Comments for Climate Etc.

You nimrods are way too clever. You know from you years of experience on the front lines that little Lt. JGs can pin medals on themselves, willy nilly. I can’t fool you jokers. Carry on with your foolishness.

I misquoted Jesse. Left an “umm” out between “the” and “cause”.

2014 HadSST, falling temperatures every month since August:

Aug 0.644
Sep 0.574
Oct 0.528
Nov 0.480
Dec 0.452

( http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadSST3-gl.dat )

It’s typical of El Ninos for SSTs to lead land temperature anomalies.

I’m sure that a barley measurable rise in global average surface temps
is the most serious problem humanity will face in the next 100-200 years
run for the hills
madness indeed

It’s A-typical that peak anomalies occur in August.

Because the temperature indexes are predictions.
You want your prediction to minimize the error.

Suppose I weighed you three times with a scale that was good to a pound.

200,200,201 are recorded as measurements

Predict the weight I will record if I weigh you with a perfect
Scale.

You want your prediction to minimize the error

What point prediction do you make and why

What’s to correct? The evidence does not exist to claim that co2 all by it’s lonesome has any meaningfuleffect on climate. The delusinal group is those who claim that a trace gas making up just .04% of the atmosphere, and of that .04%, human contribution from burning fossil fuels makes up maybe 3%, is somehow THE control knob for our climate systemd. You somehow think that if we can control co2, we can control climate and never experience any kind of climate change or severe weather again. So, tell me joshie, who are the fools?

“Ice at a point X is more reflective than open water at point X.”
First that isn’t what’s important about it, and I think you are wrong, when you’re driving into the Sun, what has more glare, a lake or the ice and snow on that lake?
The point is the absorption of ir by the water is is greatly reduced, and cooling has increased.

I would go with the average of:

199+201+199+201+200+202

Because the scale was accurate to a pound. And I can’t think of any other way to do it. Let’s ask tony.

I was actually thinking we should take out the first 4 or 5 levels of the terrorist’s command structure, be it governmental, civilian, or religious; with conventional weapons. If religious and a leader is an imam with a mosque, take out the mosque and everyone who supports it. Take out the leadership and social support, whoever or whatever the leaders are.

We are at 46% confident.

John S. and guyleech1
faint praise coming from me, but
great comments

Of course, I get the same number if I add all the results and divide by 3. I hate this.

You see tomato and I see tomahto. Especially if you consider the 2014 record as barely, I see the red group stalling, perhaps against some kind of barrier or negative feedbacks. Not defeated though. Is it diminishing returns?

Rls yes. In fact some folks think that global warming will express itself as a rise in tmin. For the most part..

From the article:
…
Washington (CNN) – As terrorism increasingly becomes a tactic of warfare, the number of attacks and fatalities soared to a record high in 2012, according to a new report obtained exclusively by CNN.

More than 8,500 terrorist attacks killed nearly 15,500 people last year as violence tore through Africa, Asia and the Middle East, according to the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism.

That’s a 69% rise in attacks and an 89% jump in fatalities from 2011, said START, one of the world’s leading terrorism-trackers.

Six of the seven most deadly groups are affiliated with al Qaeda, according to START, and most of the violence was committed in Muslim-majority countries.

The previous record for attacks was set in 2011 with more than 5,000 incidents; for fatalities the previous high was 2007 with more than 12,800 deaths.
…

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/28/terrorist-attacks-and-deaths-hit-record-high-report-shows/

Danny, I’m not interested today in getting into mitigation, other than suggesting a revenue-neutral carbon tax, with all taxes collected distributed back on an equal per capita basis. (60% of taxpayers would get back more than they paid.)

The IPCC has a different view than the NAS — but I suspect the NAS document you quoted is (?) from several years ago (?)