Realizing that surface emissivity is only ~0.91, surface emission only ~355W/m2 and the GHE only has a magnitude of about 115W/m2 would be a great start. At least if we want to get the “science” eventually right.
It is a good idea to question the assumed surface flux property. This boundary condition should be scrutinized because problems there would filter all the way up.
A value of 355 W m-2 implies an atmospheric window flux of over 60 W m-2 compared to the standard scheme of 40. I will explain below.
That is a difference of 20 watts per square meter that is lost directly to space compared to standard diagrams.
Standard atmosphere gives surface flux 398.2 and OLR 239.9
Standard greenhouse factor = surface flux / OLR = 1.66
Standard atmosphere emission = surface flux / 2 = 199.8 = 169.9 + 29.9
Standard atmospheric window = OLR – atmospheric emission = 40.1
Because the atmosphere does not absorb in the window region OLR must be the sum of flux from the atmosphere (including clouds) and flux in the window portion. Total atmospheric emission is approximated by surface flux / 2.
Standard models would require extra forcings at the surface to account for an extra 22.4 W m-2. With the Schaffer surface boundary condition estimation no such extra forcing is required.
In the case of CO2 at 20% greenhouse factor in standard radiation theory 22.4 W m-2 would account to approximately 4.5 W m-2 extra CO2 forcing.
When we change the surface boundary condition to 355 W m-2 according to the Schaffer estimate no such extra forcing is required. 4.5 W m-2 is conspicuously similar to the hypothetical forcing from extra non condensing greenhouse gases.
Average surface temp of 288 C gives IR emission from ground upwards of 390 W. So how do you calculate 355 W? That would be 281 C average, kind of low average temp to escape attention.
If I have understood correctly your value of radiation net flux from the surface 63 is similar to the 60 in my example above. In my view the nature of net flux density delivered from the surface to the atmospheric boundary layer is by nonradiation mechanisms such as turbulent diffusion. So in my view radiation emissivity isn’t the right conceptual framework to describe the nature of net surface flux. There I am in disagreement with both Schaffer and standard atmospheric diagrams. That is another matter. Surface radiation concepts such as emissivity may only have a discernible impact on atmospheric window flux density.
It’s not my value, it’s Trenberth’s.
Which 60/63? (57.9)
It’s on the graphic twice.
163.3-18.4-86.4-0.6=57.9
398.2-340.3=57.9
Two sets of books?
BTW 398.2 is a theoretical “What if?” calc for the denominator of the emissivity ratio.
It – is – NOT real!!!
Neither is the 340.3.
It could be that we are in agreement but it’s difficult to follow you. I would argue the atmosphere does not receive net radiation from the surface. Radiation equilibrium extends to the surface. While flux density is measured in W m-2 it does not imply what proportion is radiation in nature. Nonradiation flux is also quantified in W m-2. If you are suggesting the atmosphere cannot receive an additional net +63 LWIR from the surface then I am in agreement.
I have a problem with the whole diagram. These are averages and averages just don’t work when you have exponential functions involved. The sun’s insolation is not averaged over the earth, it varies according to a trig function that itself is modified by clouds/albedo/etc. Similarly, the earth’s ground/water temps vary by the insolation received at that point. That is why we have temperature zones.
If SB is going to be used then calculations will be based upon an exponential of the 4th power in addition to the trig functions. As a consequence averages just don’t work properly.
You would think Phd. climate scientists would have and should have developed a more sophisticated mathematical description of how the radiation balance actually works. I know it is enticing to use averaged temperatures but that is ignoring the real world.
Schaffer’s emissivity could be valid for local radiation exchange equilibrium between surface and atmosphere + IR window.
Then conceptually set net LW radiation exchange between surface and atmosphere to zero. This is a separate matter from total energy exchange between the surface and atmosphere where net surface to atmosphere is dominated by turbulent heat flux and eddy covariance K. You have illustrated that in your diagram. https://www.met.reading.ac.uk/~swrhgnrj/teaching/MT23E/mt23e_notes.pdf
All too often talented scientists burn bridges by their own arrogance but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.
The emission and absorption characteristics of the atmosphere vary with the concentrations of green-house gases such as water vapour and carbon dioxide.
Even if this were a real thang at .04% there is not enough mass to matter.
I’ll give you one more shot. Being in defensive mode will not win you allies. Regardless of assumed emissivity and the radiation characteristics of the atmosphere my view is that net LW radiation exchange sums to zero. Full stop. The slightest change to K will offset any radiation perturbation. That is my point. As soon as radiation is perturbed the temperature lapse rate becomes greater than the adiabatic lapse rate and the atmosphere becomes instable. This instability initiates an immediate feedback response denoted by K.
How do I respond to esoteric handwavium?
