Alistair, You can get extra points depending on where on the planet you come from.
So far you don’t classify because you seem more intellectually curious than dogmatically persistent about some wild theory.
Comment on Overconfidence(?) by WebHubTelescope (@WHUT)
↧
↧
Comment on Overconfidence(?) by Rob Ellison
The system is frequently in equilibrium. That it is also dynamic is pretty much the point.
I suppose there might be some energy sequestered somewhere for millions of years – fossil fuels for instance .
But we were talking about ENSO and not nonsensical distractions.
The accounting is statistical – and the globe warms and cools from the oceans to the atmosphere to space.
↧
Comment on Overconfidence(?) by Alistair Riddoch
Hi R Gates,
You seem very serious about ocean temperatures and movements, with good cause, I believe.
I also believe I can add to the pile of information you can draw upon in your estimations/thoughts.
I strongly suggest you go to: http://geoid.colorado.edu/grace/dataportal.html
And look at monthly anomolies, smoothing radius 25km and pick ANY month in 2002, any month in 2008 and any month in 2013. Add to that the polarity flip of the sun, and then look at the gravity anomolies on Greenland in those three years. It goes from dark green outside and grey inside, to grey inside and dark green outside.
I think you asked before about ocean area gravity anomolies, and it doesnt look like it, it is all white over water.
There are “geoids” (or some such), that look like whole globes that may provide some visual information. I don’t know where they be viewed in different time periods. You can search the pottsdam potato.
Sorry if this is not new to you, but I believe you will find the information fascinating, if you weren’t aware of it already.
Are the oceans part of the equation, I think you will be found correct. I think they recieve more heat from the equatorial mantel during some periods of the solar cycle. The off peak, radiance speaking. Meaning they would oscillate on a 5.75 year or perhaps half of that (if the double bulge of the moon caused tide, is an indicator of half cycles). So depending on the time frame between el ninos/ el ninas average cycle, gravity phase change may be an part of the picture you are painting. :-)
Hope this is helpful, and not redundant.
↧
Comment on Climate Smart Development by Tom Fuller
On the other hand, lots of companies do leave potential savings unrealized due to a variety of reasons, ranging from lack of capital to other priorities to just lack of time. I went round and round with this with Jeff Id a couple of years ago. This argument hasn’t changed. Energy efficiency savings can pay for their cost in 8 years or so and are still not implemented.
↧
Comment on Climate Smart Development by Tom Fuller
I gotta say, cities like Shanghai that recognize that you can actually use 3 dimensions are very liveable.Population 26-29 million (nobody really knows any more), compact size, high density. And it’s a wonderful city.
Pity about the air pollution, though. Shanghai is ringed by an industrial belt powered by coal, coal, coal.
↧
↧
Comment on Climate Smart Development by Tom Fuller
White courtesy phone for Paul Kelly–Mr. Kelly, you are requested to participate in this discussion. White courtesy telephone Mr. Paul Kelly…
↧
Comment on Overconfidence(?) by Alistair Riddoch
Mr Ellison, Mr Gates,
May I perhaps ask?
Your back and forth, at it’s root, is???
One believes in CO2 as a cause, one doesn’t??
One believes in the oceans as a significant trigger, one doesn’t??
I haven’t read all your stuff, back and forths get tiresome to me, when I see no headway.
Maybe you could both consider. (I find you both bright / level headed)…
I think one says, oceans don’t change the amount of earths energy?
but friction from tides does. and that changes as the gravity of the earth shifts back and forth, equator, pole, equator/pole.
And ice has special properties to consider to do with freezing and unfreezing. (hot water really does freeze faster, and pure water at -25 wont form ice, but smack it and it does, or stir it and it does. weird stuff with ice, heat trapping and releasing. the glaciers in greenland can suddenly have a mile thick melt internally, and it can suddenly refreeze again.
Also clouds contain ice, where lightning forms. lightning is significant energy transfer and almost unquantified/tracked as far as I can tell. Lightning also creates GHG, and affects local magnetic and gravitational field strengths.
I’m saying there’s lots of mysteries to go around. But you two seem stuck on arguing over trees in a forest.
More time spent researching, and less time spent bashing and refuting and we probably have the brain power and political acumen in this crowd, to actually make some knowledge progress and do a good thing.
Or we can chew each others butts, and clog the blog with mostly personal, limited purpose stuff.
Can’t we just all get along?? Respect that we haven’t walked a mile in each others shoes? We don’t know what each other know, only what we manage to put into words, in an imperfect language, deprived of tone and hand gesture. Sometimes that can be a tough go.
Perhaps forbearance could be considered virtuous, in the interests of a brainstorming modus, and more productive??
Cheers
:-)
Alistair
↧
Comment on Overconfidence(?) by Rob Ellison
It is quite simple really. Anomalies are changes in forcing and are remarkably accurate.
