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

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by beththeserf

0
0

The old policy saw…
Defend the realm
and its outer edges,
maintain the grainary
emergency reserves
– else-wise yer lose
the Mandate of Heaven.


Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by Vaughan Pratt

0
0

My position exactly, Jim. Hopefully my immediately preceding link to http://clim.stanford.edu/SeeForcing/ lives up to your standard.

Of course if you insist on knowing the name, rank, and serial number of the sailor who pulled up each and every bucket of water to measure its temperature then you’d be setting a rather high bar. In every science a reasonable line needs to be drawn.

Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by PA

0
0

Vaughan Pratt | November 14, 2015 at 11:56 pm |

While it’s certainly not the same thing, a strong argument can be made that the warming during the 83 years 1900-1982 was caused by phenomena whose combined contribution increased in direct proportion to CO2 forcing.

Well, I could buy that there is some effect that caused warming when the CO2 level took off in the late 1950s and that it saturated around 2000.

As a side note – emissions increased about 50% since 1999 and the annual CO2 increase has only changed 7% (2.06 to 2.2 PPM/y). Before 2000 the two rates of increase were neck and neck.

Something changed around 2000. Perhaps increased plant growth has a cooling effect.

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by human1ty1st

0
0

f aka gc
based on fridays events “cover” doesnt appear to be one of their major priorities.

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by freeHat

0
0

Sounds like a good time to invest in coal.

Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by Vaughan Pratt

0
0
@Bored: <i>when certain activist and NGO stakeholders metaphorically spit in the face of other major actors like entire industries</i> No longer necessary, Bored, now that Exxon Mobil has <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxonmobil-denies-lying-about-global-warming/" rel="nofollow">taken on that job.</a> They spit with an authority NGO's can't hope to match. <i>or a huge number of the sitting politician.</i> No need for that understatement either, Bored. Not merely a "huge number" but, at least in the US, the <i>majority</i> of both the House and the Senate. Although given that each side of the aisle essentially speaks with one voice on such matters, it's unclear whether there's really any significant numerical difference between "huge" and "one". As in "one party". It does make it easier to aim the spit.

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by human1ty1st

0
0

“Iran has apparently already halted centrifuge dissembly on some pretext.”

Presumably we know this sort of thing because of the existence of inspection?

Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by Vaughan Pratt

0
0

@timg56: Identify the fact from the fiction:

timg56’s skill at his own game —100% / 0%


Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by Vaughan Pratt

0
0

@SoF: No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.
– Albert Einstein

That doesn’t even make sense, SoF. You’re driving down a street. Problem: you forgot your wallet. Damn. Solution: U-turn.

How was that remotely like a change in “level of consciousness”?

Society is beset by people quoting eminent philosophers like Popper and physicists-turned-philosopher like Einstein with no ability to see how ridiculous those quotes are.

The general form of that argument seems to be, you and I aren’t geniuses but Popper and Einstein are, therefore you’re wrong.

Brilliant.

Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by Vaughan Pratt

0
0

@SM: The reason they can do this is that skeptics lost the debate.

News to me, Steven. Were the judges in that decision certified free of bias? That’s an important criterion.

Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by Vaughan Pratt

0
0
@DM: <i>I eventually stopped using escort services for the same reason.</i> I thought you said you lived in the SF Bay area, Don. You were unable to find ethical escort services in the area? Have you complained on Yelp?

Comment on Call for an ethical framework for climate services by Vaughan Pratt

0
0

@PA: Well, I could buy that there is some effect that caused warming when the CO2 level took off in the late 1950s and that it saturated around 2000.

I think you’re letting yourself be taken in by short-term fluctuations, PA. Those are completely irrelevant to likely climate in 2100. Consider looking at the bigger picture.

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by jim2

0
0

In this day and age, they can have a virtual meeting. Of course, they would have to settle for virtual prostitutes.

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by richardswarthout

0
0

Tony

The West does not know the mind of radical jihadists or the minds of their many sympathizers. I recommend reading “111 Questions on Islam” by Samir Khalil Samiir, S.J. I also recommend “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements” by Eric Hoffer.

Richard

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by JCH

0
0

“Deranged or alienated individuals – often U.S. citizens or legal residents – can do enormous damage, particularly when inspired by larger notions of violent jihad. That pull towards extremism appears to have led to the shooting at Fort Hood, and the bombing of the Boston Marathon,” he said. “So that’s the current threat: Lethal yet less capable al-Qaida affiliates. Threats to diplomatic facilities and businesses abroad. Homegrown extremists. This is the future of terrorism. We must take these threats seriously, and do all that we can to confront them.” – Obama


Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by kim

0
0

In a way it has already blown up in their faces. The Masques of Paris are off, no one is getting what they want, a postponement, or rearrangement may be just what the doctor ordered.
===========================

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by beththeserf

0
0

…passionate intensity and schadenfreude.

Comment on Week in review – science edition by mwgrant

0
0

PA and TE

Regarding the BEST correlation function. Here is a graphic from the current methodology appendix:

BEST pair-wise correlation: data and model (black line)

* First, note that there is scatter in the ‘data’, i.e., pair-wise correlations [the individual blue dots], as evident in the finite vertical spread of the cloud at every distance. This spread while variable with pair-distance does persist at small distances.

* Second, note that the the spatial structure is evident in the curvature of the blue cloud.

* Third, recall that the correlation value can not exceed one (+1). Thus the scatter at small distance will inevitably is constrained to values at or below +1. It should be obvious then that the spread centers at each distance will be below +1. Hence the nugget is below +1.

* The difference between the correlation function at zero (0) and +1 is then the spatially independent random error–or so it is assumed.

BTW expected is a key word in Mosh’s response.
Note to willis: The correlation function is required for kriging and hence is determined before kriging.

Anyway that is sorta how things are off the cuff.

regards
mw

Comment on Week in review – science edition by mwgrant

Comment on Week in review – politics and policy edition by Don Monfort

0
0

Is that when the genius said that ISIL is JV?

Viewing all 147818 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images