Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Climate Etc.
Viewing all 147818 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Week in review by Jim D

0
0

As I mentioned on the previous thread, if there is concern about the fossil fuel industry influencing congressional testimony, they also need to look at the members on the committee, who often rely on the fossil fuel industry’s approval to be even elected. By the time the panelists have been invited, the industry has already had its say through helping to decide who sends out those invitations. We need to be realistic about where the influence lies, and it is not in the panelists who are often just used as sounding boards for the committee’s own ideas. They will only invite people that give them a positive feedback on their predetermined view. This is similar to what happens with some journalists and who they decide to use for opinion, again ‘use’ being the operative word.


Comment on Week in review by michael hart

Comment on Week in review by curryja

0
0

agreed. academics are minority in terms of witnesses; people from industry and advocacy groups dominate. somehow blaming academics for misleading the politicians is a bit of a joke

Comment on Week in review by John Vonderlin

0
0

David,
So in your fevered imagination an old, recycled story about an obscure, generally considered irrelevant researcher, who has possible conflict of interest failings, beats a steamy, still unfolding, (He apparently was just admitted to the hospital and others are coming forward to support her story) morality tale about the resignation of the long time head of a powerful United Nations organization that has had enormous influence on politicians around the world. If you’re not kidding, I suggest you take your cub reporter beanie off and go back to what you’re more qualified for: throwing newspapers on people’s front porches.

Comment on Week in review by Mike Flynn

0
0

Re the U.S. administration declaring Green War on India –

“He wouldn’t put it this way, but Secretary of State John Kerry announced this week that the U.S. government will turn the screws on India over the country’s environmental record.” – Washington Post.

Another War on Something or Other – maybe one that they’ll actually win! Or maybe the same result as all the others – the War on Poverty, the War on Drugs, and so on.

At least they’ll get plenty of exercise – turning the screws on a billion people or so. If that gets boring, they can have a bit of variety by holding a couple of billion feet to the fire. Green fire, of course, not the ordinary CO2 generating type. What utter balderdash!

Mahatma Ghandi was once asked what he thought of American culture – he supposedly responded that he thought it would be a good idea!

Maybe the administration could consider getting its own house in order first, and then leading by example. Many Indians are patriotic, and take pride in being part of the world’s largest democracy, with a rich and varied history going back thousands of years. Some of them even object to upstart Western politicians telling India what to do, and how to do it.

They obviously need a good American screwing!

Live well and prosper,

Mime Flynn.

Comment on Week in review by John Vonderlin

0
0

Jim D,
I agree with your analysis. Unfortunately, it’s not just the Fossil Fuel industry that’s buying access. At OpenSecrets.org you can view the amount of donations to every Congressional politician and their relative ranking in each industrial, institutional or power elite category. Sadly, based on my awareness of post-donation voting records it would seem that “Money doesn’t talk, it swears.”

Comment on Week in review by Danny Thomas

0
0

200 peer reviewed articles that indicate a good hard look at the sun might be in order? Quick scan and this one stuck out a bit to consider as it specified it should be looked at for past and “modern” ice maximums in Greenland: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n9/full/ngeo2225.html

Dr. C, is this in part why you felt bitten by your uncertainty bug?
I’m not sure I know any more than I did when I started this quest +/- 4 months ago. And I’ve not read so much on one topic in all my life.

Comment on Week in review by Jim D

0
0

Made even worse by the Citizens United decision, which rules that money is speech, with the consequence that as far as elections go, if you have less money, you have less speech. Money calls the shots.


Comment on Conflicts of interest in climate science by popesclimatetheory

0
0

No, their success depends on helping the elected officials achieve their agenda’s. Proving CO2 is bad is much more important to them than finding out if that is really true.

Try to question it and see how they react. This is in the public records.

Comment on Week in review by Skiphil

0
0

David, the head of the Nobel-awarded IPCC resigning in scandal overshadows a manufactured non-scandal against one lone obscure scientist by about a million to one. YOUR politics are really showing….

Comment on Week in review by Jim D

0
0

Do you think skeptics tend to be less skeptical of solar effects than GHG effects on climate? It seems that way. In terms of forcing, doubling CO2 is equivalent to a 1% solar increase, which is more than the sun has changed in millions of years.

