Since this is a holiday weekend, and after the bombshell Spencer and Braswell revelation today, there’s not much else besides watching tropical storm Lee and Hurricane Katia this weekend.
I have several things to do in the home improvement realm that have been neglected while I work on WUWT and other projects, and I need to step away for a bit. I may update WUWT if something happens related to tropical weather, and guest authors are welcome to post. But I don’t plan to spend much time online this weekend.
Have a nice holiday weekend, see you all back here Tuesday.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Since this is an open thread, I thought I’d get my two cents worth in about those of you who talk about the “Thought Police” – referring to that great novel 1984. I’ve got news, the thought police are alive and living among us, and it’s not the AGW crowd.
Think the story was in the WSJ a couple of weeks ago. It told of a business man who, for a fee, will research web postings of individuals…people who are applying for a job. Seems employers want to know about any postings that you and I, as prospective employees of a company, make on the internet. Of course, to remove a person from consideration based on web postings would, seems to me violate the First Amendment, but I’m sure there are a couple thousand reasons for not getting a job, and of course the web search had nothing to do with it.
It used to be that what an employee does on their own time, with the exception of criminal activity, was off limits to employers. Not any more. Your comments on this site are fair game for an employer, and a visit to a site like this could cost you future employment.
Posting on company time – sure I get that…unless that’s part of your job description. But this, this goes beyond that so far that it makes me ill. I just thought you’d all want to know
PS – INTHEDEN is owned by me, so I’m posting with the bosses permission…
Mike
My site, whatcatastrophe.com (click my name above), was originally setup for something similar, but no one found it useful. I still have it up as sort of a blog. But I created a Data Repository section where people could upload graphics, pdfs, text files, whatever, and describe them. It also allows for a copyright notice to identify the source of the information. I can make modifications as needed, within the restrictions of the framework I use. If interested, head on over and register. There is a forum where you can start a thread about this, if you wish.
@ur momisugly Smokey (September 3, 2011 at 6:27 pm)
Thanks – I can barely see the screen for the tears rolling down my eyes! I needed a good laugh.
Dear, RoyUK, Steve C,Josh, and Jeff Alberts, thank you for your interest and links and invites.
I consider you honorary founding members!
The Chronological listing of early weather events PDF is fascinating and scary at the same time…people didn’t have it easy back in the olden days.
I suppose the simplest way to progress it to tell you what I envisage and it would be as suggested an open forum website arranged alphabetically; with an up front ‘index’ to help people log data correctly.
To test it’s usefulness I think it might be interesting to limit/filter the type of data we collect in order to create a picture of maximum stability. In other words events of some duration, the shortest being a Season. The values being limited to hot, cold, wet, windy, snowfall/hail, fog.
So, only statements which clearly speak of: a ‘winter of terrible fogs’, or the ‘year of the great wind’ ‘the summer the sun seemed weak’, the great drought etc etc.
As a glance at the chronological listing will show, there are thousands of castastrophic individual weather events, hail, floods, tornadoes hurricanes etc etc are so tied to their localities as to merit a separate Study. ‘I think their inclusion would ‘blur the image’ but that’s only my opinion.
If our humble first attempt was to produce say an animated map of an area like the US or Europe showing the successive pulses of cooling and warming I would be delighted.
Other filters might produce rain wind fog or snowfall variations as detailed above.
As for how ‘scientific’ all this is I’m sure some will say its not. That anecdote is not data.
I would argue that these comments having been made formally, in writing, by educated people with ‘no axe to grind’ (ie neither warmist nor denier) constitute as sound a basis for understanding and vizualizing climate shift as any other proxy.
Once again thanks. Start gathering data, ask booky, literate friends…
I’ll be in touch…bookmark this page I’ll post the website details here in the next week.
Chas.
Smokey, I particularly enjoyed you “Click 22”, but all were smile provoking.
However, in a previous ‘Open Thread‘, you showed an unrealistic road-sign concerning a Northern Hemisphere view of Australia and I was not at all amused.
Below find something that is more real and genuinely amusing in Oz road signs, in a Melbourne suburb near to me:
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/05/06/mystery-joker-installing-funny-road-signs/
I particularly like the “Hump” one, although the authorities and PC profundities are clearly not in support.
@Mike Bentley says:
September 3, 2011 at 6:39 pm
(Mike discusses possible negative consequences of posting opinions your employer might not like.)
I nipped that problem in the bud.
H.R. ;o)
Since this is an open thread, I thought I’d propose some ideas.
