Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Climate Etc.
Viewing all 148479 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Week in review by beththeserf

$
0
0

‘Better understand feedbacks and the oceans.’ Synonymous
fer ‘ observational data lacking fer that pesky man-made human warming.’

O/t. RS, I have the Tononi book ‘ u recommended, ‘Voyage
from the Brain to the Soul.’ Thx, makng the voyage now.

bts .


Comment on Week in review by Jim D

$
0
0

AK, if you can show that per unit of CO2 remediation is less costly than preventing putting the CO2 out in the first place, that would be great. It is much harder to capture CO2 after it is dispersed than before it goes out. Remediation may be part of the solution, like reforestation, but is no substitute for mitigation.

Comment on Week in review by jim2

$
0
0

From the article:

Capitalism in crosshairs as Socialism promoted at opening event of People’s Climate March

Panel member: ‘A socialist world that will deliver a high standard of living for all.’
Bill McKibben: Climate change ‘is the biggest problem that humans have ever been up against’
Naomi Klein: ‘We are dealing with an existential terror’
Sen. Bernie Sanders: ‘We all know what Fox TV does not know. Climate change is real.’

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/09/21/capitalism-in-crosshairs-as-socialism-promoted-at-opening-event-of-people-climate-march/

Comment on Week in review by Jim D

$
0
0

Don M, thank you for your input.

Comment on Week in review by Peter Lang

$
0
0

Rob,

How did you post the graphs?

Comment on Week in review by Don Monfort

Comment on Week in review by willard (@nevaudit)

Comment on Week in review by Rob Ellison

$
0
0

The images have a URL where they are stored – simply paste the address on a separate line.


Comment on Week in review by curryja

$
0
0

The toughest environment I’ve seen was the APS Workshop, with Santer, Held and Collins vs Curry, Lindzen Spencer, with questioning by very intelligent big shot physicists. Koonin’s op-ed reflects his judgement on all that.

Comment on Week in review by Jim D

$
0
0

That doesn’t make the Supreme Court decision any better.

Comment on Week in review by willard (@nevaudit)

$
0
0

> an observation is not a defense.

One does not exclude the other, unless one conflates two levels of descriptions of speech acts.

Comment on Week in review by Bill

$
0
0

The 1.6% is the number of abstracts that explicitly stated that humans cause >50%, correct?

Comment on Week in review by A fan of *MORE* discourse

$
0
0

TJA explains “I don’t actually obsess about hockey sticks […] I think that warmists attempts to snuff the enlightenment are far more important than Mann’s hockey stick”

LOL … if yer not too busy obsessing over us watermelon-commie enlightenment-snuffers … yah might take a look at the right-hand-margin of Figure 2 of S.P. Huang, H.N. Pollack, and P.-Y. Shen A late Quaternary climate reconstruction based on borehole heat flux data, borehole temperature data, and the instrumental record (Geophysical Research Letters, 2008).

Dude, looky-at-the-*BLADE* on that sucker!

\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 Week in review by kim

$
0
0

Assumes facts not in evidence. I expect he thinks he’s helping them, he’s just wrong.
=======

Comment on Week in review by mwgrant

$
0
0

“I’m thinking of reasons this might be a false positive, or more interestingly, not what the authors think”

Could be. To air is human. At least they got in their two scents worth.

Now about the funding…


Comment on Week in review by kim

$
0
0

Heh, a political scientist dabbling in biology and an international relationsist speculating about sociology. What are the chances?
===========

Comment on Week in review by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2

$
0
0

Joseph, “Is that similar to the global warming is a hoax argument?”

Pretty much. AGW is being portrait as the problem to end all problems. Something so dire that Manhattan style projects are required to resolve. Some have even recommended that democracy be suspended until the intellectual elite can determine the level of austerity that will be needed to save the world from this greatest of all threats, ourselves.

The globe is warming and some portion is undoubtedly due to mankind, but the upper limit, that 4.5 C, is looking less and less likely while the AGW faithful increase their screams for urgent action and the need for their pet world saving plan of attack. They have been shown to bend the truth for their noble cause which could lead rational folks to believe the catastrophic side of AGW is a hoax.

Of course you wouldn’t think such a thing, would you?

Comment on Week in review by PA

$
0
0

The problem is the scaremongering (global warming, radiation, etc.) induces stress – stress killed more Japanese than the Tsunami (the argument if anyone was killed by radiation is still underway).

The solution is allow criminal and/or civil class action against people that fraudulently scaremonger. Jailing or bankrupting these hooligans will make everyone healthier.

Comment on Week in review by mwgrant

$
0
0

What are the chances?

Kim – I don’t know, never studied bozon statistics.

Comment on Week in review by kim

$
0
0

Coal or nukes ’til there are energy breakthroughs. China has both trains on high speed rails.
===============

Viewing all 148479 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images