The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change
I have travel plans this weekend, so positing will be lighter than usual.
Please feel free to discuss topics withing the normal range here.
Have you ever noticed the correlation between increasing CO2 and the increasing shrillness from AGW Alarmists? Maybe I should put together a computer model with made up data to prove this….
So, like, maybe I missed something, but has anybody else noticed that Al Gore has kinda dropped out of sight on the eco-scene, here lately, which, when you think about it, is pretty much an amazing development–indeed, hive-handiwork, worthy of of the late, great Grigory Potemkin, himself, even–given Al’s normally highly-visible, behemoth-fatso, flab-bucket rotundity, which has pretty much (as in >100%) defined the gent ever since he dumped Tipper, and everything.
Poor Al! The one-way trip down the memory-hole must have really shocked him, given all those years of him getting away with all his strutting show-off, carbon-piggie brazen-hypocrisies; his in-your-face, “greenwashed” money-grubbing; his jet-set hob-nobbing lack of seriousness; and, of course, his alpha-cad treatment of Tipper–especially that last!
I can just see poor Al, now, sharin’ his assigned dust-bin of history with some has-been Holodomor-apologist, who thinks Al should just shut his whiny pie-hole, before someone shuts it for him, ‘cuz there’s lots worse “things”, in this vale of tears, than a stolen Presidential Election, let me tell yah, ol’ buddy. Al’s bunky drawing, of course, on his dim and fading, but cherished dream-time, lost-world memories–memories all happy-place fuzzy with red-diapers and popular-fronts and mummy and shakin’ Gus Hall’s hand, that one time, and re-livin’ the “rush” of revolutionary zeal that once flowed so freely in the heady, grab-ass company of real-life veterans of the “Abraham Lincoln Brigade”–good-comrades all!, and so unlike that bunch of shrill-and-cranky, “gender equity” busy-bodies, who make life such a misery for your basic non-person, hive-deviationist now-a-days.
But I guess that’s what happens when the hive’s empowered man-haters decide that Al’s big, fat, white-boy dumb-ass just doesn’t fit into the post-pants-suit-putsch version of the hive.
Nah, Gore’s disappearing act is deliberate but if he can get a speaking fee big, Big, BIG enough he will put in the few more hours of lying. He has done that once already.
Al Gore knows it is over and he is just trying to fade into the background hoping that people will forget about him. He knows the ship is holed. Al Gore is a big rat but he is also smart enough to know that you abandon ship before the general panic sets in. He has wrung everything out of the global warming scare that he is going to get. Al Gore is abandoning ship at the optimum time.
Soon the other smaller rats with put their noses up in the air and the panic will start.
Eugene WR Gallun
The AlGore has his $200million plus, so he’s content at this point to buy all the cooperative massage girls he needs.
Chairman Mao “Al” Gore will be in Toronto in July … unfortunately. Expect bad weather in two weeks, Torontonians. http://www.climatereality.ca/presentersTraining.aspx
He no longer has the time, he is too busy working out how he can spend all those $millions he’s made from his venal mendacious BS speechifications, @$200,000 a pop!
I suggested an “index” for the strength of their shrillness. It was based on how they attacked Dr. Soon:
That post was very good. If anyone reading this has not already read that Chiefio link, do your self a favor and savor that post.
better yet check correlation between consensus and amount of grant money made available to study the “problem”.
Take a break, Anthony.
…”so positing will be lighter than usual.” Do assumptions get lighter on these days?
I caught that too. Was gonna crack “No thinking where you are going this weekend?”
Serious question from a geologist following climate science
Has anyone normalized all the forcing factors in climate (such as solar energy, CO2, etc,e tc) on a COMMON SCALE either oforenergy, or other common quantitative indicators for comparison? If not, isn’t time it was done? If so, please post link to publication or other documentation..
What a very interesting idea. I am sure the data is available, it would just need someone versed well enough in the mathematics to put it together.
Does anybody know where Dr. Spencer put UAH v6? Searching only got me v5.6, and I did not see a link to the data on his site.
Food for thought. In 1980 Crater glacier began forming on Mt St Helens after the eruption. As of 2006 the ice has had an average thickness of 300 feet and a maximum of 650 feet. The volume of the new glacier is about the same as all pre 1980 glaciers combined. If we are truly warming why are glaciers still forming and growing?
Because co2 is a miracle molecule, it can do anything!
Thnx Albert that is great info, I remember the eruption even 300 miles NE up in Canada, I was working on a golf course at the time and we had to stop mowing because of the fine ash that coated everything ( not much but enough to dull the blades on reel mowers almost instantly).
take time off Anthony. At least here in the west we’re in the dog days of summer and that means lazing around with sleeping dogs trying to keep cool.
Age of the Universe
Current understanding from obserable galaxies gives an age of the Universe at 13.6 billion yeards. Trans-ferrous elements require the power of a supernova to be formed.After the supernova the dust has to form the subsequent stars and solar systems. As our solar system is some 5 billion years old isn’t it pushing it a little for stars to form. explode and for the dust to form new systems as the first generation of stars would take a couple of billion years to form? I just think that that the Universe is a lot older maybe 45-50 billion years.
Also why is the Universe the same age irresepective of which way we observe it? We know that the Earth is not the centre of the Universe. So to one side the observable galaies should be 13.6 billion years and on the opposite side should be substantially less if the Big Bang theory is correct.
The early universe was mostly super massive quasars, and ultra massive stars that burned out in fiery supernova explosions in just afew 10’s millions of years. Several generations of formatiom, heavy element dispersal, and cold gas cold collapse can happen in the space of a billion years at those formation and death rates. We still see this when we look back intime to 10-13 G lyears on those high z shifted quasars.
I don’t understand how those super massive quasers could have formed so quickly. I remain agnostic on most cosmological theory, although I accept the observational facts.
Quasars have been clearly shown, but not accepted by the Big Bang (BB) proponents, to be localized to the region around their parent galaxies. Their redshifts decrease as they are more distant from their central galaxy and begin to transform by interstellar accretion in protogalaxies. They are not the ultra-distant, metaphysically powerful objects at the edge of the universe. They are local and thus not as drastic as they are believed from BB theory and take on realistic physical features.
The key is that BB assumes that gravity runs the Universe and almost completely ignores electromagnetic effects, which are a billion, billion, billion, billion (10 to the 36th) times more powerful, assuming all charges balance to zero locally and all through the Universe. BB also assumes that all redshift by objects must be caused by velocity-caused Doppler effects. BB completely ignores that an object, not moving, causes a redshift gravitationally. Thus, the distance of massive, dense objects nearby can be misinterpreted to be very distant objects, based on redshift, when, in fact, they are much closer.
