I do find it extraordinary that the USA, who pretty much invented computers and supercomputers and owns most of the worlds supercomputing resources, can be falling behind in numerical weather prediction.
See supercomputer top 500 site:
http://www.top500.org/list/2011/11/100
I thought the accuracy of forecasting was about 70-80% at 3 days, and therefore beyond 3 days isn’t worth using for much.
Yes. That is why I put “science” in quotes.
Again and again and again and again I ask for proof in the physics lab, but all I get back are words in argument.
I want to see:
1. proof that CO2 molecules can delay IR transmission (if that’s what is postulated now) and cause warming
2. proof that changing the molecular composition of a blackbody can change its radiative equilibrium temperature
3. proof that anything purported to change earth temperature can do it independent of solar input and albedo.
Surely physicists can still do experiments?
Thanks
2011 North Atlantic ACE =127, if I added it all correctly
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/AHA.htm
(vukcevic)
To John Kennedy,
I am merely a literacy teacher. Forgive me. But are you telling me that the “literature” is not fraught with hypotheses?
You wrote: “The analysis is based on hypotheses that come from examining the literature, the data and the metadata. As with any scientific hypotheses they ought to be open to criticism, but not, I should think, the criticism that they are hypotheses.”
If you hadn’t read or written anything else for weeks – and then looked back at this from a longer perspective, what would your reaction be?
Not sure I understand. Are you saying those volcanoes have cooled us and yet we are still warming? If so, it is worse than we thought.
Ms Curry’s boredom.
A search on Google Trends shows that climate interest goes thru a ‘natural annual oscillation’ or it could be a variety of of unrelated forces coming together to give the appearance of an oscillation to the pattern loving human eye.
http://www.google.ca/trends/?q=climate
Interest remains high in Q1 dips to a minimum in summer to return to it’s highs again for Q4. Of course an extreme forcing like Copenhagen can have a major impact, It looks like being one of the more astute in the climate blogosphere that JC’s boredom is slightly ahead of the rest of us.
Dig deep?
You can’t go anywhere in history without stumbling over the corpses of martyrs to science at the hands of religious or political leaders. History, it’s a bit like Texas.
Name the scientist who’s held another scientist in a dungeon for the sake of science?
The one who’s organized boycotts of another scientist’s employer over science?
Which scientist has led a mob to ambush another scientist, strip them, beat them, drag them through the streets and stone them for science?
I didn’t find any of those in the leaked emails. Eight inquiries into the leaked emails found all of what? One single act of FOI wrongdoing worth taking action over: and guess what? Scientists took care of that one themselves.
Over and above that, scientists zeroed in on the acts not in the spirit of science in the emails almost immediately upon their release, expressed their dismay, went over the implications for the work of science, and moved on, long before these slow-moving boards and committees.
Because scientists are the first to disparage the bad science of others.
I’m all for ordinary adversarial scientific search for knowledge, rivalries that sharpen the focus and hone the advancement of research. That’s cool.
It is perfectly ok for a taxpayer to decide for themself what is or isn’t sloppy science, and use deception, hacking, and abusing the power of the law to vilify and victimize their target? That’s so far from ok as to be vile. It demeans the justified work of taxpayers to use deception, hacking and abusing power of the law to vilify and victimize sloppy journalists and incompetent, corrupt politicians who waste tax dollars.
What’s sacrosanct about asking for scientists not to be subject to witch hunts out of ignorance? I mean, they aren’t demons, are they?
On Liberal brains
Research conducted by University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt suggests one possible answer: Liberals just aren’t as good as conservatives and libertarians at understanding how their opponents think. Haidt helped conduct research that asked respondents to fill out questionnaires about political narratives—first responding based on their own beliefs, but then responding as if trying to mimic the beliefs of their political opponents. “The results,” he writes in the May issue of Reason, “were clear and consistent.” Moderates and conservatives were the most able to think like their liberal political opponents. “Liberals,” he reports, “were the least accurate, especially those who describe themselves as ‘very liberal.’”
http://reason.com/archives/2012/03/30/the-liberal-legal-bubble
Eli – let’s drag politics into this. There is only one important point here, and it’s not hidden.
