“New paper finds “large” natural climate cycle of ~17 years in the North Atlantic”
JC mis-introduced that paper. It is about a cycle produced by a climate model , NOT a cycle in climate.
The title of the paper is clear: “A mechanism of internal decadal variability in a high resolution coupled climate model”
Steven Mosher,
Often your comments are childish and silly.
You say you believe in cheap everything wheeeee. Well gee, eh, how silly and childish is that comment? The reason why least cost energy for all peoples, especially the poorest, is so important is well established and has been demonstrated since humans first began to control fire and later tame animals to do work. If you are not aware of this you are ignorant of the most basic facts.
You say you don’t believe GHG emissions are dangerous. But then you say there is a risk. What is the risk? Do you know what risk means and how to quantify it? It is consequence of an event or condition multiplied by the probability it will occur. So, what is the consequence? Please state it and quantify it in units of economic cost or fatalities per time period for a given year. If you say GHG emissions are not dangerous, what is the consequence?
Please avoid the juvenile sentences and answer constructively.
Willard,
Flat earth theory stays on the table too. That doesn’t mean it will be taken seriously. You comments are stupid.
So, there has been a lack of high energy, vertically erupting, volcanic events since Pinatubo, the kind which inject aerosol into the stratosphere, but as the article indicates, a lot of lesser events.
Not sure about relationship to the slowdown in tropospheric warming.
Strat aerosols reflect some incoming solar and also absorb some and also change IR emissions somewhat for the few years they remain aloft. But the lack of strat aerosol in the years since, has meant more incoming solar, not less, so…
Will be interesting to see what happens with the next eventual eruption.
Also, worth considering the strat temperatures higher up:
In lab studies it has been observed that even in a monoculture, the rate of adaptation by small organisms (say, drug resistance of the malaria parasite) can depend on the size of flask being used.
…Which makes good logical sense when the population is looked at, not as a single genome, but as a population of different genomes to be selected from. With a flask the size of an ocean this makes adaptation projections a lot harder in the real world.
The same studies also find that when the selective pressure is removed for many, many generations, even at the cellular level in such organisms, genetic memory is still retained that allows a rapid reversion if necessary.
All this is is nothing new to a lot of scientists, but seems to be forbidden knowledge for catastrophists.
A reading:
The thesis on “Cryospheric Mass Variations from GRACE” is a reminder of the importance of data corrections and adjustments (e.g., instrument resolution limits and model assumptions for the imperfectly spherical globe) for satellite-derived estimates of ice mass loss.
haploid daughter cells
Slightly tangential to the topic, but very interesting, and it highlights some of the ways evolutionary science remains not settled.
The site is down for maintenance so I can’t open it at the moment, but I skimmed it yesterday. I noticed one figure showing temperatures v time. If I recall correctly, it showed CO2 starting at 1100 ppm and 6C temp drop decrease.
Since life thrived and food was plentiful at 1100 ppm CO2, it seems to me very hard to support an argument that GHG emissions are dangerous, learnt alone catastrophic.
Another chart showed 6C temp increase in a million years at the start of the Early Eocene. From what I seem to recall life boomed during the warming periods. Life loves warming. Looks good to me. I am finding it very hard to believe the doomsayers – like Steven Mosher and Vaughan Pratt.
P. Falciparens, the eukaryotic malaria parasite, is said to be most widely studied animal other than humans. It has a genome of approximately 27 million base pairs. Eukaryotic single point mutation rate is about one per 10^9 replications. There are approximately one trillion replications in a single human being with malaria. So in a single bout of malaria every possible single point mutation gets tried on for size many times over. All the drugs we have to combat malaria require at least 2 interdependent single point mutations for the parasite to resist. It has somehow managed to find and propagate those. With 100,000,000 people infected each year there’s a good chance of developing resistance in some individual but there’s another filter stopping it. A mosquito has to bite an individual with drug resistant parasites and then pass it along to someone else. Sexual reproduction of the parasite occurs in gut of the mosquito. It’s all asexual in the human host.
This kind of illustrates the limits of Darwinian evolution. One of the most prolific animals on the earth hasn’t been able to evolve around the need to have mosquitos host it for part of its life cycle. There are more malaria parasite reproductive events every year than all the reptiles that ever lived.
However in this case there’s a fine alternative theory: there are no hostile aliens in Earth’s foreseeable future. This theory has a very simple argument for it. There’s been no sign of such for billions of years, making it highly improbable that they’d show up at any point in the next 15 years, […]
Wrong!
They only care about “intelligent” species, which they define as producing coherent radio waves. So your sample is only a century or so.
Not only that, but we don’t know how far away they placed their sensor, so how long a time to expect between when our “civilization” started producing coherent radio waves, and when they notice them.
They might show up any day!!!!
Or maybe they showed up in the ’70’s, and started the “global warming” movement. Making us destroy ourselves is easier than spending ammunition on us.
I think you may be wrong about the aliens. You realize Obumble’s birth certificate is in dispute … don’t you?
Most interesting sub-thread. David Springer’s thoughts on the malaria virus is great reading. All parasites obviously can’t survive without a host and the malaria virus is a classic example of how a genetic characteristic is hard wired to accommodate its host mosquito.
I couldn’t find any patents with you as inventor other than in the area of wireless medicine.
https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=ininventor:rud+ininventor:istvan&num=100
I was on the patent committee at Dell for a few years when the heat was on to build up a patent portfolio to escape hundreds of millions in royalties being mostly to Texas Instruments and IBM. The committee was a group of 12 engineers plus a paralegal and IP attorney who reviewed all the patent abstracts submitted by employees worldwide. I voted up about 300 of the 1000+ I reviewed. As far as I know all 300 were eventually granted. I was a tough sell especially regarding novelty. We were successful. IBM wanted our “Build To Order” patents in a bad way and eventually did a cross-license deal. Michael Dell said the day he no longer had to pay $100,000,000/yr to IBM in patent royalties was the best day of his life at Dell. IMO patents are generally a racket where individual patents don’t mean much it’s just a numbers game played by big corporations who reach cross-license agreements with each other to avoid ruination and then use prosecution of individual patents as a barrier to entry for smaller businesses. Reality does indeed bite.