When you realize that the BB theory has been patched over and over to explain things, such as the abundance of light elements in the Universe, which was explained by inventing Dark Matter to discount (read, “ignore”) all cold, non-glowing, real matter in the Universe. [Literally, they pretend that all real matter is visible to us and there is no cold matter.] As gravity should be working to slow down the BB expansion and it cannot be detected, BB supporters then had to invent Dark Force that counters gravity, trying to expand the Universe. Of course, if you have Dark Matter and Dark Force, you would have Dark Energy, completing the invention of a Dark Physics, and the many fantasies of tapping this non-existent energy source. At this point, the fudge factor in the BB theory is 10 to the 106th power, that’s
10,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000.
They really want us to believe that 95+% of the Universe is undetectable and then make up lots of ephemeral ways to infer its presence.
The solar and cosmic winds are evidence that charges move around in space and that static charges can occur which can result in current flows between objects. When observations of the Universe are examined in terms of plasma physics, with gravity also in play but not dominant, as BB pretends, lots of the structures seen in the Universe become rather normal. Local solar, interstellar, and intergalactic features can be explained without inventing undetectable factors. Einstein also did not think black holes existed, and there are basically seven different models for black holes that do not agree with what we see, but BB supporters pretend to see black holes everywhere. It is curious that, only with black holes, BB supporters recognize that gravity can cause redshifts; how myopic and selective of them.
The bottom line is that studies of quasars show that the BB theory is fatally flawed and we have a Steady State Universe, as was thought long before Hubble reported astronomical redshifts. It simply may be that we will never know the past history of the Universe nor know how it is developing in the future. BB theory appealed to many people because it offered an almost religiously-based birth, origin, genesis, or beginning.
Recently, at the micro-level, the model of quantum mechanics has been elegantly completed. One implication of this model is that the BB model cannot be. It is fun to see that both the macro and micro worlds negate the BB theory.
In a Steady State Universe, all Dark Physics, and related fantasies that spawn from it, can be abandoned and the massive, cobbled patches to the BB model are not needed in order to understand what we see and what is happening when we look out at the Universe.
Oh, and a Steady State Universe also obviates all the Multiverse of Universes and such that go with the BB theory speculations. These fantasies are mind-blowing and fun, but they are also patently absurd and way out of being even slightly realistic. Of course, the BB research community has job security, always needing more funding to do research to describe things that simply do not exist and never will. They will always be on the verge of discovering something. [I am not talking particle physics, such as the Higgs particle. I am talking about mini black holes and efforts to detect Dark stuff.]
I am not a cosmologist, but my understanding of dark matter is that the rotational velocities of galaxies cannot be explained by simply the observable mass by a very large margin. Thus has arisen the dark matter theories that posit the existence of WIMPs, to make the major fraction of mass in the universe.
As for any universe age beyond the current limits of observation which is roughly ~14 Gy, pure speculation . 45-50 Gy… why not 55-60Gy? or 450 -500 Gy if we are going to start pulling stuff out of nothing? Observable reality is the only reality there is in science. Unobservables are the stuff of Ouija boards, tarrot cards, mysticism, and all the related fake paranormal pseudoscience that tries to masquerade as science.
Dark matter was introduced to expla9in the fact that galaxies are not flying apart. Various modifications to gravitational theory have been tried and so far failed. However, inventing things to explain observations is just adding epicycles.
I’d say we just don’t yet understand the nature over cosmological, or even galactic, distances yet. Just as we don’t understand climate yet. Further research is needed.
And another error, Phlogiston, who is in fact a commentator here, I believe 🙂
June 28, 2015 at 8:39 am
“Quasars have been clearly shown, but not accepted by the Big Bang (BB) proponents, to be localized ….”
Add ‘strings’ to Dark Matter and this is what you get from the frustration of all the good stuff having been done before the middle of the 20th Century, coupled with having tens of thousands of times more physicists plying their trade than the handfuls of the pre 1930s. About 40 yrs ago, a colleague of mine (I recall the dud comet Kohoutec was not busy wowing us as advertised) asked me if I knew the startling fact that there were more scientists alive today (1973) than had lived throughout all of history beforehand. It was then that it came to me that in modern days, a course of study, a white lab coat, horn-rimmed glasses and a pipe and you became a scientist – and that was it. It also caused me to note that not much in the way of newsworthy discoveries were being made. Moreover, we were moving into the age of engineering with the space race (no, Victoria, there is no such thing as a rocket scientist. That would be a rocket engineer.) followed by the electronic revolution (scientists discovered the electron, but engineers put them to work).
It is the nature of things. Looking at classical music from the Renaissance to the early 20th Century, really the same period as the golden age of physics, it was resplendent with composers who also performed. Now we have millions of classical musicians who just play the old stuff over and over again. The rest of music – mod music- became another engineering development.
Anyway, Dark M and Strings opened the door to loose, artistic physics that didn’t need any attempt to experiment or observe. They knuckled under to the existing classical view of the universe, patching it up to smooth over observations that didn’t fit. No throwing away a theory – it became the new art to repair theory that they wanted to keep. Climate science, moral degradation in society, sound and light instead of subtance – anything goes. No theory need now be discarded (falsified) as long as there is a way to patch up the one we are comfortable with or the one that gives us the desirable politics that is wanted by the client. Now a scientific theory doesn’t even need a scientist to formulate it. You choose one that suits ideological policy objectives and pay the expert “performers” to cobble together science that makes the theory valid or rise to the occasion to paper over objections by changing the observations. Engineers are left with nothing to do with this butcher, baker and candlestick maker science. A physicist isn’t available? Go to a psychologist, a philosopher, a journalist, historian (especially if you need a rewrite for history) or even a cartoonist, it doesn’t matter.
Actually a reply to
June 28, 2015 at 11:57 am
As I understand it the Big Bang (even though it was a name created by a nonbeliever) depends on the expansion of the universe. The question I have never heard even posited is “How big was the Big bang?”
If we accept that the laws of physics were stabilised within the first 10 seconds following the big bang then how big was it to have missed becoming a singularity and thus not being able to expand? My knowledge of astrophysics does not permit me to calculate the answer, but I do know that it must have been very large. Black holes as big as our planetary system are known to exist and the mass of these compared to that of the universe is insignificant. A Big Bang as a point is impossible without producing a non-expanding universe. Even the concept of an expanding universe, originally based on the “Doppler” shift of light can be doubted with good reasons. Because light can be Doppler shifted does not mean that a shift must be due to Doppler effect. It could conceivably be due to light losing energy on its journey, Energy loss cannot be due to velocity loss and can only manifest itself as a lower energy (wavelength) state. Longer wavelengths have a lower energy density than shorter wavelengths. As light loses energy then the absorption bands would apparently move with the reduced energy but not as a Doppler shift.
I feel that the big bang “theory” is an oversimplified hypothesis that ignores too many observations and tries to invent ways around some of those that cannot be ignored.
