Comments on: How not to measure temperature, part 66

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 05:02:59 +0000

Behold!

The MMTS.

Famed in song and story.

Most often used for measuring waste heat from air conditioners and car exhaust, with a side of heat sink emanations from nearby structures, parking lots, and rooftops.

By: Emailgoals

Emailgoals — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:34:30 +0000

What the hell is this intrument ?

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 04:26:16 +0000

My very favorite is affluence.

By: Philip_B

Philip_B — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:08:02 +0000

Thanks, Gary.

Although I did have to look up fluences

fluence -
(physics) energy or number of particles crossing (or incident upon) a unit area

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 02:18:24 +0000

You’re on a roll today!

You shoulda seen the one that got deleted!

By: Gary Gulrud

Gary Gulrud — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:15:40 +0000

Philip_B and McGrats:

As Dr. Spencer put it at the Heartland conference, my paraphrase, “The anthropogenic CO2 fluences are 1/24000th that of the natural.”

These are vector quantities, in real time. ‘Balanced’ equations employing flux terms in scalar arithmetic are snap-shots at the end of a chosen time period, and have no other useful function, except to confuse and mislead.

By: Ric Werme

Ric Werme — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 04:33:30 +0000

Evan Jones (14:54:17) :

“We are too old. Yet too young.”

“The Trouble with Tribbles is the positive feedback loops . . .”

And the Club of Rome’s “Limits to Growth” rolled up into one.

By: Jeff Alberts

Jeff Alberts — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 03:37:57 +0000

Leebert, did he go as a NASA employee or on his own dime?

By: cohenite

cohenite — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 03:14:54 +0000

In respect of site problems I have referred to this paper by Runnalls and Oke before;

http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2FJCLI3663.1

On that occasion Dishman straightned out a few misunderstandings on my behalf; the paper looks as though it offers a solution to the microclimate biases that AW is discovering; is it being looked at?

Tilo; great stuff, as usual; you go back to ’98 with HadCrut; wouldn’t the temp decline be even greater if you removed the ENSO effect from UAH and RSS records? I note Tamino interjects at the Real Climate debate on this and refers to a GISS graph from 1880; this graph is a textbook record of PDO flipping over the period.

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/dead-heat/

By: Philip_B

Philip_B — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 03:11:37 +0000

Approximately 90 to 100 Pg of carbon moves back and forth between the atmosphere and the oceans, and between the atmosphere and the land biosphere. Although these exchange rates are large relative to the total amount of carbon stored in the atmosphere, the concentration of CO2 was constant

http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Bi-Ca/Carbon-Dioxide-in-the-Ocean-and-Atmosphere.html

By: REX

REX — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 02:20:55 +0000

Tilo: Lucia at the blackboard has falsified all IPCC projections including Schmidts RC ENSO adjusted. see http://www.rankexploits.com

By: leebert

leebert — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 02:08:01 +0000

Hansen went to the G-8 and gave them his spiel July 4:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/07/402555.html

By: McGrats

McGrats — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:39:39 +0000

Philip B wrote: “I assume the figure of 3% of CO2 in the atmosphere is the amount directly attributable to human activities and ignores the vast quantities of CO2 being constantly cycled in and out of the oceans. CO2 in the atmosphere and the ocean surface are more or less in stable equilibrium over the short term. So whether x% of CO2 comes directly from human activity or from the oceans is irrelevant, because it is in the atmosphere because human’s put x% of CO2 into the atmosphere. The fact the x% is subsequently exchanged with CO2 from the oceans is, as I have said already, irrelevant to why the CO2 is in the atmosphere.”

Although I rarely talk like this, I’d suggest you put your brain in gear before you put your mouth in motion. Do you realize you said nothing in the above paragraph? Can you cite any sources to back up your absurd statements and numbers? You always have a proclivity to rattle off at the mouth without saying anything of substance. Claims here, claims there, but nothing but [snip]

Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:11:58 +0000

Oh, wait…

Heh-heh.

Well, it keeps ‘em honest.

Sort of.

But only after 1979.

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:08:56 +0000

You’re on a roll today!

You’ve been a fantastic audience.