I’m caught up in Mothers day duties as well as reviewing data for a new paper, so please talk quietly amongst yourselves and don’t make me come back here.
For those going to the Heartland ICCC7 in Chicago, I’ll be there and I propose a Tuesday evening informal meetup. Leave a comment if you are interested. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@Scott
You put me and my poor little birdfeeders to shame. Thank you for your service!!! A pharse I usually on;y use for serving or retired Military.
DirkH says:
May 13, 2012 at 2:08 pm
Kirk Sorensen 2 h Molten Salt Reactor, Thorium,….
__________________________
Thank you Dirk, I just finished watching it and it was great. It answered a lot of my questions.
Verity Jones says:
May 13, 2012 at 4:46 pm
There seems to be quire a lot about water that has been overlooked.
=======
Great video. Why does water vapor clump up into clouds, with very high humidity, while right next to the cloud is an area of low humidity? Why does climate science and the IPCC say that clouds are not well understood, but we are confident they play only a small role in climate? How can you be sure something you don’t understand is not important? Could it be that climate science simply assumes that only things that are well understood are important?
Doesn’t the IPCC also say the reason that we know CO2 is driving the climate is that science has not found any other cause to explain the warming 1980-2000. Could it be that we have fundamentally misunderstood the nature of water? It appears we have. Simple water is not so simple.
jorgekafkazar
The pictures are drivel? Or the man’s hypothesis at the end of the video?
In this Tim Flannery article it is claimed the UHI effect on Western Sydney is 1C-2C, I thought the IPCC only allowed 0.6C a discrepancy of 0.4C-1.4C wiping out a centuries worth of global temperature increase. Would someone like to check this out.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/climate-commissioner-professor-tim-flannery-said-temperatures-on-rise-in-sydneys-west/story-e6freuy9-1226354331959
Did you know a voice produces these kinds of patterns?
Anybody heard anything from the Monckton inquiry ?
Smokey
You know, I wasn’t clear on exactly what he meant. But I think I caught part of what he was saying, that well known global warming ‘skeptics’ don’t question the sun’s influence on earth’s climate, or at least they don’t think it has a significant effect. But there is a very well known skeptic who says the sun doesn’t have a great effect on earth’s climate. If I was to mention his name everyone would recognize it. And he is someone I admire very much.
Jim Petrie says:
May 13, 2012 at 5:15 pm
I was going to post the link I tracked down with my last comment. I guess I should have.
LFTR in 5 Minutes – THORIUM REMIX 2011 | torij torija torio トリウム
It really was a good video wasn’t it. I read a few comments and none that I read seemed to “get it” Even though Kirk explained the difference between the two Plutonium isotopes and there uses in some detail, some…. person was whinging about producing weapons grade plutonium. (Insert roll of eyes)
These are interesting plots. Your explanation is not entirely clear to me, though. These are temperature anomalies relative to what? And, you seem to say that in the north-central U.S. the temperature is always above normal, which suggests that the comparisons are not made against the normal per locality. The maps show anomalies relative to a U.S. average or something?
The temperature record since 1890s is, overall, a positive trend, so you could be mapping the trend here and the impact of El Nino/ La Nina is overwhelmed by this signal. Detrend the data first; did you do that? What about other parameters, like precipitation?
http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/power-hour-with-alex-epstein/id465769847
There’s a new book out by Robert Zubrin; “Merchants of Despair“.
The link is to an interview with the author. I think a lot of the readers of this blog might be interested in this book.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Dr. Dave says:
May 13, 2012 at 5:34 pm
“The link below is to a PDF file of a very good primer on energy production and use in the US. It’s a very enlightening read and I strongly recommend it.”
Excellent educational report.
F. Ross says:
May 13, 2012 at 4:34 pm
The new Calvinists:…
________________________
The New Calvinism: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1884779_1884782_1884760,00.html
I consider them modern day Luddites intent on smashing machinery and technology so that we may return to the deep-eco dream of a Stone Age agrarian socialist culture. Never mind that it means a return to slavery (or death) for most of the human population.
stan stendera says:
May 13, 2012 at 7:02 pm
@Scott
You put me and my poor little birdfeeders to shame. Thank you for your service!!!
____________________________
I will second that.
As a caver/climber/horseman I hate to think of the tons of trash I have hauled out of the woods over the years. My husband and I are still picking up and disposing of other peoples trash. Collected another garbage bag full this weekend.
I think most here on WUWT are real environmentalists in some fashion or other.
Gail Combs says:
May 13, 2012 at 7:43 pm
Jim Petrie says:
May 13, 2012 at 5:15 pm
I was going to post the link I tracked down with my last comment…..
_______
Darn it! When I try to embed a video link it does not work and this time when I wanted the URL it does. Gremlins, there are gremlins in this here maachine, I say.
add http:// to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVBEwn6iWOo
DirkH says:
May 13, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Dr Gerald Pollack. 2008
Photonic energy induces charge separation in water; leading to layer formation near surfaces. This is a much more prominent effect than heating the water by photons.