Comment on Week in review by michael hart

0
0

Re: “Media reports that GMO science is settled are flat out wrong”

Delightful irony/hypocrisy to be found at the point where they bleat about the possibility of “the rapid spread of herbicide-resistant weeds”.

Comment on Week in review by R. Gates

0
0

Need to push gas and oil much much lower if possible. A win-win situation helping consumers and putting the squeeze on Putin and his war machine.

Comment on Week in review by PA

0
0

Well, JD …

Given that a lot of carbon sinking was destroyed (about 20% of total sinking) and the collective effect has been steadily increasing, the carbon sink destruction and emissions will have similar trends. The linear nature of the CO2 atmospheric increase in the face of drastic Chinese emissions increases argues for a greater ocean/carbon-sink-loss role since the emissions are increasing far ahead of the increase in the CO2 level.

You are arguing that the problem is because someone turned on the faucet. I’m arguing that there was already a faucet running and somebody stopped up the sink.

Virtually all (83%) of fossil fuel emissions are in the Northern Hemisphere.

Does it really look like only the Northern Hemisphere is the problem?

Comment on Week in review by Rud Istvan

0
0

Steven, it is late enough and I have had enough wine tonight to take you up on this stuff. Forget my’ coat racked’ books which you will never, ever read, more the pity. Just your blog stuff versus my stuff. References. You know, citations to peer reviewed papers and such.
I have started by archiving indelibly Zeke’s SKS post per your comment. Simple screen shot capture on my hard drive, date stamped by .pdf . We will work from that now indelible beginning, even if SKS later erases/modifies it per its usual MO. 10 questions? Heck, less than 10 suffices.
This will not end like you want. BEST 166900 will be returning, using your own archived previous explanation for that little but significant abomination turning actual temperatures into your minimum error expectation field. So will the BEST ingestion records of Reykjavik and Rutherglen ( have you checked/fixed either?) No matter, already archived and date stamped, and returning soon. And much, much more. Not just about BEST. GISS, NCDC, BOM…I am on record saying BEST is the best (of the miserable lot)… the question is, good enough?
You might want to start planning a bottom line reply now, explaining how you make your lipstick, and how it is applied to beautify this climate pig.

Sometimes, stuff is best left alone. I offered an olive branch to you all on the TOBS thread. Tempest/teacup, and all that. You could have grasped it. Instead, you continue to challenge on off topic threads where my opinions are basically absent. That degree of defensiveness indicates problems worth delving deeper into. Else, you would have let them go.

So here will eventually come a time wasted ‘offensive’ response.
Why the H can you guys not figure out how to let stuff go, when you cannot win and it is not so important? Ah, because any wrong part of the warming meme means the whole is suspect. That is a big chink in your armor. Ponder how many chinks there now might be.

Just give me a few days, as also have and have had better things to do. Like the MSLB deconstruction tomorrow, which contains a few surprises.


Comment on Week in review by Alexander Biggs

0
0

THE US government appears not to know the difference between soot and carbon dioxide.Both can result from the combustion of fuels, but soot is a pollutant while CO2is a non toxic invisible gas and the stuff of plant life. CO2 should not qualify as a pollutant because it is a clean, non-toxic gas. Soot is bad for the lungs of both humans and animals, but it is a local problem in India and China. There is nothing to stop US citizens wearing a face mask to protect their lungs as many locals do.

So the US government could be accused of meddling in the affaires of India and China in its Don Quixite like charge at climate change.

Comment on Week in review by Steven Mosher

0
0

Rud,

Steven, it is late enough and I have had enough wine tonight to take you up on this stuff.

I trust the liquid courage is top shelf

Forget my’ coat racked’ books which you will never, ever read, more the pity. Just your blog stuff versus my stuff. References. You know, citations to peer reviewed papers and such.

This not you versus me or my stuff versus your stuff.
The offer is simple. you Objected to SKS . I suggest you focus your efforts on rebutting Zeke’s POST. 5 10 15 whatever questions
ABOUT THAT POST. stay on topic. Act like a reviewer of THAT piece.
If this goes well, we can extend it to other pieces.