We know that general upward/downward air movement causes compression (warming) & expansion (cooling), respectively. This cannot produce any net atmospheric warming since the volume of atmosphere is fixed — any downward movement must be accompanied by equal upward movement somewhere.
OK. But look at this more closely. Where exactly are these actions occuring? As air moves downward, it is compressed & the final state is reached at the surface. The “heat” of this compression ends up at the surface. Chinook winds on the lee side of the Rockies is a good example.
Now, an equal amount of air must rise to counteract this. Air rises, expands & cools. But the cooled air is now up in the atmosphere, away from the surface. It doesn’t cool the surface unless rain/rain-cooled air falls out of the rising air which doesn’t happen everywhere where the rising air is (and doesn’t occur at all on Venus).
This brings up my question — does the bulk action of upward/downward air movement actually warm the surface, but cool the higher atmospheric levels? Note: there is no net heating here.
This might help explain to some extent why Venus is so hot (assuming there is sufficient upward/downward air movement). The potential compression (& heating) of downward moving air on Venus is huge — from the thin upper atmosphere to the deep, high-pressure surface. This seems to me that it might produce high surface temps (& matching, cooler upper-air temps) w/o invoking GHG effects.
Feel free to pick to pieces.
Charles Nelson, you might want to include a link to the new Climate History Network blog. It includes bibliographies of academic journal articles and popular articles relating to historical climate events, climate history research and such like. It began with some members of the H-Environment discussion group and “it just growed” as they say around here. http://www.climatehistorynetwork.com
Charles Nelson et al
I would be happy to consider some involvement in the project you have outlined but would urge you all not to spend too much time reinventing the wheel.
There are several chronological data bases of weather events around, and many books by such as Hubert Lamb (first Director of CRU)
My own web site is devoted to historic instrumental records from 1660 and this is combined with other observations in an attempt to build up a multi layered sequence of information for specific locations.(link to my site below)
http://climatereason.com/LittleIceAgeThermometers/
If you scroll down my site you will see a number of articles I have written which utilise the information collected..
My colleague maintains this site;
http://www.climateapplications.com/
In it are instrumental records designed to do just what is suggested above-illustrate graphically periods of warming and cooling.
Can I respectfully suggest it would be worth exchanging emails privately between all those interested so the purpose and precise terms of reference of any new resource are fully considered before any further effort is expended.
My email is tonyATclimatereason.com (I am in the UK)
Look forward to hearing from you all
Tonyb
The politics of climate change like all politics ends up in mud slinging and demagoguery. The two camps on AGW were formed by the heavy handed control of climate research publications by one side. They have had a “good thing going” and are worried that the “well is going dry” for climate research dollars. Unfortunately, for them selves, they have built a “house of cards” based on unsound science. As more and more climate data are evaluated and other research like CERN emerge, the cards start to tremble. More and more doubt will present its self and people will begin to see through the preposterous anecdotal claims made by the AGW proponents like that hurricanes are worse now than ever because of climate change. We can not undo the personal attacks on Dr. Spencer’s or any other climate scientist’s integrity. They speak volumes about the source of the attack. However, no matter how much we disagree with climate scientists who are the source of these attacks, we should fall into the trap of getting into a mud slinging battle. It would be my hope that the authors of blurbs in WUWT would hold their rants of frustration and emotional egotistical venom for other BLOGS. I would prefer to take the high road and let the truth be known without insidious comments about the opposition’s parental marital status.
Thanks Blade, interesting stuff, I will look it over if I ever find the time…
The SEC is going through the high yield REITS looking for stuff. Instead of shutting down pump & fullers like Martha Stewart. MLP’s maybe next… they are really something.
Oops, I meant pump & dumpers like Martha Stewart.
A serious question, if anyone is still reading this thread.
Doesn’t Arctic ice act as an insulator, and limit the amount of heat radiated to space from the Arctic Ocean? As the ice extent has reduced in the past 11 years or so, the minimum extent occurs well after the period of maximum sunlight. Therefore, many more hours are spent radiating heat rather than absorbing sunlight from or to the ice-free ocean. The albedo effect is likely much, much less than the radiative effect.
Could this explain (at least in part) why the oceans are cooling and sea level is not rising?
Finally, is there any scientific study into the radiative effect (that is, cooling) of the ice-free areas of the Arctic?
Thanks in advance.
Roger Sowell says:
September 10, 2011 at 9:54 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/?s=radiative+effect.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/?s=amount+of+heat+radiated+to+space+from+the+Arctic+Ocean