==============
This is a fascinating re-discovery of science lost for the past 50 years. The conversion of normal water into ordered/structured water at surface boundaries due to light energy. If you every wondered how like charged particles can attract to assemble macroscopic objects, this provides the explanation.
Re: -LOD
Is it possible/plausible that wind-driven changes to the rate at which the ocean gyres spin could be responsible for slight variations in the Length of Day?
Kevin Kilty-
“These are temperature anomalies relative to what?”
These plots were constructed here:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/usclimdivs/
I selected to have the anomalies be relative to the 1895-2000 mean. Ideally, I would have liked to set them to the 1895-2010 mean but there was no option for using the mean of the entire period.
“And, you seem to say that in the north-central U.S. the temperature is always above normal, which suggests that the comparisons are not made against the normal per locality. The maps show anomalies relative to a U.S. average or something?”
Not always just during the twenty positive ENSO years ranked highest when normalized with respect to changing means and variances and the twenty negative ENSO years rank lowest in the same manner. So during other years, the means are presumably below average.
“The temperature record since 1890s is, overall, a positive trend, so you could be mapping the trend here and the impact of El Nino/ La Nina is overwhelmed by this signal. Detrend the data first; did you do that?”\
I don’t think that should be necessary. The years for both positive ENSO events and negative are distributed pretty evenly throughout the time period 1895-2010:
in chronological order, negative years:
1898
1909
1910
1916
1921
1933
1938
1942
1945
1950
1955
1956
1964
1971
1975
1984
1988
1989
1999
2000
Positive years:
1896
1900
1905
1914
1919
1930
1940
1941
1948
1953
1957
1958
1965
1969
1972
1977
1982
1987
1997
2002
Any long term trend should generally be averaged out.
“What about other parameters, like precipitation?”
I did precipitation too, it’s just not nearly as interesting, or confusing, but it did post-dict the Texas Drought:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEIElNinoPrecip.png
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b370/gatemaster99/IEILaNinaPrecip.png
Oh, and I am fairly certain that they are anomalies relative to the local means.
Amino Acids in Meteorites asks: The pictures are drivel? Or the man’s hypothesis at the end of the video?
Water has memory. The video. The pictures. The hypothesis. In toto.
@Gail Combs says:
May 13, 2012 at 8:01 pm
Interesting links; and yes your eco/Luddite information probably comes closer to my intent.
Thanks
The latest on Tim Flannery,s alarmist warnings he has made a statement in sydney harbour today 5/14/2012 that we will all fry next summer, more violence in the streets , higher deaths in sydney we are all doomed
waste-is-equal-to-gas-emissions-from-20000-cars-7743521.html
Ric Werme says:
May 13, 2012 at 6:55 pm
I find it astonishing this claim that visible light doesn’t have energy still gets posted here. Excuse while I go into a soundproof room and scream. Which will most serve to heat up the soundproofing.
You’re already in a soundproof room, scream as much as you like no one can hear you, your atmosphere is empty space and thus no sound can travel in it..
Shortwave cannot heat land and oceans. But, the real puzzling thing about the insane fisics created to support AGW of shortwave in longwave out is – why have you excluded the real heat direct from the Sun?
Are you aliens from an alternative reality pushing your own world’s fisics?
You take the real heat from the Sun out and then give its properties to shortwave which is light not heat.
Thermal infrared, heat, the thermal energy of the Sun on the move to direct to the Earth’s surface which we really do feel as heat because we feel it heating us up is missing from your comic cartoon energy budget!
Hey, wake up or get real or something. What have you done with it? Why don’t you include it? How can you claim this is based on real science when you don’t even realise what ludicrous nonsense you’re spouting?
I do hope the padding around you is soft..
Timothy Can says:
May 13, 2012 at 5:30 pm
Something from Australia and perhaps relevant to the current forum is today’s “impact statement” from the climate commission. Media reactions have been predictable…
Good one Timothy Can. Even using the 1960-present rainfall trend (which is where they start their temp trend) doesn’t look scary either. I guess 1970 is a better cherry pick for rainfall?
I note that they say that “most human-caused carbon dioxide emissions have occurred since 1950”. I guess this conveniently explains why there was a pronounced decrease of temperature between 1940 and 1950 during and after WW2. I guess we didn’t measure CO2 emissions then? But I would have thought that CO2 emissions would have been high during this period and suddenly did not increase in 1950. But I suppose there will be an answer – lag or something, they always seems to come up with a reason to explain the anomalies.
ghl says:
May 13, 2012 at 5:21 pm
The whole world is innumerate.
That’s a coincidence, so am I!
Hi Anthony,
I am glad you are caught up with Mothers Day duties. No doubt helping the little Watt-lets prepare all sorts of secret early morning culinary extravagances. and packaging of handmade items.
And well deserved Mrs Watts.
Hope the day was fantastic.