I’m taking the weekend off, as I need to do some climate unrelated work, which is physical, and always good for the soul, and I need to spend time with my family, who often get neglected due to the amount of time I put into this blog.
Guest posters are welcome to post stories.
Feel free to discuss topics within site policy.
Geoff Sherrington says:
October 21, 2013 at 5:13 am
Geoff,
You can have both: about halve the amount of what humans emit remains in the atmosphere (as quantity, not as original molecules), the other halve is distributed into vegetation (about 15%), the ocean surface layer (about 10%) and the deep oceans (the difference of the balance).
The 10% absorbed by the ocean surface is good for an overall decrease of 0.1 pH unit over the past 160 years. Hardly measurable in real life, therefore mostly calculated from other variables.
There is no measurable effect on fish, which can have a lot of pH variations (as is the case in estuaria), neither on corals (with a lot of pH changes within hours in the reefs…) or shell bearing algues (coccoliths), which did thrive under CO2 levels 10-12 times higher (and higher temperatures) than today 60-120 million years ago during the Cretaceous…
Does anyone know why RSS data have not been updated yet for October? They are very late. Are they a victim of the government shutdown?
Mr. Englebeen, how kind of you to respond to Bobble (6:52am) on my behalf (partially, at least). LOL, my “ignorance” is worse than bobble realizes! I understand Dr. Murry Salby fairly well and cite his research with a fair degree of certainty that I am citing it relevantly and persuasively, but, I really AM quite ignorant of most of the science behind Salby’s conclusions! His arguments and those of most of the WUWT scientists against AGW are, my dear Englebeen, far more persuasive than yours are. However, I will no longer call you “a modern day Neville Maskelyne.” You demonstrated integrity and fair-mindedness in that post. From now, on, I will regard you as: My Esteemed Opponent with Whom I Beg to Disagree.
***********************8
Gee, Jam, I am REALLY honored to be mentioned in the same sentence with that first-class researcher and poster, Jimbo (he, if he read your post, likely winced, lol) — he far outclasses my efforts, here. Yes, often two or three posters get into fervent discussions that go on and on, down the thread (here, I thought the one to which you referred was worth reading, btw)…. just SCROLL ON BY. It’s a bummer that this site doesn’t work like a typical chat site where posters can start their own threads but, there are information management issues that make the type of site WUWT is best suited, I think, to the dissemination of truth in science. Thus, the sometimes clogged threads. And….. some people (you, perhaps? (smile)) would growl at THIS post (so I’ll stop).
Sometimes, those verbal fisticuffs can be great entertainment — look up an old thread where Sir Richard battles a nasty troll. #(:))
I LIKED your thorough, well-written, summary of atmospheric CO2 levels. Thanks for that. LOL, that Mark guy never did say anything about the answers we tried to give him… .
Uh, oh… I can hear the growls of annoyance at my post’s length and subject matter already — gotta go!
Take care — AND KEEP ON POSTING (it’s fun!).
GeeJam says:
October 20, 2013 at 12:17 pm
“All of us should be singing from the same hymn sheet – unilateral agreement that CAGW is a complete scam.”
I do agree that it is; but disagree with the notion that “we” should all agree.
lsvalgaard says:
October 20, 2013 at 8:28 pm
“…First, it is not a fact, second, correlation is not causation.”
“correlation is not causation”????
Seriously, Leif, is that all you have to offer?
Did you really get a PhD? If so where/when?
Or are you just practicing for a stand-up comedian routine?
Hey, Geran… . I hope everything is okay in your corner of the world. You sound pretty upset and I just wanted to extend my genuine sympathy for your frustration. Dr. Svalgaard is often terse. Given how sarcastic you’ve been, however…. lol, I think you should be glad he did not say all that was on his mind. I think his assuming that your pretend planet was round was logical, or, at least, not a stupid mistake. Now, seriously, did it really call for you to jump up and down like a chimpanzee and screech at him? (btw: I can understand the feeling — you should hear me yell at the politicians on TV). Dear Geran, you (from your posts on other threads) are a fine person. You deserve to give yourself the self-respect of making a dignified or, at least, a coldly polite, response.