Higley7, et al., sound like they read Eric Lerner’s “The Big Bang Never Happened” back in the 90s. It was an interesting book. Don’t know if the more recent edition has significant updates.
Dear All, thank you for your inisghts. It provides food for thought. It just seems that the attractive forces of gravity and electrostatics would take a a very long time to cause dissiapted dust to aggregate into stars and planetary systems.
Pope Francis recruits Naomi Klein in climate change battle
Social activist ‘surprised but delighted’ to join top cardinal in high-level environment conference at the Vatican
Klein is not a scientist or an economist. She is a journalist. Which of course means she’s an expert on both. Nothing to see here.
Naomi Klein?–Fox-News hot-babe looks, Pol Potty-mouth. An inspired replacement for Naomi Oreskes, I gotta admit.
This Pope truly is a useful idiot — Eugene WR Gallun
First time poster here …
A question: I recently discovered this website that offers up a nifty global representation of the weather …
… and I noticed that when I set the height to 10 hPa I get to see the wind in the Northern Hemisphere flowing in one direction (from the east) and the wind in the Southern Hemisphere flowing in the opposite direction (from the west). I find this interesting and I am wondering if anyone here knows why this is so.
BTW, I think this is a great blog.
The winds are known as westerlies (west to east) and trade winds (east to west) search for either and you will get plenty of information even on this site.
Welcome — This site is actually quite a fun place — depending on what your idea of fun is, of course.
Eugene WR Gallun
10hPa is really high, 90,000 feet. What’s the temperature like up there?
Maybe I need to display a different type of chart to clarify the question I am asking …
It’s not bands of winds – Easterlies and Trade Winds – that I am wondering about, instead it’s winds that cover ENTIRE hemispheres.
The chart is a dynamic chart and hence it has morphed a bit since I first ran across it several days ago and during this time an eddy or two formed in the Southern Hemisphere and disrupted it a bit. But before this occurred the wind flow in the Southern hemisphere closely matched the wind flow in the Northern Hemisphere EXCEPT for their directions – as they do now (at least they do at the time of this post).
I find this interesting and I am thinking that due to the extreme altitude the winds may be generated from the upper atmosphere’s interaction – directly or indirectly – with the solar wind.
Uh, “Easterlies and Trade Winds” should read “Westerlies and Trade Winds”.
Let’s take a look at the chart at a lower elevation, at 70 hPa , and notice the degree of wind disruptions:
Now let’s drop down to a lower elevation, to 250 hPa (the jet stream level), and take note of an even greater degree of wind disruption:
Now let’s got to the original chart, the one at the highest elevation,, the one at 10 hPa:
Check out the lack of wind disruption, at least in the Northern Hemisphere, and take note of how all the wind is traveling in the same direction. This suggests to me that whatever is driving these winds is not coming up from lower elevations but instead is coming down from higher elevations. And what is there to drive the winds from higher elevations except for the solar wind?
I am reading your comment with interest I have been aware of this web site for a long time and it was created by a Japanese comp guy. The lower wind disturbances are created by such things as mountains the various day night/ time temperature variations and many more factors ( people have written a lot of material on this as you well know). Earth’s rotation and tilt come in to mind The higher you go the fewer these surface disruptions have an effect also the higher, the colder and the thinner “air mass” becomes. so with what little I know I presume that air mass becomes more homogeneous and flows more evenly. ( and at at times very high speeds)
Asybot, thank you for your response.
You say “The higher you go the fewer these surface disruptions have an effect also the higher, the colder and the thinner “air mass” becomes. so with what little I know I presume that air mass becomes more homogeneous and flows more evenly. ( and at at times very high speeds).”
But the main question I have is: Why do these winds travel in different directions? In the Northern hemisphere all 10 hPa winds travel in one direction and in the Southern hemisphere they all travel in the opposite direction (except for some eddys). At no other altitude does this occur.
I find this interesting. I also find it interesting that the sun now and then throws off into space huge chunks of itself and a lot of this stuff is collected up by the earth’s magnetic field and is channeled to the earth’s poles. This stuff thrown off from the sun contains a lot of energy – kinetic and otherwise – and this energy isn’t something that just “goes away”. My thinking (which may be considered a bit “far out”) is this stuff reacts with the atmosphere on its way to the poles and generates the high altitude, 10hPa winds.
Combotechie, if the solar wind has enough force to cause high altitude atmospheric winds, why doesn’t the solar wind knock satellites out of their orbits ?
“Combotechie, if the solar wind has enough force to cause high altitude atmospheric winds, why doesn’t the solar wind knock satellites out of their orbits ?”
It’s because the solar wind doesn’t have much the density. There may be a lot of mass to the solar wind but the mass is all spread out, spread out until it interacts with the earth’s magnetic field; At this point its density increases, increases as becomes focused as it nears the earth’s poles.
So if what you say is true, how do satellites in polar orbits stay aloft ?
“So if what you say is true, how do satellites in polar orbits stay aloft ?”
Satellites do not fly at the low orbits where the 10 hPa winds reside. As the earth’s magnet field approaches the poles – as it converges on the poles – the elevation of the magnet flux drops, taking whatever it has collected down with it.
Auroras, think auroras. The auroras at the poles are created by what the earth’s magnetic fields deliver to the poles. The stuff that created the auroras had to get to the poles somehow and while they were getting there they caused a lot of atmospheric disturbances, a lot of winds. That’s my guess.
And note at what altitude the auroras do their thing. It’s a high altitude but it’s not satellite high. Note: A lot of nifty photographs of the auroras were taken by satellites, taken from above by satellites.
Combotechie, I see that, too. I hadn’t noticed that before. I have no idea why the northern winds at 10hPa flow east-to-west and the southern winds at 10hPa flow west-to-east (apart from the eddy over Australia). I see the change occurs slightly north of the equator, about where I think the ITCZ is.
Anyway, that’s just awesome. Thanks for pointing it out, and welcome.
Thank you, mellyrn.
Only since Man invented the bath (and plughole) has this been true.
Latest from Booker
The BBC is in a fog of groupthink and can’t see how biased it is
Trying this on the open thread. Should get many better pictures very soon. 🙂
I would just like to say that Tom fuller has been doing a bang up job over at his
Lukewarmer’s Way blog lately. He’s been writing about a post a day on various topics, including a lengthy exchange with Christopher Monckton. I suspect Monckton’s keen senses recognize that there is something going on there.
I particularly like how he’s been contrasting what he calls the “klimate konsensus” with the actual climate consensus. When I quote and link to one of his posts in a forum, Tom often shows up and tears them a new one — kind of like calling in an air strike. He just got a new book contract and I hope readers will go to his blog and check it out.
Tony Heller over Realclimatescience has been on a factual tear lately too. Go Tony!!!
