What if someone else looks at him and says “You’re wrong, Steven. I estimate he’s 12 feet tall, plus or minus 2 feet.” How would you resolve the difference?
Comment on Simplicity amidst complexity (?) by willb
↧
↧
Comment on Simplicity amidst complexity (?) by Dr Norman Page
Peter Lang Many thanks for the reference. It is a terrific source of very detailed data which will take some time to diges.I will enjoy digging intoit. There certainly seem to be millennial scale quasi periodicities in the Fig you referred to. Thanks again
↧
Comment on Gleick’s Testimony on Threats to the Integrity of Science by les yeux jaunes des crocodiles telecharger
I think the admin of this web page is really working hard for his web page, for the reason
that here every data is quality based data.
↧
Comment on Week in review by jim2
At last! You and I agree! The Feds should get out of the flood insurance business completely! Mark your calendar!
↧
Comment on Simplicity amidst complexity (?) by Danley Wolfe
Related topic. New York Times – ran in Science section of today’s print edition that, UNDER AAAS (SCIENCE) BANNER, a group of consensus scientists have published a “stark report” on global warming: ” “The evidence is overwhelming: Levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are rising,” says the report. ‘Temperatures are going up. Springs are arriving earlier. Ice sheets are melting. Sea level is rising. The patterns of rainfall and drought are changing. Heat waves are getting worse, as is extreme precipitation. The oceans are acidifying.’
Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/science/scientists-sound-alarm-on-climate.html?_r=0
The report download:
http://whatweknow.aaas.org/get-the-facts/
I am VERY curious on the purpose and AAAS sponsoring a full court press on global warming THIS TIME, whether related to the recent Senate all-nighter and possible set up for a new major policy initiative.
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review by kim
Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warning.
==================================
↧
Comment on Bonfire of insanity by Marlowe Johnson
j martin,
the short answer is yes. it’s called a lifecycle assessment. see my previous link. now whether or not you agree with all of their assumptions and sources of data is another story.
here is another study that assesses the GHG benefits of using biomass in lieu of coal.
http://www.pfpi.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/McKechnie-et-al-EST-2010.pdf
↧
Comment on Week in review by Jim D
jim2, now tell that to your congressman. It made sense that insurance reflects true risk when that is a risk of choice. It is the same reason as why life insurance premiums should be higher for racecar drivers. The repeal makes no sense.
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by manacker
Oo ee oo ah ah
Gotta stop that C-O-2 today.
↧
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by John S.
AAAS makes abundantly clear that the “reality” they address is not physical, but polito-sociological!
↧
Comment on UK-US Workshop Part V: Broadening the portfolio of climate information by GaryM
The U.S. government is already “broadening the portfolio of climate information” in its own progressive way, but it ain’t for adaptation.
WUWT has a post about the new government funded website designed to repackage climate data from NOAA and other government agencies.
Here’s NASA’s latest endeavor on expanding scientific knowledge – a study showing the necessity of redistribution of income as the only way to save the world. And no, that is not hyperbole.
“Collapse can be avoided, and population can reach a steady state at the maximum carrying capacity, if the rate of depletion of nature is reduced to a sustainable level, and if resources are distributed equitably,”
http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/here-s-how-nasa-thinks-society-will-collapse-20140318
And then there is the inimitable EPA, which has responded promptly to 28 FOIA requests from Democrat politicians, while it has been unable to complete its response to any of four, count ‘em four, FOIA requests from GOP staff. Apparently there have been some seminars at EPA given by the IRS folks who trashed the constitutional rights of conservatives before the 2010 election.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/18/epa-gives-campaign-paper-trail-to-democrats-little/
So you lukewarmers all go on having your little panels and discussion groups, and keep on drawing up your plans for bridges to political nowhere on the issue of climate.
All while Leviathan is busily ignoring everything you say and do and deconstructing the very democracy around..
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by manacker
David Appell
"Reading" is not "believing"
But to the question of how much global warming we would <em>theoretically</em> see from an increase to 560 ppmv CO2:
Using the estimates for "transient climate response" to a doubling of CO2 of 1.35C warming from the many recent observation-based studies, we would <em>theoretically</em> see global warming of:
1.35C * ln (560 / 395) / ln(2) = 0.7C
Using the higher estimate for "transient climate response" to a doubling of CO2 of 1.9C warming from the model-based predictions of IPCC, we would <em>theoretically</em> see global warming of:
1.9C * ln (560 / 395) / ln(2) = 1.0C
Above is the <em>theoretical</em> GH warming if we ASS-U-ME that <em>all other things are equal</em> (which, of course, they never are).
Max
↧
Comment on UK-US Workshop Part V: Broadening the portfolio of climate information by angech
“On decadal timescales, the scenarios of greatest interest involve extreme weather events. The decadal scenarios are not time series, but rather frequencies of extreme events (including clusters) and worst case scenarios over the target time interval:”
Extreme weather events occur repeatedly throughout history and are conveniently forgotten. The wrecking of the Spanish Armada, the destruction of the two Mongol fleets under Kublai Khan in 1274 and again in 1281. Napoleon’s ill timed advance into Russia in a severe winter.
Hurricanes and Tsunamis.
The key time for Hurricanes is 30 years but an area could miss out if lucky for up to 200 years. Some areas like Florida and Japan are high risk with multiple risk factors. By Definition extreme weather events are neither predictable or preventable.
Strategies must and should include preparation for rescue, support, rebuilding and population rebuilding rather than wasting money on misguided “white guilt” shutting down of western economies.
These always suffer from the Pied Piper response of when disasters go quiet for 30 or more years people forget, become complacent and drop the watchful role [as in Game of Thrones I guess]
↧
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by Curious George
@David Appell: Do you still maintain that the hockey stick doesn’t go past about 1970-1980, due to the divergence problem? Apparently you do not,
I asked you at March 19, 2014 at 6:21 pm. I quote you: “at least read the paper before spouting falsehoods about it.”
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by manacker
Judith Curry
Lemme sell ya a good deal policy covering unicorn damages to your front yard. Real cheap.
Max
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by manacker
David Appell
You ask:
What’s the threshold for melting all of the Greenland Ice Sheet?
- 8,000 years +/- 5,000 years?
- Atmospheric CO2 concentration of 3,000 ppmv +/- 1,000 ppmv?
Take a guess, David.
Max
↧
Comment on UK-US Workshop Part V: Broadening the portfolio of climate information by Mike Jonas
“Are GCMs the best tool?”
No. GCMs are basically weather models, not climate models. They are unsuitable for predicting anything more than a few days ahead. The UK Met Office seasonal predictions demonstrate that they certainly are not useful for one particular region (the UK)..
↧
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by beththeserf
Witch means yer
gonna hafta pay
‘n pay ‘n pay …
oo ee oo ah ah !
↧
Comment on AAAS: What we know by manacker
How much CO2 to get to 6C GH warming?
Try 3500 ppmv, David
Ouch!
↧
Comment on UK-US Workshop Part V: Broadening the portfolio of climate information by pokerguy (aka al neipris)
“So you lukewarmers all go on having your little panels and discussion groups, and keep on drawing up your plans for bridges to political nowhere on the issue of climate.
All while Leviathan is busily ignoring everything you say and do and deconstructing the very democracy around..”
Hey Gary, this is damn good writing. Too bad it’s so depressing. KInd of takes the enjoyment out of reading it.
I never wouldn have thought it possible, but Obama is every bit as bad as Bush in my opinion. Perhaps worse. I hated almost everything about Bush, including what I considered his religiosity.
But could anyone be more dangerously blind and deaf than our current President when it comes to his climate change fanaticism?.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