JC’s recommendation: Get NOAA out of the climate modeling business, and put DOE in charge of GFDL and their climate modeling activities. The U.S. needs to get serious about weather and seasonal climate forecasting. The problems at NOAA/NCEP are so overwhelming I don’t even know where to start.
Regarding your defense of James Hansen (who is indefensible) – ““Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” — Robert A. Heinlein”
Birth announcements are nearly as old as the Gutenberg printing press. It is a way of saying “Hey, we had a kid! Send us presents!”
Bart – History is replete with mayhem – it wasn’t just scientists who were on the receiving end. You are being dramatic.
hat we found in the leaked emails were scientists trying to stifle other scientists. That’s not part of science.
And those were probably leaked by someone on the inside – someone with a conscience.
Those emails may not have been the final nail in the coffin of the bad behavior of certain scientists – but it was one hell of a nail gun.
Robert I Ellison | April 1, 2012 at 9:21 pm |
You can’t even do better than New Zealand.
The “List of Canadian Films” goes back a decade earlier than Australia, and has so much more content that, where the Australian list is broken down by decade, the Canadian one is broken down by year.
It would be faired to just say the Australian list is broken down film.
Not that I can recall ever watching an all-Canadian film, since pretty much 90% of either list is the work of other, greater film nations with a few Aussies or Canucks attached in some way. Heck, there are entries that are on both lists.
I am an American, I voted for Barack Obama in 2008, and I deeply appreciate the information roncram provided.
JamesG may not care, but many Americans want to know if Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent. Why?
Most of us were unsuspecting until Climategate emails and documents were released in Nov 2009 to expose serious abuse of basic principles of science by government-funder scientists in order to promote the world-wide AGW scare.
More alarming were official responses from world leaders, leaders of the scientific community, editors of major research journals, and especially the UN’s IPCC, the US NAS and the UK’s RS !
I am an environmentalist with a strong personal commitment to social justice and civil rights. I supported the left wing of the Democratic party, until I belatedly realized they are establishing:
a.) A totalitarian government, like that described by George Orwell in a novel banned by totalitarian regimes – “1984″:
http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/
b.) To replace basic rights, guaranteed since 15 Dec 1971 in the “Bill of Right” – of the US Constitution:
01. Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion and Petition
02. Right to keep and bear arms
03. Conditions for quarters of soldiers
04. Right of search and seizure regulated
05. Provisons concerning prosecution
06. Right to a speedy trial, witnesses, etc.
07. Right to a trial by jury
08. Excessive bail, cruel punishment
09. Rule of construction of Constitution
10. Rights of the States under Constitution
http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/BillOfRights.html
I do not object to globalization, nor to the corruption of almost every field of science – astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, climatology, nuclear, particle, planetary and solar physics – nearly so much as I object to the establishment of a tyrannical government and loss of protections guaranteed by the “Bill of Rights.”
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://www.omatumr.com/
http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/
Myrrh | April 1, 2012 at 9:30 pm |
Not that I want to touch this one..
But an igloo is made from snow, not ice.
When it’s 60 below outside an igloo, it’s near freezing inside.
When it’s 60 below outside an ice cave, it’s near 60 below inside.
A few citizens of Iran and Israel found an interesting way to bypass government propaganda:
Interesting how the patterns shift when you substitute, “climate change”, “global warming” or “extreme weather” for “climate”.
If you plot “climategate” trend and remove for it, somewhat different picture.
DocMartyn | April 1, 2012 at 9:54 pm |
Comes across more as a case of those with poor self-knowledge also having poor empathy.
If you don’t know what you are, you’re likier to think you’re something you naturally admire, a cynic might say.
People in America who know little admire liberals; those who know extremely little admire extreme liberals; who know themselves for the frail and imperfect beings they are know they’re conservatives, in America.
Human behavior is universal; politics is local.
Eli Rabett | April 1, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
Here you go, letting facts and accuracy get in the way of a good narrative.
Why can’t you let Kate have her fictional realm from the genius of Heinlein?
Isn’t it mean to insist on actual truth, when there’s artistic truth?
you really need to learn how to document your work.
