Articles on this Page
- 12/31/18--05:11: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--05:27: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--06:08: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--06:38: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--07:17: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--07:33: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--07:35: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--07:57: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--09:15: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--10:06: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--10:21: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--10:57: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--11:40: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--11:53: _ Comment on Wee...
- 12/31/18--12:50: _ Comment on 201...
- 12/31/18--12:51: _ Comment on 201...
- 12/31/18--13:02: _ Comment on 201...
- 12/31/18--13:16: _ Comment on 201...
- 12/31/18--13:17: _ Comment on 201...
- 12/31/18--13:20: _ Comment on 201...
- 12/31/18--05:11: Comment on Week in review – science edition by bigterguy
- 12/31/18--05:27: Comment on Week in review – science edition by bigterguy
- 12/31/18--06:08: Comment on Week in review – science edition by astroclimatelink
- 12/31/18--06:38: Comment on Week in review – science edition by Ragnaar
- 12/31/18--07:17: Comment on Week in review – science edition by JCH
- 12/31/18--07:33: Comment on Week in review – science edition by bigterguy
- 12/31/18--07:35: Comment on Week in review – science edition by RiHo08
- 12/31/18--07:57: Comment on Week in review – science edition by dpy6629
- 12/31/18--09:15: Comment on Week in review – science edition by jacksmith4tx
- 12/31/18--10:06: Comment on Week in review – science edition by cerescokid
- 12/31/18--10:21: Comment on Week in review – science edition by Robert I. Ellison
- 12/31/18--10:57: Comment on Week in review – science edition by HAS
- 12/31/18--11:40: Comment on Week in review – science edition by jeffnsails850
- 12/31/18--11:53: Comment on Week in review – science edition by matthewrmarler
- 12/31/18--12:50: Comment on 2018 –> 2019 by Mark Strauch
- 12/31/18--12:51: Comment on 2018 –> 2019 by plodinec
- 12/31/18--13:02: Comment on 2018 –> 2019 by The Informed Consumer
- 12/31/18--13:16: Comment on 2018 –> 2019 by The Informed Consumer
- 12/31/18--13:17: Comment on 2018 –> 2019 by sheldonjwalker
- 12/31/18--13:20: Comment on 2018 –> 2019 by Victor Adams
“. Why the 100% correlation between being an elected Republican politician and denialism? Nothing to do with science of course.”
I’m sure the politicians on both sides are not judging on scientific merit, but on the concordance with their political views for the most part. Donkeys see an opportunity to play Santa Claus and salve their consciences at taxpayers expense, while Heffalumps see balloning government expense not involving safety or defense.
What’s your point?
Exactly. Earths climate is a ‘heavily buffered’ system. The oceans provide the buffering. When it gets warm, more water vapor is produced resulting in shielding clouds. When it gets too cold, water vapor condenses allowing more sunlight to reach the surface. This is very fortunate for us, and life in general. We are in the so-called ‘Goldilocks region’ of the solar system that produces conditions where liquid water is relatively stable. Hence, no Venus or Mars results. It would take something truly catastrophic to upset this balance, like a very large asteroid collision. Human produced CO2 is insignificant.
Please go to:
There is a link there to the (Australian Bureau of Meteorology) BOM site where you can generate the rainfall anomaly data. All you have to do is extract the positive anomalies (i.e. set all the negative anomalies to zero) and then do a normalized auto-correlation on the data.
“Ultimately, religion is about the human need for meaning. This need is inherent, not learned. It is a fundamental component of the human condition.”
100% blank slate - No. It is evolutionary and bottom up. It's science.
“...the decline of traditional religion has been accompanied by a rise in a diverse range of supernatural, paranormal and related beliefs.”
At the same time we have all these end of the world conferences.
“This trend can be observed on the basis of age cohort: Young adults, being less religious, are more inclined to believe in ghosts, astrology, clairvoyance and spiritual energy. But it also can be observed geographically: The parts of the United States where secular liberals are predominant tend to be the same areas where the market for alternative spiritual experiences and products is most lucrative.”
