Would this qualify as “earth science?”
Back when that iceberg the size of Texas calved off Antarctica there was serious whoop-de-do about climate change until someone pointed out the volcanic activity that melted the glacier from below. The melt water causes basal lubrication which allows the ice sheet to slip downhill. Glaciers melt from below, from the heat of the earth, not the heat from the air. Geothermal heat flux. Don’t hear much about that, but then it’s neither caused nor cured by man. What did IPCC AR5 TS.6 have to say about it? Let’s Look.
“IPCC AR5 TS.6
Observational coverage of the ocean deeper than 2000 m is still limited and hampers more robust estimates of changes in global ocean heat content and carbon content. This also limits the quan¬tification of the contribution of deep ocean warming to sea level rise. {3.2, 3.7, 3.8; Box 3.1}”
Half of the heat that keeps this meaningless dust ball from turning into an ice cube comes from within the earth. The hundreds of scientists involved with IPCC don’t have a handle on how that works.
As the linked papers below suggest, relatively minor fluctuations in the geothermal heat flux at the bottom of the ocean could easily explain the warming and outgassing of CO2. Should the recently launched CO2 satellite and deep diving, down to 2,000 meters, ocean radio sondes even hint at CO2 and heat distributions influenced by geothermal heat flux, mankind generated AGW/CCC is dead and the person/organization who verifies that connection picks up the $30,000 prize. http://www.fauxscienceslayer.com/pdf/missing_geothermal_flux.pdf http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2011/07/18/nuclear-fission-confirmed-as-source-of-more-than-half-of-earths-heat/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklo
Taphonomic
August 8, 2014 1:50 pm
I can’t see Ed Schultz without thinking of paraphrasing Dan Aykroyd:
Ed, you ignorant slut.
Greg
August 8, 2014 1:50 pm
“80% Of Respondants Think Climate Denying Republicans Should Be Forced To Take A Basic Earth Science Course.”
You’re kidding. You know the answer is going to be [97.3% ], they booked Cook to to cook the books.
No need to watch it. Ed Schultz is violently paranoid and schizophrenic. IN any other occupation, he would have been locked away long ago.
geologyjim
August 8, 2014 1:55 pm
Thanks for this item, Anthony. I was afraid there would be no “Friday FUNNY” this week.
As Lisa Lubner used to say to Todd on the old “Saturday Night Live”, “That’s so funny I forgot to laugh”
u.k.(us)
August 8, 2014 1:58 pm
Taphonomic says:
August 8, 2014 at 1:50 pm
=============
Thanks for the laugh 🙂
” all these things are happening that are terribly abnormal and very severe.”
What is this buffoon waffling on about?
Has he read AR5 SPM, has he ever heard of IPCC SREX. Apparently not.
David in Michigan
August 8, 2014 2:04 pm
It’s Aug 8 at 1700 hours. The poll was posted yesterday. So far there are 867 votes. 96% are YES, 4% NO (including mine…. you have to vote to see the results).
It’s a reflection of the number of viewers that Big Ed has. When you only have a few viewers, you have to resort to extreme measures in an attempt to get your ratings up.
Greg
August 8, 2014 2:05 pm
OO-er, winds picking up, looks like Bertha is about to hit Europe.
I’d bettter go and batten down the hatckes, this could be terribly abnormal and very severe.
hunter
August 8, 2014 2:08 pm
Typo alert: “Reduction” should be “Re-education”. I did not see the pitiable Mr. Shultz call for re-education, by the way. I did see him demonstrate his ignorance by confusing his climate obsession with ‘basic Earth science’. [The spelling difference is acknowledged. We do not know yet whether is was (another) example of poor decisions and poor education by Mr. Schultz, or a typo on this site’s side. .mod]
Paul
August 8, 2014 2:10 pm
maybe a spelling mistake with re-educate!
MarkW
August 8, 2014 2:12 pm
Reduction camps.
Didn’t they used to call those spas?
I disagree where you say “MarkW says:
August 8, 2014 at 1:16 pm
One constant with modern leftists, is their totalitarian tendencies towards anyone who dares to disagree with them.”
They were doing this a hundred years ago.
[Well, 96 years ago: The Communist-leftist-socialists didn’t have real control of the state’s secret police, the state’s press corpse, and their re-education camps until 1917-1918. .mod]
mpainter
August 8, 2014 2:22 pm
MSNBC wants better ratings so they stir up controversy. Best to simply ignore them.
kim
August 8, 2014 2:25 pm
Actually, we are all headed for climate re-education camp. Mama Gaia runs a fierce ship, so get ready.
==========
Benson
August 8, 2014 2:28 pm
“Re-education” assumes they were educated in the first place. Problem is, many of them know very little about science, and need huge sums of money to get elected, which is why they’re prone to follow the politicized version of science. We need to call for campaign finance reform, not “re-education” (although more education would always help).
Greg
August 8, 2014 2:28 pm
David in Michigan says:
“It’s Aug 8 at 1700 hours. The poll was posted yesterday. So far there are 867 votes. 96% are YES, 4% NO (including mine…”
You see. If all you non-MSNBC viewing deenyers from WUWT hadn’t skewed the results it would have been 97.3% . Just like I predicted.
Threads like this are what make me love you guys….smart comedy!
RJ-
Mr Ed was a talking horse. This Ed is a talking horse’s…..behind.
Greg
August 8, 2014 2:32 pm
mpainter says:
MSNBC wants better ratings so they stir up controversy.
if 867 = 96% , they got 903 phone-in responses. Pathetic. If that’s stirring up controversy, it’s not causing much of a stir.