Energy in – http://lasp.colorado.edu/data/sorce/total_solar_irradiance_plots/images/tim_level3_tsi_24hour_640x480.png
Fluctuation of some 0.25W/m2 at the surface in the 11 year cycle. Constant average.
Interannual variation – but no trend.
No warming in the period? If only only we had the ocean data to confirm it.
You can break down the outgoing into SW and IR – which is quite interesting.
http://s1114.photobucket.com/user/Chief_Hydrologist/media/CERES_MODIS-1.gif.html?sort=3&o=200
webby call what he does digging deeper? A matter of interpretation. I call it homeopathic math and freaky physics culminating in dodgy curve fitting.
↧
Comment on Overconfidence(?) by Rob Ellison
The back and forth is about the ill-informed and ill-mannered with constant drive by abuse. Their intention is not to understand but defend the groupthink. They are dedicated progressive activists.
I occasionally get bored with it – and answer back.
↧
↧
Comment on Overconfidence(?) by Brandon Shollenberger
I find it amusing I’m included on that list with basically nothing stated about me save I went to ITT Tech. Given I’ve repeated demonstrated solid skills in the IT field in blog discussions, citing where I attended is pointless. It’s also funny because the only reason anyone found out where I attended is people sought out information about me as a person. It speaks poorly of people when they try to make issues of trivial points. It’s sort of like how WebHubTelescope routinely says my comments are good for high school debates as his only rebuttal. If people/comments are as bad as he says, why can’t he muster better rebuttals?
(He also includes what is either a willful delusion or lie, that I dismiss things by saying they “make no sense” and nothing more. Anyone who actually bothers to read my comments where I say things don’t make sense will inevitably find me detailing why the thing in question makes no sense. WebHubTelescope, willard and others like to ignore that just so they have ammunition for their smear campaign. Because that’s apparently all they have for it.)
↧
Comment on Open thread by Diag
Why the C in CAGW? Simple, without fear there would just be apathy. 2 degrees warmer? Oh, that’s nice.
There’s a shortage of things to fear. Generations after the war had The Bomb to fear. The population bomb was also a dud. The environment was saved, all the way from whales to snails. Ozone is passé. We only had five years to save the climate…. oops! another dud.
↧
Comment on Open thread by Ragnaar
Jim D:
Tsonis et al 2007,
“One of the most important and mysterious events in recent climate history is the climate shift in the mid-1970s. In the northern hemisphere 500-hPa atmospheric flow the shift manifested itself as a collapse of a persistent wave-3 anomaly pattern and the emergence of a strong wave-2 pattern.”
I think it was Jennifer Francis who indicated we are now at something like a wave-3 anomaly pattern. My interpretation being at about the time of the 2001 climate shift:
http://robertscribbler.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/francis_amplification.png
Another guess of mine is that a strong wave-2 anomaly pattern segregates the equator from the North Pole as far as heat transport goes. I may have rose colored glasses on, but as Tsonis indicated above, it looks like a regime change.
And I think it was
↧
Comment on Open thread by Jim D
Apart from world government, which will come up again as the main topic for Paris according to him, his other main thesis is that Obama is going after coal, and using climate change as a made-up excuse to do that, because they are the main funders of the Republicans, so by shutting them down (over a few decades) they won’t be able to fund the Republicans anymore. Seems in the meantime they would fund the Republicans even more, so this doesn’t add up. I think Alex Jones fell for it.
↧
↧
Comment on Open thread by David L. Hagen
<b>Should EPA be allowed to impose rules and garnish wages for fines it decides without Congress or court order?</b>
<a href="http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/07/the-epa-now-trying-to-garnish-citizens-wages/" / rel="nofollow">Roy Spencer links </a>to <a href="http://dailysignal.com/2014/07/03/epa-harasses-americans/" / rel="nofollow">EPA Harasses Americans</a>
<blockquote> . . . Chantell and Michael Sackett of Idaho were similarly threatened by the agency with fines of $75,000 per day for seeking to build a home on a small lot situated between two other lots that already had homes, an action the EPA claimed the couple could not even challenge. The Sacketts challenged it anyway, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court, where they won a unanimous verdict. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the court’s decision stating that, “In a nation that values due process, not to mention private property, such treatment is unthinkable.” Scalia went on that “there is no reason to think that the Clean Water Act was uniquely designed to enable the strong-arming of regulated parties into ‘voluntary compliance’ without the opportunity for judicial review—even judicial review of the question whether the regulated party is within the EPA’s jurisdiction.”