Well we have another example today of The Most Dishonest US Executive Administration Ever, aka The Obama Regime, is pressing ahead full-speed with it’s organized, coordinated Information Warfare propaganda campaign. In military speak of my old profession this is a classic PysOps campaign geared toward swaying an enemy populace with propaganda. In this case, the dishonest is our government focused on the naive public.
Today (Saturday), the US President made a taped speech to medical doctors and health professionals today at a White House health summit.
(Where was The Most Dishonest President Ever? Probably out playing golf while his WH staff worked the event. Bozo was in Palm Springs last weekend playing golf. Friday he and the Missus jetted down to Charleston for the memorial eulogy for the massacre. Must nice to be King while “Rome burns.”)
Basically, the Obama Administration has been pressing hard at its on-going, ramped-up propaganda campaign (leading to Paris COP21) by trying to draw a link between global warming and faux public health issues. The summit included the U.S. Surgeon General, top administration officials, and public health experts from around the country telling doctors, nurses and other conference goers how to talk about global warming with their patients.
The central message: doctors should warn their patients that global warming could make their health worse.
Speakers at the White House summit didn’t just tell doctors to go out and raise awareness about global warming, but to also promote the Obama administration’s regulatory agenda aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions.
The Daily Caller has most of the details here:
This is continuation of the Propaganda Campaign to try to recruit the medical profession to spreading the Climate Change lies of this administration.WUWT discussed the Lancet paper here:http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/22/wild-claim-climate-change-could-wipe-out-health-progress-over-the-past-50-years/
This all has behind it the Wizard of Oz-like hand of Mr. John Holdren, The Most Dishonest WH Science Advisor Ever, pulling the levers behind the propaganda curtain. He is the quarterback for the on-going Climate Change PsyOps disinformation campaign. And This is just the beginning folks.
The Most Dishonest US Executive Administration Ever will continue to ramp up the faked-up rhetoric, the dubious data manipulations from government agencies, the lying NGO’s working for the Admin under the false pretenses (like the American Lung Association (ALA), which has become a taxpayer-paid advocacy group for the EPA, since the government can’t legally run partisan advocacy, so the Regime pays an NGO to do it.), and who knows what else (like probably a few back-room engineered, buddy-reviewed Science Mag Climate papers in the pipeline too with seriously dubious CC alarmist narratives.)
These disinformation campaigns are like the public fireworks displays. This PsyOps campaign is slowly ramp-up, leading to final crescendo of “shock and awe” finale probably in late October-Early November. That is what to expect in the coming 5 months to Paris. Hang on to your seats boys and girls. It’s is going to a fire-hose of dishonesty spewing Climate Change dishonest theatrics for the next 5 months.
So keep the truth coming here and on other blogs and with friends, neighbors, co-workers. Expose the lies in the data from the like of Tom Karl, and Gavin Schmidt, et al.
And when you see another one of these Climate Change disinformation pieces, just remember how the Liar Obama and his henchmen sold ObamaCare. And it’s just more Gruber-isms-on-steroids from The Most Dishonest Administration Ever.
An “Action items agenda” of a Climate Change psyOps campaign being run by Holdren is right now. Like I said above, it’s a classic PsyOps campaign (my old profession in the military), fully engineered, planned, categorized, scheduled, assets deployed, orders issued.
Thus there some things that are predictable. Holdren even probably has a summary spreadsheet summarizing each planned event/news release/journal paper in a well-devised, by-category PsyOps plan to spew Climate Change propaganda. They certainly have identified Climate Change impact categories (health, environment, endangered species, polar ice, sever storms, ocean acidification, etc). No doubt they also have a contingency plans to spew pop-up (targets of opportunity) pre-planned propaganda and alarmist talking heads should a Cat 3-5 hurricane strike the US mainland this season.
But back to what we can expect: Thru the usually slow summer (when many people are tuned-out of the news are on vacations), we can expect a leisurely 1 or so Climate Change lies per week to come out through end-August, coordinated of course by the Most Dishonest US Executive Administration Ever.
But starting in Sept – this will ramp-up to probably 2 per week, and in October at 3/week, with early November at least 4 or 5 in the first two weeks, with at least two of those being sold as “blockbuster” findings by the MMS and released by a complicit AAAS/Science mag leadership.
All the regular WUWT posters need to be prepared thru November for this campaign, and ready to counter the lies and disinformation, and half-truths with the intent to deceive.
In this regard, I was very pleased to see Dr Jim Steele’s push back against the Apocalyptic fear mongering with his post:
This is the kind of push back the Liars in the White House hate, since it methoidcally, and factually dismembers the lies.
The same happened with the Karl, et al, Kill the Pause paper in the Push back at WUWT and many other skeptic blogs. Keep pushing back with the truth against these lies.
I suppose I could find some “comma mistakes” in your post but what else is there to disagree with?
Eugene WR Gallun
yeah, I’m bad with commas because I don’t proofread well enough before hitting Post Comment. It’s usually because I’m on my tablet and editing is a pain in butt.
No, problem, Joel. I sometimes, if not all too often, have been known,
to overuse commas. If, you ever, need a few, you can borrow them, from me.
Hey, cut with the CO2 and nobody gets hurt, capiche?
Let’s eat, Grandma.
Let’s eat Grandma.
Commas save lives.
just Steve — laughing out loud — Eugene WR Gallun
You clearly have an axe (or should that be ax?) to grind with Obama. From the UK, I can’t say it worries me too much whether you have Republicans or Democrats in the White House.
However, I recently saw an amusing re-run of some of the most idiotic moments of the last Republican presidential candidate (a man called Mitt), and it doesn’t surprise me that Obama was elected. Assuming that political sentiment in the US is split roughly 50-50, then out of 100-odd million potential candidates, the Republicans have only themselves to blame for selecting such a bumbling fool to represent them
The same kind of benny hill idiotic videos can be put together of Obama, and have been. They just don’t the journalistic notoriety. go figure.
Joel, actually Mitt was a good candidate. As usual the problem was the press. With the amount of public exposure each candidate receives they are both going to make mistakes and accidentally say something stupid. That’s only natural and to be expected. When Obama said stupid things the press mostly ignored it or explained that it wasn’t what he meant to say. When Romney said stupid things the press made it front page news and replayed it continuously.
I’m not sure how accurate a picture of America you get from the UK news media. We have a severe problem with our news media here in America. Our media is almost universally liberal, ridiculously biased, mostly ignorant of history and science, and lazy. I used to write occasional press releases on my job. The press releases were reviewed by legal staff, psychologists (for reading level), and science staff. And yet the stories in the news were often mis-reported and factually inaccurate. Even by the big networks like CBS. Most of the reporters I spoke with over the years were pretty stupid and poorly educated people.
Sorry for the rant.
Has anyone else noticed how spotty the daily Arctic/Antarctic Ice Extent updates have become?
