You are missing what most of us are missing, or not missing. They are making stupid decisions for stupid reasons. I don’t think we are missing that.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by popesclimatetheory
Comment on Climate closure (?) by kim
Most likely variable heating of the ocean by the sun, most likely mediated by the clouds, most likely by a variety of mechanisms.
======================
Comment on Climate closure (?) by davideisenstadt
ashhat.
really mosh…did he have to ask “will you cite an article for me please?” in order two get a citation from you?
here:
Will you provide a citation for your claim?
You really should be teaching at a community college somewhere….
Comment on Climate closure (?) by davideisenstadt
Sorry Mosh.. that should read “asshat”
Comment on Climate closure (?) by timg56
RE: Lou maytrees
“don’t the Roman & Medieval Warm periods prove that the atmosphere is very sensitive to climate forcings?”
Lou, they don’t “prove” anything. They suggest that climate may be cyclic and/or naturally variable. If past periods of earth’s history experienced temps / climate similar to what is being experienced now, it calls into question the hypothesis that CO2 is the primary influencer of tempertures. So far those pushing the CO2 hypothesis have tried to eliminate these past warm periods or have claimed they were only localized and in no way represent what was happening on a global scale. They could be correct on the latter argument, but so far all they have to base it on is :we don’t have global records for back then”. Unfortunately for this line of reasoning, Chinese researchers have been publishing work that shows similar climate regimes in historic China that correspond to the MWP.
Comment on Climate closure (?) by timg56
This is another of those times that Mosher gets it.
Why argue over the quality of someone’s argument when it is a manufactured issue that was created for reasons other the science you want to argue about.
I wouldn’t read past the title of a paper which talks about target or ideal atmosphere.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by harkin1
Watch the poor hold hands and sing kumbaya in a well lit/heated home.
The horror!
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by ristvan
So, you have some personal choices to make. Be silent and complicit there (not here). Agitate for change there, and if fail, resign. You may identify others more greyscale than such a simple if, then black/white dilemma.
My alma mater will never get another dollar contribution to any of the three schools I graduated from, even though only one committed the offense of tenure hiring Naomi Oreskes. In my world, actions always have consequences.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by ristvan
MH, informed intelligence was never their long suite.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by ristvan
BtS, one of your best ever. Beautiful and pithy.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by Danley Wolfe
Michael Hart – you know already that the liberal policy wonks in all fields come from universities and have no practical experience in “doing” in their fields, rather, they are academics who learn from mentors who learned from mentors etc. so they are certain that based on their academic training and resulting liberal ideology that they know what the right thing is and how to do it. The current administration in key departments include no persons with field experience a) to understand the importance of historical context and motivations from experience over decades, centuries and even millennial time frames in the regions of critical importance, e.g., Middle East. Similar but different in EHS – environmental, health and safety. Key positions are filled with people who are bureaucrats, agree with the storylines, and are willing to draw conclusions based on beliefs not data, unproven hypotheses (hope) to achieve desired outcomes (change) which together spells hope + change. the story line has to agree with personal objectives (such as legacy) facts be damned.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by jim2
Prices go down.
Prices go up.
Seems like people would have learned that extrapolation does not imply knowledge by now. Rookie investors make that mistake all too often.
Comment on Climate closure (?) by Mike Flynn
JCH,
Are you saying that “the climate” was no better in the past when CO2 levels were 310 ppm? What about when levels were 500 ppm? What was so bad about conditions then?
The reason I ask is that CO2 levels were much higher in the past. In order to drop to 310 ppm, they had to pass through 500 ppm, 400 ppm and so on.
So what catastrophic conditions applied when the concentration was 500 ppm? I presume you have some evidence of how wild the climate was, and how uninhabitable parts of the globe were, owing to the searing heat.
In this case, I could understand your fear of CO2 levels increasing to 400 – 500 ppm.
Of course, you have no evidence, because CO2 concentrations have no perceptible or definitive effect on climate or temperature. Like all doomsayers, the catastrophe will happen in the future, and only believers will be saved.
Naturally, if the disaster doesn’t occur on time, new evidence will be found to put off the day of reckoning to a new, even more certain, time in the future.
What a complete load of tosh!
Cheers.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by jim2
Hey, Oz Cousins. Wot’s up with this? Better watch your back. From the article:
…
PLAID, the Australian ‘unbreakable’ smart card identification protocol has been recently analyzed in this scientific paper (disclaimer: I am one of the authors, and this is a personal statement.)
Technically, the protocol is a disaster. In addition to many questionable design choices, we found ways for tracing user identities and recover card access capabilities. The attacks are efficient (few seconds on ‘home’ hardware in some cases), and involve funny techniques such as RSA moduli fingerprinting and… German tanks. See this entry on Matt Green’s crypto blog for a pleasant-to-read explanation.
…
The detailed story of PLAID in the paper is worth a read, and casts many doubts on the efficacy of the most important standardizing body in the world. It is interesting to see how a “cryptography” product can be approved at ISO without undergoing any real security scrutiny.
…
http://it.slashdot.org/story/15/10/28/1537207/australian-plaid-crypto-iso-conspiracies-and-german-tanks
Comment on Climate closure (?) by Mike Flynn
Steven Mosher,
You wrote –
“Ideal is greater than 100. easy peasy”
I believe somebody else has pointed out your ignorance of biology, so I will make no further comment on that front.
You also wrote –
“No one argues there is an “ideal” level. There are ranges at which there are no known ill effects. that does not imply there is an IDEAL
or optimum amount”
So tell us, Steven, what is a range where there are no known ill effects? Or are the ranges simply not known, so nobody can criticise you for being unable to support your silly assertions.
You appear to be saying that CO2 levels need to be reduced because they may cause ill effects of an unknown type. Have I understood correctly?
Is it possible that CO2 levels were higher during the MWP than 1952? Were there known ill effects during the MWP, in comparison with 1952, or did the increased levels at that time have no discernible ill effects?
You are talking nonsense.
Cheers.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by franktoo
Any comments on Hurricane Patricia. Strongest hurricane to hit the west coast of Mexico. No reports of massive storm surge so far. Luck? Hype? Less vulnerable coastline?
Comment on Climate closure (?) by Jim D
Over 0.6 C of warming has occurred since 1950 of the generally accepted 0.8 C total. You could also argue for 0.7 C of 0.9 C using more recent numbers.
Comment on Climate closure (?) by Lou Maytrees
Timg, maybe ‘prove’ was the wrong word, yet it does show that the climate is very sensitive to any kind of forcing, whether it is something cyclical or natural ‘variabilities’ or man made. The claim was that these periods were as warm as now, so if we have 400-500 year periods of warmth (like the Roman) with no known reason for the warming beyond vague ‘variabilities’ or ‘cyclicals’ which no one seems to know how or about, it still shows the climate is highly sensitive.
Comment on Climate closure (?) by Lou Maytrees
opluso, yet your reasoning still shows that the climate is very sensitive to forcings.
Comment on Hypocrisy at universities over oil company funding/divestment by ianl8888
Yes, the Aus Green Blob naggers – wowsers, actually – are protected from a 3rd world existence by our farming and mining industries while simultaneously trying to destroy them
The genuine stupidity of this has always confused me (and I readily admit that stupidity has always confused me, I have never been able to see its’ point), although I now accept it as part of the city-based furniture