And of course, the belief in Green Energy. This path to heaven. This tower of Babel. Propped up with fervored B.S. They'd pick up snakes if that worked.
“Some who reject both traditional and non-traditional supernatural beliefs are attracted to what I refer to as “supernatural-lite.” This label encompasses beliefs that require a leap of faith and have characteristics reminiscent of religion, but do not explicitly rely on the idea of supernatural power. And they often are superficially wrapped up in 'scientific or technological conceits', which make them more palatable to those who do not fancy themselves people of faith (especially men). This includes the belief that intellectually superior aliens are monitoring and even influencing, the lives of humans. Some of these believers have even embraced the idea that extraterrestrials are responsible for human civilization, and will one day welcome us into a larger cosmic community once we reach some baseline level of enlightenment.”
Conceit is the right word. I can think of two famous people. A Green enlightenment. Before global warming, they were cult. Now they are mainstream. Kudos to them for that. Then we have the religious saving the planet. We are in our community of planet savers, except for when Trump got elected. Then various states and cities said, we are not sinners, we are still in the community and will prove it with some wind turbines and proclaim our loyalty. Trump is the devil. Clintons's 500 million solar panels is a thousand points of light.
They need meaning. The writer said so. They have their meaning. Their cross to bear. Their sacrifices. Their floods, their plagues. You look in their Bible and it says, CO2 warms the atmosphere, and when it doesn't, it warms the oceans. They have their prophecies and as my two believer confirmation class teachers had, the prophecies fulfilled. If that's not science, I don't know what is? They at this moment, are adding up numbers to know how much that has been so with the 2018 average GMST. With how many times in the last 10 years their prophecies have been fulfilled. They have their original sin.
It's meaning. If not global warming, what provides meaning in their lives? JCH, and Atomski? Come on. We all did about 10 consensus studies. What's one more about meaning in our lives? A worship of the Earth? A worship of the past climate? To claim that one has risen above evolution and reached a higher plane that has no meaning or the mostest bestest meaning. That's conceit or maybe not, but it might just be honesty. Proclaim ye faith before Gaia and everyone. I want to know. Why would it be a secret with secret handshakes? If I proclaim my faith in fracking I am cast out. But I keep proclaiming it. Deceit is not on the higher plane. That is for sinners.
Honestly, I have no idea what you are on about. Income wise, we're oil and gas, now mostly fracking. Gushers were way better.
OK, there is a correlation between rainfall at one spot and tides. Is this a universal result around the world? Is it linked to volcanism/ earthquakes that are also sensitive to lunar tides? Is it linked to humidity or cloudiness?
This appears to be yet one more factor that has some impact on climate. I guess models do not consider this. Is that significant?
Ragnaar (didn't I meet you someplace before? cold, wind-swept, a spec of land somewhere? between here and there?)
Anyways, I too struggle with religion; not as one struggles like wrestling a bear at an amusement park, rather, I struggle with believers who intrude upon my space. If as you say, or at least many writers have said, religion is a personal experience, derived and evolved during the day-to-day machinations of life, if in that journey one still awakens each day undecided, shouldn't I be content to explore the new day afresh?
What is amazing is that despite a constant barrage of catastrophe narrative press accounts about how every weather event is due to global warming, little has actually been done in terms of mitigation. This shows I think two things. First, mitigation is extremely politically difficult. Second, people have come to distrust the media and scientists based on their track record.
Ragnaar, old man. That's not how all this works...
When we 'pray' to Alexa does she not offer comfort and guidance? (batteries not included).
Dan Brown (author of the Da Vinci Code) previously warned people may no longer worship God or pray to Jesus – instead putting all their faith in an AI messiah. “Humanity no longer needs God but may with the help of artificial intelligence develop a new form of collective consciousness that fulfills the role of religion. Are we so naive today to believe that the gods of the present will survive and be here in a hundred years?”