Not to sound too conspiratorial, but it seems that CAGW advicates may be developing a new algorithm to calculate Arctic and Antarctic sea ice extents to hide both Arctic’s ice extent recovery and the record Antarctic ice extents being observed. Are they perhaps working on a type of Karl2015 “adjustment” for polar ice extents?
Since CAGW’s severe weather, ocean pH, and global temperature projections have all failed so miserably, falling Arctic sea-ice extents are their last bastion of scaremongering available…
I don’t see CAGW advocates simply admitting their CAGW hypothesis is a bust. I feel they must try something to hide Arctic Ice Extent recovery..
CAGW advocates are trying desperately to convince “useful idiots” that record Antarctic Ice Extents are being caused by global warming, but trying to use the same falceous argument For Arctic Ice Extent recovery may be too much of a stretch even for the most aggressively ignorant sycophants to accept as plausible.
The problem for the NSIDC with any attempt to manipulate the sea ice data is other nations are independently publishing data too.
Thus NSIDC Arctic ice page:
Can’t vary by any appreciable amount from say:
without huge alarms bells ringing, and an obvious data manipulation being uncovered.
The one thing you cannot do in a PsyOps disinformation campaign is publish or put out a deception that the public/target audience can see is easily questioned or refuted by other credible sources.
There might occur a conformity pressure between the individual groups – watch out.
Couldnt resist it .Personally i think Gay Pride marches are a load of politically correct right on pretentious nonsense and i know a few Gays who think the same and makes them cringe .But Check this out
i noticed JIMBO’s name crop up in a comment fairly recently. Haven’t seen anything from Jimbo for months. He was a prolific poster, a positive mine of information, and I used to love to read his comments. I hope he is allright.
I have found someone named JIMBO commenting on other blogs fairly recently.
Style seems the same, but I have no idea why he’s not here.
Is there someone here that knows a bit about HITRAN,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HITRAN . . .
https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/hitran/ . . .
https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/hitran/Download/HITRAN2008.pdf . . .
https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/hitran/Download/HITRAN2012.pdf . . .
http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/175860/collisional_effects_on_molecular_spectra.pdf . . .
http://lmsd.chem.elte.hu/hrms/Tran.pdf . . .
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joseph_Hodges2/publication/51572682_The_air-broadened_near-infrared_CO2_line_shape_in_the_spectrally_isolated_regime_evidence_of_simultaneous_Dicke_narrowing_and_speed_dependence/links/02e7e5236fc55ba87d000000.pdf . .
http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roypta/370/1968/2495.full.pdf . . .
Concerning Prof Happer ” The far wings of the Voigt (Doppler) Profile, do not exist!”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woldemar_Voigt . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_effect . .
Michelson-Morley result, a Voigt-Doppler effect in absolute space-time
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00735382 . . . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment . . .
Im a radio guy, built my first kilowatt while completing puberty, got some grasp of whats involved… It might be a long shot,, but no try, no joy, if ive struck paydirt, you know what this is about already,,, is the very mechanism of AGW already debunked by recent updates to HITRAN ?
” The far wings of the Voigt Profile, do not exist!” . . .
I’ve been trying to imagine ways to get political candidates to speak up productively about issues that are specifically important to us here toward which I have concocted a few questions. Premises –
1) we’ll get nowhere asking about global warming, climate change – just no votes to get there,
2) no one, excepting perhaps Bernie Sanders, would speak off the cuff about any of this so a set of questions needs to be both framed and announced,
3) how to announce and make it so?
Open Thread – Issues for Political Candidates –
Energy, Research and Technology Agendas, Subsidies, Data, UN
What are your plans for providing the country with abundant, reliable, and affordable energy?
The Executive Branch of the Government (White House) annually sets the Research and Technology Agenda which drives major grant funding for discovery for example – National Science Foundation, NASA, National Institutes of Health, EPA …
What would be your research and technology priorities?
To what extent do you believe the government should be subsidizing poorly performing alternative energy systems? Or
To what extent do you believe government should be subsidizing energy?
What about environmentally damaging energy systems such as wind and solar?
There have been ongoing “adjustments” to earth sciences data systems at NASA and NOAA that have included data from the past and the present. How will you make taxpayer financed science agencies accountable to the people?
What do you believe should be a healthy relationship between the US and the UN specifically in regard to Climate and Energy?
“I’ve been trying to imagine ways to get political candidates to speak up productively about issues that are specifically important to us here …” ~ Jim Sawhill
Good luck with that!
As a radical libertarian (Rothbardian AnCap type), I see no way to use politics to win this war. Heck, I will not vote on philosophical grounds. But for folks like you who do vote, supporting people who are willing to listen to skeptics on climate issues is a good thing. If they will just listen to the issues they will see how the science is not settled.
But to win using the political system or the court system in the U.S. (only system I can discuss with some confidence), you will have to convince “the people”. That means a sizable portion of the voting population. You have to do that in spite of the American People’s worship of all things governmental — especially the worship of government by those who claim they don’t worship government.(**) You have to overcome the main stream media which is the main propaganda arm of the state. You have to overcome the “experts” with a bunch of letters following their name.
Consider this site itself. Those of us who are convinced that surface warming via CO2 and “back-radiation” is impossible according to the laws of thermodynamics have to be very careful in what we write here as that line of reasoning is not allowed under the no-Sl*y*rs rule. I point this out to mention that even the luke-warmers are aiding the alarmists by upholding the orthodoxy that CO2 warms the surface by 33 degrees. Those of us who learned our science in the 70s or earlier were told of the atmospheric effect and that the weight of the atmosphere (gravity plus mass), convection, conduction, advection, ocean currents, winds, thunder storms, and so forth were the drivers of the weather machine on planet earth. The exact elements of gravity-mass idea is controversial even among those who believe that. Such is the nature of a very young science. Yet it seems that all of us get treated as if we were Joe P. himself here.
So, with all that I simply wish you all the best in your efforts to effect the argument via politics. I hope your idea does some good. Truly I do.
(**) “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” – Goethe
TTIP Update: (Tags, Hydro Turbines, Trade, Global Warming, US, EU)
‘Nein Danke’ – smaller German firms see U.S. trade deal as threat
Martina Roemmelt-Fella, who owns a small, family-run turbine manufacturer in Bavaria, should be a cheerleader for a trade deal between Europe and the United States that promises to ease the flow of goods and services across the Atlantic.
But instead she fears the Trans Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) being hammered out between Brussels and Washington will give too much power to big multinationals at the expense of small companies like hers.
“The proposals are being negotiated behind closed doors with the help of 50 or 60 big corporates,” said Roemmelt-Fella, whose firm is one of the thousands of small and medium-sized companies known as the ‘Mittelstand’ that account for 89 percent of Germany’s exporters and form the backbone of the economy…
…”TTIP may bring significant benefits for big multinationals, but I don’t think there are big advantages for the Mittelstand,” she added.
