Hi Judy
Were you just looking at the slides?
Ie you don’t quite get all of what he said..
Ie the co2 equivalence DID include methane, etc.
Why not watch the video of it and perhaps reconsider some of this blog post..
2 parts are available at Climate Realists website
The House of Commons is an important place, where policy is being
made….they need understandable arguments….
Let’s throw the “Likes of the Gleicks” out and get all the Lindzens in….
rejoyce everybody….finally scientific progress!….
JS
Doug, there’s a simpler explanatation, which is accepted by everyone (skeptics and warmists) – only net radiation is heat (or energy) and this Qnet is the sum of all “individual” fluxes (between bodies or across the system boundaries). No need for standing waves or Prevost or whatever.
Your last point is correct.
thermophysics.ru/pdf_doc/ahttv122.pdf
I believe that the Red side is at least smart enough to understand that the Blue’s, as a percentage, are much more likely to possess firearms and therefore fully understand that it is only by utilizing the inherent force of government that they have any chance of imposing their view of society.
Fortunately all attempts to address that problem have met with abject failure.
Dr Curry -
Is there much in the whole climate debate that isn’t relevant to this talk, and therefore this thread?
In slide 19 Lindzen talks about the two necessary ingredients for climate panic – 1) The magnitude of warming and 2) The relation of warming of any magnitude to the projected catastrophe.
I think this misses a third ingredient – the rapidity of warming. Whenever I argue for the extraordinary adaptiveness of both life ingeneral and the human species in particular, I’m invariably told by some doom-endian that it is the speed of the change that’s the problem”, which as far as I know is based on negative imagination and nothing else.
Otherwise, I’m grateful for your comments, especially noting the similarity of confidence between Lindzen’s world view and that of the IPCC (to say nothing of the ultra-alarmists).
You say that, but according to Dellingpole there were only 2 MPs present at Lindzen’s talk. I was disgusted to hear this, but I suppose not really all that surprised.
Fair point Pekka.
Any chance to talk with Dr. Lindzen?????
A. Lacis –
It’s bad enough having all your excuses as to why the stupid toy models are diverging from the real world of facts, but spare usl your excuses as to why Gleick diverged from the real world of sane law-abiding citizens.
I go with open another can – except I prefer bottles. And as I get older, it becomes more likely to be uncork another bottle or pour me another double.
I find it very entertaining to watch news reporters standing on a beach or boadwalk as a hurricane hits land and talk about how danagerous it is. Poll anyone growing up along the SE Atlantic coast and I’m betting you find a large percentage who at least once in their lives enjoyed a hurricane welcoming party.
Barry – I couldn’t find the video. Do you have a link?
David,
Starship Troopers was much better in my opinion. The movie didn’t do it justice.
Vaughan
Of course trains didn’t fit inside the 15 inch pipes. It was more the general principle of evacuation that I thought you would be interested in.
The larger the tube the greater the expense and chance of things going wrong. Your 20m one sounds more feasible than a 100m one although I’m not saying it would work or be practical. Just that the idea -like Brunels-is interesting.
tonyb
Well, because it is the BEST data that is readily available. Do you think BEST land-ocean will be of a different shape, other than the hockey stick I just showed you?
A hockey stick just refers to a shape with “handle” with one slope, and a “blade” with something steeper. I don’t know where you get your other requirements.
“…what do you think is driving the increasing energy in the system as shown in your graph?”
My take is: the most of the increase is driven by the increase in solar cycle frequency (decrease in solar cycle length). This explanation will be put to the test in the next decade. There was a very significant increase in solar cycle length from sc22/23 to sc24, which predicts a significant temperature decrease.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.1954v1.pdf
Vaughan Pratt
The warming trend is in fact far from linear.
It is linear => http://bit.ly/wzkYvi (a LINEAR warming trend of 0.06 deg C per decade with an oscillation of 0.5 deg C every 30 years)
To top it off, the globe is now cooling => http://bit.ly/nz6PFx
juakola and Chris G -
juakola, you don’t see a hockey stick there?
It is every bit as much of one as GisTemp or HadCrut3. Do you need tape on the blade and Wayne Gretsky’s autograph on it? BEST’s blade slope is steeper than most of the other curves, and the handle is just about the same slope as the others. Not seeing it, huh? Wow. You DO know that the blade on a hockey stick is not perpendicular to the handle, right?
It sounds like you are denying the existence of the hockey stick altogether. Does that make you a denier, since you won’t accept the facts in front of you?
And all Chris has to work with on BEST is the land, only, so what do are you asking him to do – beat Muller over the head until he makes one for you?
Steve Garcia