I have started by archiving indelibly Zeke’s SKS post per your comment. Simple screen shot capture on my hard drive, date stamped by .pdf . We will work from that now indelible beginning, even if SKS later erases/modifies it per its usual MO. 10 questions? Heck, less than 10 suffices.

weird. you dont trust SKS to keep it up. What if I didnt trust you
to archive it properly without alteration.? But never mind, whatever
you think is fire

This will not end like you want. BEST 166900 will be returning,

1. How I want it to end is an improvement
2. This is about Zekes article. Stray from that, stray from his driect words, and you’ll be ignored.
3. Your time to respond to BE will come on our blog no less.

using your own archived previous explanation for that little but significant abomination turning actual temperatures into your minimum error expectation field.
Off topic for Zeke’s post

So will the BEST ingestion records of Reykjavik and Rutherglen ( have you checked/fixed either?) No matter, already archived and date stamped, and returning soon.
Off topic for zekes post

And much, much more. Not just about BEST. GISS, NCDC, BOM…I am on record saying BEST is the best (of the miserable lot)… the question is, good enough?

Off topic for zekes post

You might want to start planning a bottom line reply now, explaining how you make your lipstick, and how it is applied to beautify this climate pig.

One less glass of wine next time.

Sometimes, stuff is best left alone. I offered an olive branch to you all on the TOBS thread. Tempest/teacup, and all that. You could have grasped it. Instead, you continue to challenge on off topic threads where my opinions are basically absent. That degree of defensiveness indicates problems worth delving deeper into. Else, you would have let them go.

either that or its a trap to include you with luminaries like goddard.

So here will eventually come a time wasted ‘offensive’ response.
Why the H can you guys not figure out how to let stuff go, when you cannot win and it is not so important? Ah, because any wrong part of the warming meme means the whole is suspect. That is a big chink in your armor. Ponder how many chinks there now might be.

two less glasses.

Just give me a few days, as also have and have had better things to do. Like the MSLB deconstruction tomorrow, which contains a few surprises.

When you publish science, send an alert.

Comment on Week in review by mwgrant

0
0

captDallas–

euan, the pair wise homogenization, interpolation or kriging of temperatures with “neighbors”. tends to screw up “local” temperature records. Iceland is a great example because it has a “unique” climate meaning it isn’t very representative of its region. Kriging is the greatest thing since slice bread for a “global” product, but it will cool or warm local temperatures as it smooths or “smears” the unique climate details into the region. Unless you or someone else does a proper “local” temperature record, you are pretty much stuck with the results.

o Kriging is a class of interpolation techniques. There are many types of interpolator and no one is the best in all circumstances. [This includes kriging as a BLUE.]

o Kriging is usually considered to be an exact interpolator–this is not the same as problem free.

o Kriging is considered to be an excellent local estimator and is prominent in industry including the delineation of ore grades, estimating the spatial extent (including uncertainty) of contamination, etc. Places where real money is involved.

To say that kriging smooths or smears details requires much more discussion of what one means by ‘smears’ or ‘smooths’. The image that conveys is incomplete and I suspect likely misleading to those not experienced with interpolation. When choosing between and working with different interpolators one has to keep in mind both smoothing and artifact generation. Also the nature of the data, e.g., flatness, sharp gradients spacing, etc. impacts the relative performance of different interpolators.

Interpolation is a curious endeavor.

To be clear this comment says nothing in regard to pair homogenization or the BEST scheme/implementation.

Best regards,

mwgrant

Comment on Week in review by gymnosperm

0
0

Socrates wrote nothing. To him writing was just a cheat sheet for those unable to hold their thoughts in real time.

Comment on Week in review by Wagathon

0
0

Human society, like the climate system, has many degrees of freedom. The previous cases lasted from 20 to 30 years. The global warming issue is approaching 30 years since its American rollout in 1988 (though the issue did begin earlier). Perhaps such issues have a natural lifetime, and come to an end with whatever degrees of freedom society affords. This is not to diminish the importance of the efforts of some scientists to point out the internal inconsistencies. However, this is a polarized world where people are permitted to believe whatever they wish to believe. The mechanisms whereby such belief structures are altered are not well understood, but the evidence from previous cases offers hope that such peculiar belief structures do collapse.
~Lindzen

Viewing all 147818 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images