Her opposition underscores the depth of scepticism towards TTIP in Germany, Europe’s largest economy, where media coverage has focused largely on protests from anti-globalisation groups and labour unions. It also highlights the challenge facing German Chancellor Angela Merkel as she tries to overturn entrenched suspicion of the pact.
While Merkel and big businesses, such as industrial group Siemens and car parts supplier Robert Bosch [ROBG.UL], remain strongly in favour of a deal, public support has fallen sharply over the past year, according to a recent opinion poll. Such widespread German mistrust could mean a deal has to be diluted or is even blocked.
Hurdles are also growing in Brussels, where as negotiators prepare for their 10th meeting next month, the European Parliament is so split on the subject that it cannot even agree to debate it.
Earlier this month, Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel declared that the talks might fail…
…Roemmelt-Fella, whose company specializes in making turbines for hydropower plants, is not the only exporter with misgivings.
A Commerzbank study last year found only 15 percent of Mittlestand companies believe TTIP would be a good thing for their business.
A separate survey by the BVMW Mittelstand association, showed more than 80 percent of its members believe the government is not doing enough to represent their interests in the negotiations.
Much of their concern focuses on how companies settle disputes under the pact. They worry U.S. multinationals will use an Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clause to bypass national courts and bully governments into doing their bidding.
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) estimates the average legal and arbitration costs of ISDS cases to be around $8 million (7.1 million euros), an amount that is far beyond the means of the average Mittelstand firm.
A further gripe is the proposed creation of a regulation council, designed to smooth the consultation process on new laws, but which opponents say will make the legislative process more susceptible to manipulation.
In March of 2004 I took a job as a hydraulic pump design engineer at a private company in Auburn Hills, Michigan. The company had a contract with the EPA (NVFEL) in Ann Arbor to design and build prototype hydraulic pumps to be used in hydraulic hybrid UPS delivery trucks. The project was the brain child of Charles Gray, who had been with the EPA since its inception, and who retired in 2012. I was happy to further my career and to be involved in this interesting project, to help design a drive train that uses hydraulic pumps and accumulators to capture braking energy and then reuse that energy to accelerate the vehicle again. I believed in the project for the first six months, and then I saw the light. Turns out it was just another wasteful government boondoggle.
What happened? Things were not making sense. Firstly, I thought the approach was barking up the wrong tree because it was a series drive, instead of parallel, also known as a launch assist, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_Launch_Assist) which propels the vehicle from a stop and as stored hydraulic pressure is exhausted the vehicle is then propelled by the normal transmission gears. The hydraulics are only in use during braking and starting from a stop. Conversely, a series hydraulic system (hydrostatic drive) is active any time the vehicle is moving.
So with a series drive the truck will be propelled by the engine-driven pumps as it cruises down the road at constant speed, not a good idea because gears are more efficient. Energy saved in the start/stop cycle will be used during constant speed driving, due to the inefficiencies of the pumps plus energy needed to flow the oil through the many hoses and fittings. At least the EPA drive uses highly efficient variable displacement bent axis pumps. Hydraulic systems are generally heavy, noisy, expensive, and not very efficient, but are highly controllable and can pack lots of power in a small space. Electric hybrids (Prius) have high energy density, while hydraulic hybrids have high power density.
It would make more sense to use a launch assist in addition to the existing drive train, but there was no room for that on the vehicle, in fact the stock transmission had to be removed to make room for this new drive. Hydraulic hybrids are best suited for big, heavy trucks in frequent start/stop service, like trash trucks (Parker RunWise system). Even with fuel at $4/gallon, payback time is ten years or more, and by then the pumps may be worn out. With fuel at under $5 per gallon there is simply no business case for hydraulic hybrids unless they are heavily subsidized, like wind turbines.
Other things bothered me, but I played along, it was a good job to have. None of the people at the EPA had ever worked in industry, they are all career bureaucrats. The few times I went to EPA for meetings, the parking lot was full of SUVs, nary a Prius to be seen. I am glad I only attended a few of the weekly meetings, I found Charles Gray annoying. Pompous and intoxicated by his position, he considered himself some kind of mechanical engineering genius, yet he only held a chemical engineering degree. He was always meddling in the minutiae of the pump, hoping to discover some breakthrough that others were too blind to see. Far from it, he went down many dead ends that I knew were a waste of time, but we were happy to take his money and give him whatever he wanted, to extend the program and give our suppliers more business.
Charles apparently had old connections in Washington DC and he was able to get funding for his pet project, to play with hydraulics until he retired. Government has a poor track record in developing new technology for industry, and I sensed that this would be another shining example. He also wanted to claim patents (at taxpayer expense) from which he would receive royalties. I looked up some of his patents, they are for things like solar hot dog warmers. We had about 10 people on the program, EPA had about 6 people on it, and our suppliers had several people working full time on it. Charles revised the specifications a few times, I worked on three generations of pumps in five years. Prototype pumps like these are very expensive, over $200,000 each, whereas production pumps are under $5,000.
We designers had a love/hate relationship with Gray and he was the butt of many jokes. We loved him for being the source of our jobs, but hated him for wasting tax money on silly ideas. I never asked my bosses what they thought of the program, I knew they were just playing the game too, they had good salaries. The whole program must have run north of $50 million total. It was a high pressure job and there was always a hurry up urgency about everything, as if hydraulic hybrids will save the world.
In March of 2009 the recession caught up with us and a quarter of the company was laid off, including me, and a year later the hydraulic hybrid program was ended. I was glad to be out of there, I knew that such a vehicle had no commercial value.
Let’s crunch a few numbers: the average UPS (or FedEx) package truck gets about 10 mpg and drives about 12,000 miles per year. UPS reports that the hydraulic hybrid system improves mileage 25% to about 12.5 mpg, which results in a savings of about 240 gallons per year. With gasoline at $3.00 per gallon that is a savings of $720 per year, or $7200 per 10 years. Let’s say that a hydraulic hybrid costs a mere $15,000 more than a regular UPS truck, so it would take over 20 years before the savings even begin!
To take a bad idea one step further, the EPA partnered with Chrysler in 2011 to build a hydraulic hybrid mini van, again with a series drive train. As I mentioned before, only large vehicles making lots of stops might benefit from a hydraulic hybrid drive, and the family car is way too small. I would love to drive that mini van, I can only imagine that it is louder, heavier, more expensive, and gets worse mileage that the stock vehicle. I love hydraulics but this is not a good application.
