Yes, Max,
Great Leaps Forward …
Five Year Plans …
Lots of ass-sump-tions
like the IPCC’s ass-ump-tion,
no, its CERTAINTY
that climate variability
is down to C Oh two.
beth the serf.
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by Beth Cooper
↧
↧
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by Don Monfort
Didn’t you notice that it was your nemesis Judith’s comment, joshie? Surely, you can find something wrong with it. What is she advocating? Does her praise for N-G pass the selective reasoning test? Come on joshie. Think!
Don’t let us down.
↧
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by GaryM
“If natural cycles are regular and repeatable, the net temperature change over one complete natural cycle will be approximately zero. The warming during part of the cycle is cancelled by cooling during the other part of the cycle. What’s left is the long-term rise caused by man.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeotemps.png
I’m just wondering what the human influences were that prevented the Earth’s natural climate cycles from netting out to zero for millions of years before we even existed. Or have climate scientists used their special climate models to prove there were never any natural, regular, repeatable climate cycles until man appeared?
↧
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by Eli Rabett
No negative numbers allowed? 150%-50% = 100%
↧
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by stevepostrel
Natural cycles seem unlikely to leave the planet’s albedo unchanged, so the energy conservation arguments here are overdrawn.
↧
↧
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by Beth Cooper
‘Neatly mechanistic,’ mosomoso, as in a Procrustean bed.
↧
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by Brandon Shollenberger
You should see how bad they are when they try to combine the two. It's almost <a href="http://hiizuru.wordpress.com/2014/01/23/correlation-is-meaningless/" rel="nofollow">unbelievable</a> (also discussed <a href="wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/23/lewandowsky-call-your-office-correlation-is-meaningless/" rel="nofollow">here)</a>.
↧
Comment on The logic(?) of the IPCC’s attribution statement by Bob Ludwick
@ manaker
“Fortunately, most of us (including folks living in Davos) live in democracies.”
Maybe you; you live in Switzerland.
I live in the US, where our former Democratic Republic has been replaced by a Marxist Thugocracy.
They don’t have to worry about such inconveniences as “…..the voting general public of these nations.”; they simply provide a list of what we WILL do and what we WON’T do—or else.
↧
Comment on Open thread by ordvic
Max:
“pre-maturely fuddy-duddy”
But alas pre-mature Believers as well.
↧
↧
Comment on Open thread by RichardLH
AFMD: And the fish bit seems to have been going on for a LONG while
“Fossil evidence going back 1,700 years suggests that Pacific Sardine abundance naturally fluctuates over time. These cycles average about 60 years” ~ Voices of the Bay ~ voicesofthebay@noaa.gov ~ http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/education/voicesofthebay/pdfs/pacificsardines.pdf ~ (Dec 2011) Fishery Basics – California Fisheries
↧
Comment on Open thread by RichardLH
BTW: Nate doesn’t think cascaded running means are FIR filters or can be implemented in WFT! Hence the need to prove me wrong and….
↧
Comment on Open thread by kim
If ‘missing heat’ is going into the oceans, it’s a win/win situation for humanity. It’ll not be in the troposphere where we live, and it will be available at the end of the Holocene. The lose for humanity is if it’s been re-radiated out to space.
I suspect Kevin Trenberth has caught on to this; now he hopes that ‘sloshed’ heat will save the CAGW meme. It may, temporarily, but what’s the long term hopes for that?
It was a massive strategic failure to demonize warmth, and to demonize CO2. These are our friends.
====================
↧
Comment on Open thread by A fan of *MORE* discourse
RichardLH cycle-seeks “It looks like the 60 year pattern is in all the temperature data sets!”
The history of climate-change cycle-seeking is not encouraging, is it RichardHL?
Because cycle-seekers perennially fool themselves XKCD-style, ain’t that right?
![\scriptstyle\rule[2.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}\,\boldsymbol{\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}\,\heartsuit\,{\displaystyle\text{\bfseries!!!}}\,\heartsuit\,\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}}\ \rule[-0.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}](http://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cscriptstyle%5Crule%5B2.25ex%5D%7B0.01pt%7D%7B0.01pt%7D%5C%2C%5Cboldsymbol%7B%5Coverset%7B%5Cscriptstyle%5Ccirc%5Cwedge%5Ccirc%7D%7B%5Csmile%7D%5C%2C%5Cheartsuit%5C%2C%7B%5Cdisplaystyle%5Ctext%7B%5Cbfseries%21%21%21%7D%7D%5C%2C%5Cheartsuit%5C%2C%5Coverset%7B%5Cscriptstyle%5Ccirc%5Cwedge%5Ccirc%7D%7B%5Csmile%7D%7D%5C+%5Crule%5B-0.25ex%5D%7B0.01pt%7D%7B0.01pt%7D&bg=bbffcc&fg=0055ff&s=2 "\scriptstyle\rule[2.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}\,\boldsymbol{\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}\,\heartsuit\,{\displaystyle\text{\bfseries!!!}}\,\heartsuit\,\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}}\ \rule[-0.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}")
↧
↧
Comment on Open thread by john vonderlin
RichardLH,
“And you base this conclusion on what?”
I’m sorry but my relative weighting in my program of the significance of all the changes in the last fifty years. both to me and the fruit and vegetables I consume, is proprietary information. Besides, if I told you, you might find something wrong with my adjustments, and hurt my feelings. my reputation and my chances to obtain grant money.
↧
Comment on Open thread by kim
Why should he tell you, Richard, when all you’ll do is try to find something wrong with it? Sorry to be so explicit, john; you are very funny.
=================
↧
Comment on Open thread by thisisnotgoodtogo
“Fossil evidence going back 1,700 years suggests that Pacific Sardine abundance naturally fluctuates over time”
Thanks! I had been asking what 60 year cycle was John N-G’s 60 years cycles adding up to zero gain.
Anything over that is a man-made sardine.
↧
Comment on Open thread by jim2
If I did the calculation right, we emitted CO2 equivalent to 790,066,915,314 bushels of corn. That’s a lot of bushels! The 2013 corn production was 13.8 billion bushels. As you can see, this much CO2 is a huge benefit to the world!!
↧
↧
Comment on Open thread by Max_OK, Citizen Scientist
ordvic, thank you for the link to the Kate Midddleton story. I’ll quote a little from it.
“Whereas William is used to the smell and the feel of the palace, Kate is used to a more modern, relaxed environment. She felt it had an overriding musty, damp smell, and ordered a six-month supply of her favourite products to override this.”
“The source added: “She’s also thrown pillows around to make it look more minimalist-chic and less fuddy-duddy.”
______
Climate Etc. needs throw pillows.
↧
Comment on Open thread by lolwot
See N-G on the last thread explain how 60 year cycle nets to zero since 1950.
↧
Comment on Open thread by RichardLH
But the tides COULD mean that gravity is behind this all along. Lateral tides operating at about 60 degrees to the orbit plane would be the Greenland to Scotland ridge.
Modulate thermohaline circulation. Possible.
And where does the Jet stream form? Now how COULD a lateral tide affect that? Polar/Ferrel cell boundary anyone.
Just asking.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
