Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Climate Etc.
Viewing all 147842 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Berkeley Earth Global by Mi Cro

0
0

If they were all based on hard measurements they wouldn’t, but they all make up the missing edges differently. Beyond that does it matter, none of them give a real value.
BTW, I’ve read Steve say BEST does a better job on the Arctic, and that’s why their number is higher.


Comment on Berkeley Earth Global by RichardLH

0
0

Mi Cro: We basically have 2 different sets of basic instruments, interpreted in 5 different ways.

The satellite data is interpreted in 2 ways, the thermometer in 3.

There are only 2 underlying instrument series. One would expect, all other factors being equal, that the 2 series interpretations would be similar, with small detail differences. The satellite ones are very close together, 2 of the 3 thermometer ones are. Why should we place any reliability in the one series which grossly differs from them all?

Comment on Berkeley Earth Global by Mi Cro

0
0

RLH, none of the surface series represent the actual measurements well.

Comment on NAS/RS Report on Climate Change: Evidence and Causes by omanuel

0
0

Thanks, Alistair, take your time. No complicated math, but many precise experimental measurements that indicate the entire solar system formed directly from heterogeneous debris of a supernova explosion five billion years (5 Ga) ago.

NASA’s active opposition to this information was recorded by a CSPAN news video on 7 Jan 1998:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m3VIFmZpFco

Comment on NAS/RS Report on Climate Change: Evidence and Causes by omanuel

Comment on Berkeley Earth Global by RichardLH

0
0

Mi Cro: I could make the same observation about the satellite also. All the series have their difficulties and challenges. All suffer from one form of under sampling or another. All will,, therefore, be proxies to the ‘real’ underlying figure, some closer than others.

Comment on Week in review by angech

0
0

Joshua | March 3, 2014 at 9:15 pm angech – What mechanism is it that you think has “paused?”
The rise in recorded temperatures at earth surface and sea level has paused for the past 17 years [1 study]. Others nearly as long.
I did not mention a mechanism that has paused but am interested that you feel it might be a mechanism?
The cause for the pause may be
accidental all the hot air sank into the sea.
incidental it will go up again, or down
occidental only happens on western world thermometers
conspiratorial don’t let them know
or enemy action.
The mechanism has to involve the heat from the sun which has only to change a trivial amount in a trivial [for the sun] time to cause vast changes here and the way in which the heat is distributed as it re radiates which it must and the variances in orbits and inclinations.
Volcanoes, asteroids and internal earth heat play a minute , mainly irrelevant part.
The earth’s atmosphere’s temperature has gone one way then the other at a slow enough rate for life to have survived a billion years or more without life freezing or roasting to none existence.

Comment on Habits of a complex mind by andrew adams

0
0

When they stray into becoming “advisors for policymakers” or, worse yet, advocates or salesmen for a political cause, they lose their scientific objectivity. As a result, they are no longer scientists and, hence, are out of their depth.

But scientific issues often have policy implications and surely we want our policymakers to make properly informed evidence-based decisions. To do this they need to get proper advice from people who have relevant expertise, and on the specific scientific questions who should they get this from if not from scientists themselves?

We don’t fund scientific research just for the purpose of increasing the sum of human knowledge (although that is indeed a worthwhile endeavour). We do it because it often has practical implications for human societies and civilisation. So it is unrealistic to think that science can be somehow separated from political concerns.


Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by A fan of *MORE* discourse

0
0

BREAKING NEWS
data analysis shows
CLIMATE ETERNALLY IN “PAUSE”

Considered objectively, the “Fallacy of the Eternal Pause” exhibits five characteristic elements of denialist cognition:

Denialism: what is it
and how should scientists respond?

by Pascal Diethelm and Martin McKee (2009)

Denialism is a process that employs some or all of five characteristic elements in a concerted way.

•  The first is the identification of conspiracies.

•  The second is the use of fake experts.

•  The third is selectivity [cherry-picking].

•  The fourth is impossible expectations.

•  The fifth is misrepresentation and logical fallacies.

Denialists are driven by a range of motivations. For some it is greed, lured by the corporate largesse of the oil and tobacco industries. For others it is ideology or faith, causing them to reject anything incompatible with their fundamental beliefs. Finally there is eccentricity and idiosyncrasy, sometimes encouraged by the celebrity status conferred on the maverick by the media.

It is necessary to shift the debate … exposing to public scrutiny the tactics denialists employ and identifying them publicly for what they are. An understanding of the five tactics listed above provides a useful framework for doing so.

SUMMARY  Climate-change denialism ain’t complicated … its five elements are plain … the “Fallacy of the Eternal Pause” exhibits these denialistic elements … denialist cognition is sure is common … and civil, rational, scientific responses to denialism are feasible.