I do not understand how people can think that such a drive would be commercially viable; it seems attractive on the surface, until you examine the numbers. Payback times of 10 years do not make good business sense. Furthermore, such schemes should not be subsidized by government, they should be able to stand on their own merit. There are a few other companies developing or selling hydraulic hybrid drives in the US, one in Michigan and another in Colorado. I suspect that such companies are grant farms, or their products must be subsidized heavily to entice buyers. The company that inherited the EPA design, American Hydraulic Power, (http://americanhydraulicpower.com/) closed their Troy, Michigan office in 2012 and is up for sale, but I doubt that it will sell.
Don’t get me wrong, I am all for saving energy and protecting habitat and wildlife, I am a tree-hugging, nature-loving outdoorsman and camper, and efficiency appeals to me as an engineer. I understand what many climate alarmists feel; 7 billion people is a bit scary to contemplate. I also worry about the environment and the future. We all thought that gasoline prices would only go up and up, just as we thought that real estate would do the same, until the bubble burst.
Our tax dollars at work.
Great story. Amazing that EPA is trying to perform technology development.
I just saw that the SpaceX rocket blewup as it went supersonic at launch.
Time to abandon the ISS. Obama will now have NASA’s billions to divert to the Climate Aid Fund, against Congressional appropriations.
Yes I saw a number of replays, to me it looked like the two stages did not separate or the second stage ignited prematurely. it is very visible in slowmo. sad but ISS is absolutely necessary if we ever want to advance into space and I hope it was sarc about the Obama thing.
No. Obama and Putin want to put the ISS down.
Putin can’t afford with the sanctions. Obama for ideological reasons doesn’t want it. He wants to redirect funds to Climate Change programs, and CC Aid Fund. Not sarcasm, just the cold hard reality of how the Socialist running this country thinks.
The ISS and the Shuttle program were instituted to preoccupy the people of Earth with what seems to be progress in space. This was done after several civilizations of aliens told if we continued to send out species out into space there would be dire consequences for Earth.
What you want is a proper Russian launch vehicle!
I’d like opinions on this CC essay. http://www.tccdebate.com/ Not too long and no ads.
I like your paragraphs on CO2 and how it is necessary, indeed beneficial. When I get into discussions with uninformed people on Global Warming (after all, that is what this scam is all about) my conversation goes something along the lines:
Climate change -> no, global warming due to CO2
Carbon pollution -> no, CO2, which is a colorless, odorless trace gas that is essential for life -> the more the merrier.-> CO2 is cool
But the planet will heat up -> A warm plane is a happy planet!
A warmer Canada is a happier Canada!
You mention the disproportionate impact of higher energy prices on the working single mom. Make no mistake, the Progressive- Socialist have plan for that called assistance and transfers. Basically they impoverish 60-70% of the population and keep them dependent of the welfare as a guarantee to reliable voting block. Its all about power. Obama and his Progressive Socialist party feels like they have the power now, and by hook or by crook, they intend to keep it.
Is anyone going to do an analysis of the Netherlands court decision with respect to climate change?
A young woman (Let’s say it was Monkton’s “bossy young woman with messy blond hair” from a year or so ago.) was asked in her science class, “If you were in a vacuum and someone called your name, would you be able to hear them?”
She thought about it a minute.
Then she asked, “Was the vacuum switched on or off?”
Good one. 🙂
(Apologies for misspelling “Monckton”. I’m sure I’m not the first to do so.)
I think we should have a Weekend Open Thread every weekend and not just when our host is otherwise tied up. Anyone else think so?
If the Mods wouldn’t mind dealing the “shotgun blast” of comments and topics, sure. A more regular “Open Thread” might be welcome.
We do get some interesting interchanges of ideas in the “Open Threads”.
As has been said, one can learn a lot by listening/reading, and I have during these conversations.
I’d be OK with it, Mark, so it has been moved and seconded.
I always like it when I read WUWT comments from around the world about local weather. This has been brought to mind as I sit in my living room here in Toronto on the 28th of June wearing three layers, including a thick sweater, as well as warm socks and pants, with the windows shut and the electric fire blasting away… because the house is frigid and I refuse to turn on the central heating at this time of the year.
My British father used to say of gloomy, cool rainy days (such as today) that they were like “a fine English summer’s day”.
Where has our summer weather gone? (Wimbledon?)
And I’m thinking “wouldn’t it be nicer to live somewhere cooler”. We spent the last couple of weeks at 105F heat index and have cooled down this week to a 95F heat index here in northern Florida. It was in the 90s way past sunset during our opening heat wave; lovely if you like sweat pouring out relentlessly…..
Oh, your poor thing in cold Toronto.
Here in southern England, summer is about to burst forth. The Met Office has already issued a “Level 2 heat alert” for the 42 hours between Tuesday night and Thursday lunchtime, complete with warnings on how to survive the fierce heat (stay indoors, drink plenty, wear loose clothing, etc), as Wednesday’s temperatures are expected to exceed 30 deg C (86 F), and may even hit 34 C (93 F) in the London area.
While hoping for a dry spell to cut my pastures between the frequent rains in west central Illinois, I see that Joe Bastardi has been spot on with his predictions of a garden of eden summer. Perhaps the local media weathercasters should consider subscribing. If carbon dioxide gives us cool, moist growing seasons with corn thats 8 feet tall before the 1st of July, bring it on!
(By the way, spring was late here again this year and my corn went in the last week of April.)
If carbon dioxide gives us cool, moist growing seasons with corn thats 8 feet tall before the 1st of July, bring it on!
I grew up in the Midwest. The phrase for corn was, “Knee high by the 4th of July.”
8 feet tall by July 1st? That could only be bad if they make us stuff the corn into our gas tanks.
Funny you should say that; the university which I retired from, has a corn to ethanol plant that has been trying to improve the tech. Here’s their spiel, the author is an acquaintance of mine.
I think she’s lost in the meme, but only for fiscal reasons.
To be fair, some of the corn crop is affected by aflatoxin and is best used by biomass conversion to alcohol. The deduction that we are charged for infected grain should make the price attractive.
I used biomass conversion incorrectly there, as it means converting the entire plant as opposed to just the grain. Probably would make sense for aflatoxins to be detected prior to harvest and take the entire plant. This would be the most economical use of the crop and also leave the least amount of aspergillus spores in the fields.
Knee high by the 4th of July.
That old saying seems obsolete in today’s CO2-rich era. I’m in a frost hollow & the nearby farm has to plant late (mid-May), but still the corn is usually waist-high or better by July 4th.
In todays health science news….
Vegetarians live, on average, 9 years longer than meat-eaters.
9 horrible, wasted baconless years.
In other news, an anti-gun activist claims when we finally have the guts to make guns illegal, people will stop being shot. After all, that’s how we stopped everybody from doing drugs. Oh, wait……
I have been a vegetarian since I was 13 . I don’t miss meat in the slightest. However I am glad I’m not a vegan as their diet is very limited and must be boring
To each his own on diet, but this sums up my view…
Vegetables….what food eats.