While the Supreme Court may have found that the Sacketts and, consequently, folks like Johnson, do have some recourse to challenge administrative compliance orders from the EPA, those who fall into the agency’s sights may now face a new and crushing hurdle: wage garnishment. Just how many people could endure challenging the EPA’s regulatory actions—no matter how indefensible—if they faced fines that the agency could garnish from their wages? How many can be coerced into “voluntary compliance”? .. . .</blockquote>
See <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/232509922/CommentsTheHeritageFoundationonDirectFinalRuleGarnishmentFRL-9910-14-OFCO" rel="nofollow">Detailed letter opposing the EPA by the Heritage Foundation</a>
↧
Comment on Open thread by WebHubTelescope (@WHUT)
”
Is the fact that the difference matches the greenhouse effect of 33.0 C give or take 1.0 C a coincidence?
“
Coincidences are not science.
↧
Comment on Open thread by Ragnaar
Here they attempt to raise questions about Lomborg:
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/06/25/millions-behind-bjorn-lomborg-copenhagen-consensus-center
I’ve looked at their form 990 at GuideStar.
The one thing that stands out is Lomborg’s annual compensation for 2012 which is North of $700k. However, no compensation was paid for the years 2010 and 2011. When the 2013 return is available it will be interesting to see if his compensation stays the same?
At the Lomborg link at the top of this post I thought he’s done a good job of getting Bill Gates to go along with him, and communicating his message. If the question is, what is a climate moderate supposed to be doing, one answer is to keep in mind people like Gates.
↧
Comment on Open thread by R. Gates
Monckton is always entertaining. A knee-slapping good chuckle for sure.
↧
↧
Comment on Open thread by jim2
From the article:
…
Ordinary Internet users, American and non-American alike, far outnumber legally targeted foreigners in the communications intercepted by the National Security Agency from U.S. digital networks, according to a four-month investigation by The Washington Post.
Nine of 10 account holders found in a large cache of intercepted conversations, which former NSA contractor Edward Snowden provided in full to The Post, were not the intended surveillance targets but were caught in a net the agency had cast for somebody else.
Many of them were Americans. Nearly half of the surveillance files, a strikingly high proportion, contained names, e-mail addresses or other details that the NSA marked as belonging to U.S. citizens or residents. NSA analysts masked, or “minimized,” more than 65,000 such references to protect Americans’ privacy, but The Post found nearly 900 additional e-mail addresses, unmasked in the files, that could be strongly linked to U.S. citizens or U.S.residents.
…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-nsa-intercepted-data-those-not-targeted-far-outnumber-the-foreigners-who-are/2014/07/05/8139adf8-045a-11e4-8572-4b1b969b6322_story.html
↧
Comment on Open thread by jim2
From the article:
The U.S. will remain the world’s biggest oil producer this year after overtaking Saudi Arabia and Russia as extraction of energy from shale rock spurs the nation’s economic recovery, Bank of America Corp. said.
U.S. production of crude oil, along with liquids separated from natural gas, surpassed all other countries this year with daily output exceeding 11 million barrels in the first quarter, the bank said in a report today. The country became the world’s largest natural gas producer in 2010. The International Energy Agency said in June that the U.S. was the biggest producer of oil and natural gas liquids.
“The U.S. increase in supply is a very meaningful chunk of oil,” Francisco Blanch, the bank’s head of commodities research, said by phone from New York. “The shale boom is playing a key role in the U.S. recovery. If the U.S. didn’t have this energy supply, prices at the pump would be completely unaffordable.”
Oil extraction is soaring at shale formations in Texas and North Dakota as companies split rocks using high-pressure liquid, a process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The surge in supply combined with restrictions on exporting crude is curbing the price of West Texas Intermediate, America’s oil benchmark. The U.S., the world’s largest oil consumer, still imported an average of 7.5 million barrels a day of crude in April, according to the Department of Energy’s statistical arm.
…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-04/u-s-seen-as-biggest-oil-producer-after-overtaking-saudi.html
↧
Comment on Open thread by jim2
And then there’s this. I guess this is really scary to Scotts.
…
REDHEADS could become extinct as Scotland gets sunnier, experts have claimed.
The gene that causes red hair is thought to be an evolutionary response to the lack of sun in Scotland.
Redhead colouring allows people to get the maximum vitamin D from what little sun there is.
Only one to two per cent of the world’s population has red hair but in Scotland the figure is about 13 per cent, or 650,000 people.
However, the figure could fall dramatically – and even see redheads die out completely in a few centuries – if predictions that the country’s climate is set to become much sunnier are true.
Dr Alistair Moffat, boss of genetic testing company ScotlandsDNA, said: “We think red hair in Scotland, Ireland and the north of England is adaptation to the climate. We do not get enough sun and have to get all the vitamin D we can.
“If it was to get less cloudy and there was more sun, there would be fewer people carrying the gene.”
…
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/climate-change-could-make-red-3814089
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