The “Fallacy of the Eternal Pause” is *NOT* complicated, Climate Etc readers!

\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 Causes and implications of the pause by Joshua

0
0

For steve’s benefit, I’ll repeat the question.

What is the mechanism, that previously caused surface warming, that has currently “paused?

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by steven

0
0

I can’t believe comparing Web to a hamster running in a wheel was deserving of deletion. That is exactly what he does. It was a scientific observation and there is plenty of data to support it.

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by Mike Flynn

0
0

stefanthedenier,

I agree – more or less, as usual.

I believe it is beyond the bounds of present technology to measure global surface temperatures with any well defined level of precision.

In any case, given that the frozen crust of the Earth is proportionally about the thickness of the skin of an apple, talk of measuring changes in the energy content of the Earth is nonsensical. All we can say is that the Earth is cooling, and anybody who doubts this needs to either demonstrate verifiable measurements to the contrary, or alternatively make an appointment with the Department of Reality Readjustment.

I agree with you – the cause of the pause is the flaws.

Live well and prosper,

Mike Flynn.

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by Bob Droege

0
0

How can you argue anything with such R2 numbers?

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by WebHubTelescope (@WHUT)

0
0


Jim D | March 5, 2014 at 1:29 am |

The quasi-60-year cycle has an amplitude of +-0.1 C.

This is true. In the CSALT model, the contribution of LOD is at best +/- 0.1C.
This pales in comparison to the 0.9C change in temperature the last 130 years and almost 1.3C on land.

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by popesclimatetheory

0
0

Green-House gases was a really bad choice for a name for Water Vapor and CO2. These gases do actually cool the Earth. A warmer Earth will give off more IR and get more cooling. The CO2 warming influence is very small. The CO2 cooling influence is larger. The cooling influence of Water Vapor is huge compared to whatever CO2 does. They claim they understand the feedback of the really small influence of CO2 on Water Vapor and Clouds and they get the extreme warming from that which has not happened in the past seventeen years.

I really believe something is going on that they don’t understand. I don’t think they even suspect.

It always gets cold after warm and they think that what always has happened before will never happen again.

There is something really really wrong with that logic.


Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by Bob

0
0

El Nino paused Josh.

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by Bob K.

0
0

“The most recent climate model simulations used in the AR5 indicate that the warming stagnation since 1998 is no longer consistent with model projections even at the 2% confidence level.”
This is a difficult statement to parse. Do you mean the P-value is less than .02 with the model taken as the null hypothesis?

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by popesclimatetheory

0
0

Evaporation cools water and warms air. This does not warm or cool the Earth, it just moves the heat from place to place.

IR can leave the Earth. That does all the cooling.

Albedo reflects light before it becomes heat. Albedo is adjusted to do the fine tuning of Earth’s Temperature. It always snows more when oceans are warm and polar ice is thawed and Albedo increases. It always snows less when oceans are cold and polar ice is frozen and Albedo decreases.

The temperature that Polar Sea Ice Freezes and Thaws is the thermostat. It is the Set Point.

When this ocean temperature is exceeded it always causes the snowfall that will cause more Albedo.

When this ocean temperature is not exceeded it always causes less snowfall and allows the sun to reduce Albedo.

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by Bob Ludwick

0
0

@ Pierre-Normand

“…and sea levels have proceeded to rise at an undiminished rate during the pause by magic.”

Magic?? Of course not; sea level has continued to rise because the CO2 content of the atmosphere has continued to rise monotonically during the ‘pause’. Atmospheric CO2 is the only significant planetary variable that influences sea level. Control ACO2 so that total atmospheric CO2 flatlines and sea level will flatline in response.

I know that you are familiar with the hundreds (thousands?) of papers and media reports on the threat posed by the fact that ACO2 is causing the seas to rise rapidly (currently as much as 3 mm/year) so I assume that when you referred to ‘magic’ you were just ‘yanking our chains’ by being facetious.

Comment on Causes and implications of the pause by Mike Flynn

0
0

Joshua,

When you talk about surface warming, can you actually provide useful definitions of surface and warming?

It seems that the usual Warmist obfuscation precludes actually defining such terms. I note that surface temperature readings are not actual surface readings which have been, strangely enough, recorded as surface (ground) temperatures by meteorological observers.

Additionally, warming seems to be often defined by Warmists as a reduction in the rate of cooling, to my knowledge.

If you are not prepared to provide mutually agreeable definitions about basic terminology, you may experience difficulty in convincing others in regard to the logic of your arguments.

Live well and prosper,

Mike Flynn.

Viewing all 147842 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images