I was going to suggest you make a correction in your reference to Atlanta, Nebraska and replace it with Atlanta, Georgia. I wasn’t sure if the Atlantans or the Nebraskans would be more offended. However, in checking if there was in fact an Atlanta, Nebraska, I found there was, albeit with a population of only 131 per 2010 census.
I’m glad I never bet anyone as to whether there was an Atlanta, Nebraska.
Just in case someone was going to bet there is no Atlanta, Michigan, don’t do it since there is.
Tipping points are ubiquitous in ecology - and much else - linking these in a preliminary way is an interesting scientific exercise,
FWIW way back when Jim D claimed the IPCC had done a risk analysis. Not really so, in AR5 they have been struggling to move from the Vulnerability analysis used in AR4 to more mainstream risk management techniques. Their fundemental problem however is that in a scenario (eg IPCC) world there is no risk in the emissions pathway because there is no uncertainty. This artificially constrains any subsequent risk analysis. As our hostess observes in her recent piece on sea level rise we need to know the expected pdf. We also need to factor in how that will change in time with increasing information.
"First, mitigation is extremely politically difficult. Second, people have come to distrust the media and scientists based on their track record."
Exactly, but expand on that. How "urgent" is the issue? Mainstream science and activists are happy with a "deal" to allow the world's largest emitter - China - continue increasing emissions until 2030.
Why is it politically difficult? Every ounce of emissions cuts in the west is offset and more by Chinese emissions growth. The entire global "mitigation" strategy at this point is- move all manufacturing to China, hope they care about global warming in a decade or so, if we're wrong about ECS we will still have.. um... wrecked the west.
Why "trust" institutions that think this is a good idea.
2019 needs to be the year somebody cares enough about global warming to have professionals examine alternatives. There is no good reason to spend another year watching people draw squiggly lines on blogs in a vain effort to argue away the consistent failure of observations to point to catastrophe.
astroclimatelink: <i> The autocorrelation confirms that there is a periodicity in the years in which the State of Victoria Australia receives excess rainfall that matches the 18.6-year lunar draconic cycle. Why are people ignoring the evidence that is right in front of their eyes? </i>
Why? Because you do not show the relationship (graph, correlation) between the rainfall and the Lunar Draconic measurements. That the periods are the same is an invitation to investigate, not a final answer.
Happy New Year, and thank you very much for all the work you put into this.
Ditto, and special thanks for the excellent review of sea level rise!
Good news about your hand. "Climate change is like onions, layers." (Shrek.....almost). Keep chopping!
Thanks for your diligence.
And Happy New Year when it comes.
Enjoy your Hogmanay.
Our Scottish tradition is that your First Foot (the first person crossing your threshold in the New Year) should be tall, dark and handsome and should bring with him something to eat (so you don't go hungry in the New Year) and something to heat your house with (traditionally a lump of coal....ironically) so you keep warm in the coming year.
Tall, dark and handsome was allegedly attributed to us being invaded by fair haired Norsemen so a dark Celt was considered lucky. The traditional food offering was a rich fruitcake.......sadly, I'm not rich. :)
(Still no idea why Wordpress persists in announcing me as The Informed Consumer).
Just in time for the New Year, an article which will stop you feeling gloomy about the future.
How far would you need to move towards the nearest Pole, to reverse one degree Celsius of global warming?
You may have already been thinking about moving towards one of the Poles (the North Pole, or the South Pole), in order to avoid global warming. But how far should you go?
Don't worry any longer, this article tells you exactly how far you should move, to get the perfect climate.
Not only that, this article also shows you how to find your pre-industrial paradise.
And there is more. Experience global warming, before it actually happens (that way, you can see whether you like it, or not).
Don't wait any longer, click the following link.
Happy New Year Ms. Judy, you and your blog are an inspiration for many of us non climate scientists, rather engineers in the energy field. From Latin courses, or perhaps Spanish you undoubtedly must have taken in the (far?) past you'll recognize the word roots in the Romanian language traditional New Year greeting, w/o the need for a dictionary: "Anul Nou Fericit cu multa sanatate".