Comment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Jim2
Yep, that’s the way they talk about each other, but trying to influence journals NOT TO PUBLISH competitors work is a horse of a different color. That is NOT how science works.
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Tom
Louise, The scientists of Astrology understand the Zodiac, and are able to predict the future already. So, why do we need AGW scientists too? We can do more, with less.
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Jim Cripwell
Girma you write “Jim, how would you explain the existence of a quadratic function in the temperature record?” I dont even try. I merely ask the question, how can you prove conclusively that what you...
View ArticleComment on Aerosols and Atlantic aberrations by Paul Vaughan
http://i44.tinypic.com/34gncox.jpg
View ArticleComment on Aerosols and Atlantic aberrations by John from CA
Thanks R. Gates, It also relates to the climate hacking craziness. There was a scheme proposed to increase plankton blooms by introducing iron to the oceans. Do they fully understand, if they do this...
View ArticleComment on Letter to the dragon slayers by peteridley
Hi Stephen (ref. http://judithcurry.com/2011/10/15/letter-to-the-dragon-slayers/#comment-191200) thanks for once again trying to enlighten Dougy and maybe, just maybe, he’s starting to move ever so...
View ArticleComment on Letter to the dragon slayers by peteridley
In Feb. 2010 “Slayer” John O’Sullivan wrote an article about the BBC. “Follow the money: BBC exposed in biggest climate racket on planet”...
View ArticleComment on Letter to the dragon slayers by peteridley
In Oct 2009 the general public were made aware of the disingenuous nature of certain aspects of CACC science with the release of the first batch of “Climategate” E-mails. John O’Sullivan may have seen...
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Girma
No. Here is my reading of the IPCC projections 2000=>0.4 deg C 2010=>0.6 deg C 2015=>0.7 deg C 2025 => 0.9 deg C Check the above values here => http://bit.ly/HnYPQf
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Bart R
Just for fun: http://xkcd.com/1040/large/
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by jim
He’s retired or unemployed, as are all the rest of us here
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Bart R
Jim2 It’s simple courtesy to our host. What I lack in quality, I’m endeavoring to make up in quantity. Truthfully, I’m beginning to suspect there’s something wrong with anyone who would post one tenth...
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by jim
The ‘A’ alternative left unwritten…
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by stefanthedenier
Jim D | April 9, 2012 at 1:03 am said: Stefanthedenier, so if I take a temperature now and one hour from now and it changes by 1 degree Jim DJim D, with your thermometer, statistically you can average...
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Bart R
jim | April 9, 2012 at 11:21 pm | He’s retired or unemployed, as are all the rest of us here Sorry; wrong on all counts. A full and healthy family and social life, never blog from (full time) job,...
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Jim D
It works out to be 10000 chicken eggs for every square meter of the earth’s surface over the last century (assuming one egg is equivalent to bringing 1 kg of water to the boil). An average 1 W/m2...
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by WebHubTelescope
So the Captain Kangaroo doesn’t have a deep feel for stochastic processes. That’s why he makes so many mistakes, and why he can’t even tell whether the quote pulling he engages in supports his agenda....
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by stefanthedenier
@ Jim D | April 10, 2012 at 12:01 am | said: It works out to be 10000 chicken eggs for every square meter of the earth’s surface over the last century (assuming one egg is equivalent to bringing 1 kg...
View Article