Why just Republicans? I think Democrats should be “reducated” too. Of course, I and my fellow Libertarians could teach the course. We might not follow the script, though. 🙂
Would this qualify as “earth science?”
Back when that iceberg the size of Texas calved off Antarctica there was serious whoop-de-do about climate change until someone pointed out the volcanic activity that melted the glacier from below. The melt water causes basal lubrication which allows the ice sheet to slip downhill. Glaciers melt from below, from the heat of the earth, not the heat from the air. Geothermal heat flux. Don’t hear much about that, but then it’s neither caused nor cured by man. What did IPCC AR5 TS.6 have to say about it? Let’s Look.
“IPCC AR5 TS.6
Observational coverage of the ocean deeper than 2000 m is still limited and hampers more robust estimates of changes in global ocean heat content and carbon content. This also limits the quan¬tification of the contribution of deep ocean warming to sea level rise. {3.2, 3.7, 3.8; Box 3.1}”
Half of the heat that keeps this meaningless dust ball from turning into an ice cube comes from within the earth. The hundreds of scientists involved with IPCC don’t have a handle on how that works.
As the linked papers below suggest, relatively minor fluctuations in the geothermal heat flux at the bottom of the ocean could easily explain the warming and outgassing of CO2. Should the recently launched CO2 satellite and deep diving, down to 2,000 meters, ocean radio sondes even hint at CO2 and heat distributions influenced by geothermal heat flux, mankind generated AGW/CCC is dead and the person/organization who verifies that connection picks up the $30,000 prize.
http://www.fauxscienceslayer.com/pdf/missing_geothermal_flux.pdf
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2011/07/18/nuclear-fission-confirmed-as-source-of-more-than-half-of-earths-heat/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklo
I can’t see Ed Schultz without thinking of paraphrasing Dan Aykroyd:
Ed, you ignorant slut.
“80% Of Respondants Think Climate Denying Republicans Should Be Forced To Take A Basic Earth Science Course.”
You’re kidding. You know the answer is going to be [97.3% ], they booked Cook to to cook the books.
What a blithering idiot.
No need to watch it. Ed Schultz is violently paranoid and schizophrenic. IN any other occupation, he would have been locked away long ago.
Thanks for this item, Anthony. I was afraid there would be no “Friday FUNNY” this week.
As Lisa Lubner used to say to Todd on the old “Saturday Night Live”, “That’s so funny I forgot to laugh”
Taphonomic says:
August 8, 2014 at 1:50 pm
=============
Thanks for the laugh 🙂
@ur momisugly Don Price, 1:25 pm,
Thank you.
” all these things are happening that are terribly abnormal and very severe.”
What is this buffoon waffling on about?
Has he read AR5 SPM, has he ever heard of IPCC SREX. Apparently not.
It’s Aug 8 at 1700 hours. The poll was posted yesterday. So far there are 867 votes. 96% are YES, 4% NO (including mine…. you have to vote to see the results).
It’s a reflection of the number of viewers that Big Ed has. When you only have a few viewers, you have to resort to extreme measures in an attempt to get your ratings up.
OO-er, winds picking up, looks like Bertha is about to hit Europe.
I’d bettter go and batten down the hatckes, this could be terribly abnormal and very severe.
Typo alert: “Reduction” should be “Re-education”. I did not see the pitiable Mr. Shultz call for re-education, by the way. I did see him demonstrate his ignorance by confusing his climate obsession with ‘basic Earth science’.
[The spelling difference is acknowledged. We do not know yet whether is was (another) example of poor decisions and poor education by Mr. Schultz, or a typo on this site’s side. .mod]
maybe a spelling mistake with re-educate!
Reduction camps.
Didn’t they used to call those spas?
If I am a denier, Ed is a Climate Molester.
Yes, he’s a troll. But Ed is Special.
I disagree where you say “MarkW says:
August 8, 2014 at 1:16 pm
One constant with modern leftists, is their totalitarian tendencies towards anyone who dares to disagree with them.”
They were doing this a hundred years ago.
[Well, 96 years ago: The Communist-leftist-socialists didn’t have real control of the state’s secret police, the state’s press corpse, and their re-education camps until 1917-1918. .mod]
MSNBC wants better ratings so they stir up controversy. Best to simply ignore them.
Actually, we are all headed for climate re-education camp. Mama Gaia runs a fierce ship, so get ready.
==========
“Re-education” assumes they were educated in the first place. Problem is, many of them know very little about science, and need huge sums of money to get elected, which is why they’re prone to follow the politicized version of science. We need to call for campaign finance reform, not “re-education” (although more education would always help).
David in Michigan says:
“It’s Aug 8 at 1700 hours. The poll was posted yesterday. So far there are 867 votes. 96% are YES, 4% NO (including mine…”
You see. If all you non-MSNBC viewing deenyers from WUWT hadn’t skewed the results it would have been 97.3% . Just like I predicted.
Has Ed taken such a course?
I thought that Mr Ed was a talking horse.
Threads like this are what make me love you guys….smart comedy!
RJ-
Mr Ed was a talking horse. This Ed is a talking horse’s…..behind.
mpainter says:
MSNBC wants better ratings so they stir up controversy.
if 867 = 96% , they got 903 phone-in responses. Pathetic. If that’s stirring up controversy, it’s not causing much of a stir.
Why just Republicans? I think Democrats should be “reducated” too. Of course, I and my fellow Libertarians could teach the course. We might not follow the script, though. 🙂