Have you read any of Dr. Svalgaard’s papers (there are scores of them on his website)? I kind of think you have not. They clearly show that his academic credentials are well deserved.
Maybe, I’m defending Dr. Svalgaard, here, because I had a fun time poking fun at his pomposity one time last summer and I’m subconsciously trying to compensate for that. I don’t know. I do know that you, Geran, are a better man (or woman — “Geran” sounds masculine, to me) than what you’ve displayed above.
I wish we could sit down together and talk (I know it’s not really Dr. Svalgaard that is troubling you). I hope that you can find someone who cares about you to will listen with his or her heart. We ALL need that, you know.
Take care.
Shalom,
Janice
Wow, what a well thought out comment, Janice. I think, if you read the entire thread, you would see that Dr S clearly first jumped at the chance to be sarcastic and insulting. As I mentioned, coupled with the fact that he got it wrong, that made him an easy target. (You get what you ask for.)
Yeah, I do get frustrated with certain types. But, I didn’t realize my response would appear anywhere close to a chimpanzee jumping up and down and screeching! Maybe I can be a little more subtle next time. 🙂
I do believe that Dr. S. has some real knowledge he can provide. I also believe, based on numerous examples, that he would prefer to insult people rather than provide facts. When he does happen to try to offer knowledge, he often makes mistakes, so you have to use caution. A perfect example is above. I mentioned a “mental experiment”, adequately described, and Dr. S completely got it wrong. He did not forget to get his snarky comment in, though.
My “mental experiment” should not have been hard for a qualified physicist to understand. In your online research about Dr S, did you ever find out about his education? I found out somewhere that he has a computer science degree, but could not find out about higher degrees.
The desired outcome would be that both Dr. S., and “geran” clean up their acts. So, based on your “constructive criticism”, I will try be the first to start….
Hi, Geran,
How lovely to hear from back from you. That you would respond thoughtfully to me, a mere peon of WUWT, speaks volumes about your character.
I still don’t think Dr. Svalgaard misunderstood the plain meaning of your “mental experiment,” nor that he often makes mistakes (when he has, he has quickly admitted it or provided clarification — often, it is his having English as his second language (Danish is, I believe, his first) that is the cause, I think) but, that is beside the point of my little note, here. Stanford University would not have hired Dr. Svalgaard as a research fellow were he not eminently qualified. I would think that reading his papers on his website would amply demonstrate to one that he is more than qualified to speak on physics, both basic and solar. That his work has been cited 888 times and that 24 other scientists wanted him to work with them on their papers is, I believe, conclusive evidence of his competence. Here, for just one piece of evidence is what other scientists think of his knowledge and abilities: http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/34446278/leif-svalgaard.
Re: chimpanzees throwing a fit… , lol, that is, of course, in the eye of the beholder. Perhaps, to others you were not rude, etc… . And if I had any doubts about your character, Geran, they were put to rest by your gracious response to my concerns above. We disagree about Dr. Svalgaard’s assessment of what you posed, but, that is neither here nor there.
I’ll assume your silence on the matter means that you are doing just fine generally. Glad to “know” that.
Perhaps, I and others have learned to “read” Dr. Svalgaard. My opinion of him changed from “what is that man’s problem” to “ah, I see, now,” over the past 6 months that I’ve been reading his comments. Under all that fierceness and blunt speech is a caring teacher and an extremely conscientious researcher and who also plays the violin and loves his grandchildren.
I’ve written at length here, since this thread is petering out. I’m so glad you came back to read what I addressed to you above. You’re all right, Geran.
Take care,
Janice
RSS released its latest temperature data today, 10/22/2013. It is very late–the data is usually available by the tenth of the month–and all of the numbers appear to have been changed since last month. The trend lines have not changed substantially, but the data has changed. I am curious about the reason for this delay and these changes. Anybody have an explanation?
Hi, Nony, I can’t answer your question, but, here’s a suggestion: even if off-topic, pose it on a currently active (discussion-wise) thread (one posted today, 10/22 would be best). Your question is a good one and someone may take the time to quickly direct you to an answer. If you begin by apologizing for the interruption, you will make your request more likely to be favorably received. Good luck!