Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel


Embed this content in your HTML

Search

Report adult content:

click to rate:

Account: (login)

More Channels


Showcase


Channel Catalog


older | 1 | .... | 4117 | 4118 | (Page 4119) | 4120 | 4121 | .... | 4134 | newer

    0 0

    Your readers may find this interesting: An Einstein Thought Experiment on Climate Change https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2019/01/12/an-einstein-thought-experiment-on-climate-change/

    0 0

    Why refer to a three year old publication about the Cascadia "big one"?

    0 0

    The Bulgarian team thanks you very much for your efforts. We will spread the correction to the media we can connect too, but it will not be easy. In the time of Tsjernobyl there was a taboo on ‘negative news for the health of people’, but nowadays there is some taboo on news towards ‘there is nothing wrong with the oceans/earth temperature’. Strange evolution, but we can only do our best to stay as objective as possible. Жан марк ван белл +je

    0 0

    Yes Robert, That is the point raised against the new Trenberth et al paper. The changes in heat content they are talking about correspond to quite small temperature changes. It's hard to believe we can measure hundreds or even thousandths of a degree accurately. Yet their recent error bars are quite narrow.

    0 0

    On the Feynmann smear, observe there are no verse, page or chapter references. My memory of the book matches none of the allegations seeking to impeach his character.

    0 0

    No - that's not the point at all. The Argo instruments themselves are precise and rugged and there are 1000's of them. Random error here - the error bars - is minor and self cancelling. I doubt that there is much systematic bias in Argo either. I had wondered if the early Argo record was reliable - in comparison with CERES. https://watertechbyrie.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/ocean-heat-and-power-flux.jpg Blue is Argo. I'm not sure that using Argo average warming rates to intercalibrate energy in and energy out is not the source of the disparity. And I am not about to waste my time on any WUWT blog post.

    0 0

    What's the difference between my 'Frankenstein theory' and the crude and eccentric musings of cranks? I think science is right - they have some new and unheralded - if excruciatingly simplistic - geophysics.

    0 0

    God - as it turned out long ago - does play dice with the universe.

    0 0

    You need to convert W/m2 from Ceres to degrees C via some energy calculation don't you?

    0 0

    Where there is unlawful action or breaches of employment contracts - then things should take their course. But this is a witch hunt - and I draw the parallel deliberately - played out on social media - where there is no right of appeal or redemption - over what far too often seems trivia. Even Kevin Spacey and a drunken boy in a bar seems less than world shattering - let alone Feynman or Einstein seen through the distorting mirror of time. What is it with these delicate flowers and the new self serving progressive puritanism? Just say no ffs.

    0 0

    The monthly average energy imbalance could be converted to energy entering or leaving the system by multiplying by seconds in a month. Likewise ocean temperature can be converted to Joules using the specific heat of water. My point was to show how the quantities in their original units co-varied. Your point is?

    0 0

    Thanks for the referent links, Dr. Curry.

    0 0

    Robert I. Ellison, Are you able to tell me exactly what you don't like about "The Comb of Death"? I know that I have a "lame" sense of humour. But I find global warming so depressing, that I use "humour" to help me cope. Do you object to me using real temperature data for over 24,000 locations on the Earth? Has anybody else ever done this? I believe that my articles offer a "fresh" perspective on global warming. I combine my love of science, mathematics, and computer programming, to produce unique insights into global warming. I am an expert at using Excel, and I can analyse enormous amounts of data, and produce interesting graphs to display the results. I have analysed the gridded GISTEMP temperature data, and worked out the warming rate for every 2 x 2 latitude longitude cell. It took me 7 days of continuous downloading, to get the temperature data for over 24,000 locations on the Earth. I love the challenge of doing "impossible" things. I try to make my articles scientifically correct. I know that not everybody likes my humour. Dave Fair obviously gets my "lame" humour. I am writing for people like him. I don't mind people criticising my articles. But I prefer constructive criticism, to simple abuse. I am prepared to listen to your point of view. I try to learn from people who disagree with me. I don't know everything. But I try to do the best that I can.

    0 0

    This is about the most cogent thing he has ever said. All the rest is hidden within such dense, self indulgent verbosity that any point - if any there is - is lost in verbiage. Trees and forest - if any of these surface temperature trees are both real and meaningful. How would we ever know? Science has a formal structure for a reason - the lack of structure and clarity has the purpose of obfuscation and polemics. Both of which I find tedious - especially so when the same comment is repeated. I can ignore it for awhile - and far from random abuse this is just a reminder to keep it original and relevant.

    0 0

    Robert, your mental rigidity (insistence on "formal structure") inhibits your ability to understand truths as presented by unconventional minds. Since I have a fairly conventional mind, I find Sheldon's take refreshing and insightful, as well as really funny. Who knows, maybe some scientist will take his ideas and develop them into peer reviewed papers? I suggest you might sit back, relax and enjoy Sheldon's twisted but truthful site-specific temperature examination and his unique take on temperature analyses and how minuscule changes are exaggerated in the popular press.

    0 0

    I've been the butt of many jokes, Robert. I try to laugh along, even with the ones that hurt. Sheldon likes to laugh at himself. You, on the other hand, seem to lack the necessary self-awareness for personal deprecatory humor. In other words, you take yourself too seriously; you are not always right in your assessments.

    0 0

    Re the link on Saharan dust, the chronological datum is too large for effective ‘dissection’ of what has taken place from proxies. On shorter time-scales things are very different. Example: The ups and downs during the Holocene were smoothened out. Another point there; the ‘summer insolation’ curve is a maths construct based on a study of an “Assumed” very stable earth dynamic. Abrupt and transient changes were ignored, -assumed non-existent- but evidence shows they happened. Also there are three thousand years of obliquity measurements and there is no agreement with that polynomial construct. That latter study is here: https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/pdf/2004/46/aa1335.pdf It provides a history of what is now dogma. But a whole host of proxies from holocene say otherwise.

    0 0

    sheldonjwalker, don’t use sarcasm on the internet, people quikly conclude that it is your actual opinion and you'll waste all your precious time on rebutting your own messages.

    0 0

    Sheldon you say in your link: <i>I use a “standard” amount of global warming in each “Comb of Death” graph. This keeps it simple. People are generally not terrified by the thought that “cold” places will have a slightly warmer summer (they probably see it as a good thing).</i> Indeed global warming is predominantly occurring in arctic winter, as surface emission is proportional to the fourth power of temperature. https://klimaathype.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/sbsensitivity.png

    0 0

    yup

older | 1 | .... | 4117 | 4118 | (Page 4119) | 4120 | 4121 | .... | 4134 | newer