning was clear to any but the most uninformed…so on one hand you are being disingenuous and on the other you are just ignorant of the facts…which is it? don’t expect me to teach you all about climate science to get a simple question answered

  18. @drkstrong actually …
    @drkstrong actually no, I said exactly what I meant to say and if you understood climate sensitivity it would make perfect sense to you so why don’t you go learn what climate sensitivity is

  19. So you meant to say …
    So you meant to say “1C WORTH of forcing provides 2C of warming” which is worse nonsense yet.

    1C worth of forcing produces 1C of warming, not 2C, by definition

    OK, let’s reset. Ask your question clearly and concisely using the right units for forcing and saying an increase in what parameter by how much is being claimed to be producing how much of an increase in temperature

    Then we can avoid all these diversions from what is a relatively simple problem conceptually if not mathematically

  20. @drkstrong yes you …
    @drkstrong yes you would have known exactly what I was talking about if I had said 1C’s worth of forcing instead of 1C forcing…however could I have been so rude as to throw you off like that…I can see how you were completely confused….yeah right..so answer the question now that you understand it

  21. Forcing is not …
    Forcing is not expressed in degrees C – that is temperature – forcing is a measure of incident energy per unit area usually expressed in watts per meter squared. Thus forcing is a term inthe Earth’s energy budget equation.

    “1C forcing” is a meaningless term. You need to understand what you are talking about before posing questions if you expect to understand the answers to and more importantly for others to understand the question in order to answer it.

  22. ok i nearly got the …
    ok i nearly got the chance to meet this guy, if I had met him I would have bled him dry of all the lies i would have murked him!

  23. Watch my video. …
    Watch my video. It’s about global warming, earth changes and our planet as we lives in. Thanks!

  24. @capemall with the …
    @capemall with the caveat that you knew the ipcc has 2C as the lower limit of climate sensitivity…but I don’t think it was outrageous of me to expect you to at least understand the basic argument…anyway, since your question indicates you don’t I suggest you go read…the same as my previous suggestion

  25. “I challenge you to …
    “I challenge you to show any observational evidence the climate has a sensitivity of 2C or above which is what is claimed”

    this was my question…if you understand what climate sensitivity is then it is a complete question…if you don’t then perhaps instead of complaining about the question you should learn the definition of climate sensitivity..the information you asked for is actually unimportant to the question

Leave a Reply