June 28, 2015 at 2:12 pm
“In todays health science news…. Vegetarians live, on average, 9 years longer than meat-eaters.”
The questions is: Why would you want to?
eat more chikun
I can’t help but think there is a certain amount of self-selection going on here. People who are likely to maintain a vegetarian diet are also likely to be making other life style choices that promote longer lives.
Would be interesting to see what the life span of people who have no choice in the matter is in comparison.
I was a veggie for several years, suffered no ill health or lack of stamina as a result. Main thing made me start gnawing on carcases again is that it’s hard to get any decent veggie meals in restaurants. I found that a pot of vegetables boiled-up was a perfectly good and tasty meal, but most chefs don’t seem to have any idea how to prepare food without meat.
A friend is vegan and she is thin as a rake and looks extremely fragile. Her health seems OK though. It’s an extremely hard regime to follow as your choices are limited, and eating-out is virtually a no-no.
vegetarians live longer not simply because of their diet, because being a vegetarian means the average vegetarian is generally more concerned about their health in general, will also take other heathy lifestyle measures (exercise, nonsmoking, limited alcohol) than the average omnivore.
Why do climate scientists feel justified in extrapolating temperatures 1200 km into parts or the Earth where there is no actual coverage? Why not use the REAL data for just the areas they have, and make properly-qualified data sets that recognize the lack of data from those areas? To make up numbers from areas where no coverage exists, and them use them as real data, cannot be real science.
Since its open thread I just read that Brazil, South Africa, India, and China at a meeting in New York are starting to make noise about how there’s no mechanism or procedure yet to get that 100 billion yearly cash flow going to assist them in “going green”. Sort of a “where’s the beef” moment for the IPCC! I think it’s important to point out that an awful lot of the “support” for the UN from developing countries stems from these sort of payola schemes. How did that old song go “come a little bit closer you’re my kind of man” It should be broadcast in the elevators at all the diplomatic work up to the December conference in Paris just to remind those involved that we don’t know for sure that the selling of sexual favors is truly the oldest profession.
Having heard so much about end-of-world scenarios since I began my journey in the 1930s, starting with the ‘dirty thirties’ being the end of times, and, of course there were wars, threats of nuclear holocausts (its sister nuclear winter), etc. etc. to go through. More recently Club of Rome/Ehrlich, mass starvation, peak resources, man-made ice age, man-made burning up the planet. In the 18th and 19th centuries Malthusian population explosion (copied again by Ehrlich in the 70s), Jevons’s running out of coal ending the industrial revolution and the like.
When the iron curtain came down, I thought we finally would enjoy some tranquility. But, no! I came to realize there is a certain percentage of the population in positions of moral and academic authority wired with anguish, self hatred and misanthropy that seem to be able to enlist masses of support. It’s disheartening that so many (a majority) want to believe this fairy tale noire without a moments thought.
My life and the history I’ve lived have brought me to a mighty conclusion, an axiom, although it is so self evident that I’m startled that I and others didn’t reach it sooner than now. When I share this with thoughtful people here on WUWT, it will likely seem ho-hum because in back of our minds we already know it:
‘THERE IS NO SUCH THING as man-made, long term ecological disaster. All real disasters by their nature are rare, very short term, mean and quick, and recovery is likewise quick and vigorous.’
So far, nothing has falsified this axiom in 4B yrs. Of course, I’m not talking about the horrors wrought by despots or the famines of the past or natural ‘disasters’. Such events are localized, brief in earth time and also will pass. The planet will not be destroyed by man. I was not even surprised that the 1.3million acre human exclusion area around Chernobyl has spawned a virtual European serengeti wild life park.
Unmistakeably the the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima, the death toll and agony of many over decades was a horrible event, but, remarkably the radioactivity fell back within a year to normal background levels, probably coming from the geology below.
A grand future is in the offing. Population will level by mid century and we will be entering a perennial state of abundance and prosperity for all, including for flora and fauna as we continue our journey of progress in agriculture which retires land from tilling, mining, which will become a mere topping up of minerals and metals obtained from recycling, clean streams, lakes rivers, air, land and oceans. The only threat that can postpone this is the seeming intractable pathology of misanthropes and their pied piper appeal to the frightened and unthinking. A lot of work has to be done in salvaging education and institutions, recovering history, repairing science and social sciences and gaining for people a new trust in human ingenuity and enterprise. That could take a few weeks.
history argues otherwise.
Basic question about climate models–I’ve been reading chapter 9 of AR5 and can’t decipher what date in the past they let the model start running on its own. Given the inability of the models to simulate the past 20 years correctly, it also doesn’t seem like they would be able to simulate the bulk of the 20th century correctly, either, but all the graphs show the model temps fairly closely tracking the observed temps. I have personally always thought they hard-coded the temps from the beginning to about 1970 and then let it go, but I can’t find an exact answer. Thanks in advance for any feedback.
BREAKING NEWS: SCOTUS rules against EPA on coal plant emission regulations:
“These questions have been settled by science.” Surgeon General
IPCC AR5 TS.6 Key Uncertainties. IPCC doesn’t think the science is settled. There is a huge amount of known and unknown unknowns.
According to IPCC AR5 industrialized mankind’s share of the increase in atmospheric CO2 between 1750 and 2011 is somewhere between 4% and 196%, i.e. IPCC hasn’t got a clue. IPCC “adjusted” the assumptions, estimates and wags until they got the desired mean.
At 2 W/m^2 CO2’s contribution to the global heat balance is insignificant compared to the heat handling power of the oceans and clouds. CO2’s nothing but a bee fart in a hurricane.
The hiatus/pause/lull/stasis (IPPC acknowledges as fact) makes it pretty clear that IPCC’s GCM’s are not credible.
The APS workshop of Jan 2014 concluded the science is far from settled. (Yes, I read it all.)
Getting through the 1/2014 APS workshop minutes is a 570 page tough slog. During this workshop some of the top climate change experts candidly spoke about IPCC AR5. Basically they expressed some rather serious doubts about the quality of the models, observational data, the hiatus/pause/lull/stasis, the breadth and depth of uncertainties, and the waning scientific credibility of the entire political and social CAGW hysteria. Both IPCC AR5 & the APS minutes are easy to find and download.
June 27, 2015 at 3:22 pm
Have you ever noticed the correlation between increasing CO2 and the increasing shrillness from AGW Alarmists? Maybe I should put together a computer model with made up data to prove this….
first view strong correlation / causation binding.
Maybe topic for an experts statistic peer reviewed pay walled paper.
Thanks for ‘Humor’ – Hans
Gregory Patomkin was a master of
Zugzwang’s First Move is a Tactical type weapon. It is an upgraded version of Zugzwang’s Last Move.
Al Gore is the Master of ‘get lost’.
Al Gore’s new strategy – we wait and see.*
*bored and tired past 18 ys.
You must be logged in to post a comment.