The sun heats the surface, the surface heats the air.
The atmos obeys Q=U A dT.
Q and/U go up/down dT goes up/down and surface temperature goes up/down.
It’s not that complicated.
Wow! Thanks for the link. Most informative.
In an earlier post referencing SURFRAD I commented that dw_ir and uw_ir must be chained at the hip liked escaped convicts by some kind of algorithm.
HEY, there they are: section 5! These are what SURFRAD uses!
I’ve attached a slide with the nomenclature cross referenced.
dw_ir moves energy from the cooler upper atmosphere back towards the surface, an egregious violation of LoT 2.
Not that it matters.
uw_ir radiates energy from the surface. Emissivity is assumed to be 1.0. It’s not, it’s uw_solar/uw_ir.
uw_ir basically duplicates uw_solar
If I were to discard a duplicate calc it would be the imaginary ir ones not the real solar ones.
It’s disappointing because we likely agree. Speaking of esotericism look to your most recent comment. Sprinkled with sarcasm it’s impossible to digest. Good luck to you.
Btw. you are taking this “energy budget” way too serious. Not just are the figures largely incorrect, the ideas it represents are just stupid. We can simplify the relevant parts.
Earth absorbs some 240W/m2 of solar radiation and emits about the same amount at various emission levels, strongly correlated to the respective emission temperatures. And that is about it.
What happens underneath these emission levels is largely irrelevant. There are no “radiative energy flows” or something like it. The effects of latent heat are best described by the magnitude of the lapse rate, not by a W/m2 figure.
Let me explain it with the example of surface-atmosphere “radiative exchange”, the core concept of the above budget diagram. The atmosphere absorbs about 85% of all radiation emitted by the surface. With updated surface emissivity that would be about 300W/m2 (355 x 0.85). About the same amount of radiation is emitted by the atmosphere onto the surface. Again, it is not 340W/m2 of “back radiation”, but only 300W/m2, or a bit less.
Anyhow, this is not an “energy flow”, but a lump sum game. And it happens everywhere. Every molecule emits radiation and absorps from neighboring molecules. We just do not care, as it is neither a (net) flow of energy, nor would it heat anything. Only “climate science” tries to make it matter..
Btw. you are taking this “energy budget” way too serious.
What can I say? I’m a serious guy.
The atmosphere absorbs about 85% of all radiation emitted by the surface. With updated surface emissivity that would be about 300W/m2 (355 x 0.85). About the same amount of radiation is emitted by the atmosphere onto the surface.
Sounds like we all agree the surface net LW radiation is roughly zero. or about the same amount upwelling from the surface and downwelling from the atmosphere (regardless of their magnitude). We probably each conceptualize it differently.
The effects of latent heat are best described by the magnitude of the lapse rate, not by a W/m2 figure.
To each their own. Total convection K (latent and sensible heat flux or evaporation/condensation and wind currents at various heights) spreads out the lapse rate in the boundary layer to the observed value compared to one by radiation alone.
Surface temperature can respond to solar input, changing landuse/surface properties, or nonradiation forcing such as ocean upwelling variations. The lapse rate then proceeds as normal up from there.
The consequence of K is to optimize energy dissipation regardless of the IR radiation properties of the atmosphere. Ultimately the total lapse rate is bound by the atmospheric pressure profile and K is the mechanism that makes it so.
K is free to move energy where it needs to be to dissipate effectively. Without it hydrostatic equilibrium of our atmosphere wouldn’t be possible.
I’ve got experimental backup.
Not only that, engineers designing and building heat exchangers are showing this process every day.
And you have?????
OK S.
February 13, 2022 6:11 pm
Well, if anyone is wanting to talk about anything, how about this coming Sunspot Cycle. The Greybeard offers a look at some of the competing forecasts:
Since the last solar cycle updateI posted a month ago, interesting data continues to come in. The questionsaren’t being resolved, but the best thing I can say about it is that these guys are practicing real science. They post their predictions and their data, essentially saying, “show me where I’m wrong” and try to improve theirmethods. It’s a sure sign there’s no money it, compared to climatescience or the Covid policy bosses.
About the solar cycle predictions and progression.
With the current ramping up of the cycle 25 and possible terminator event occurrence there is a lot of buzzing and claims that the cycle 25 is significantly stronger than the predictions of low cycle similar to 24. These claims are made by both amateur enthusiasts but surprisingly by prominent professionals as well.
they are accompanied by charts like this as the evidence.
This is not only wrong but just plain stupid. The predictions in these charts are just a general depiction of the C25 duration and the maximum peak reduced to a simple smooth hump like curve. It should be totally obvious the curve itself is not to be followed as an exact prediction as no cycle actually even looks like this.
If you want to see how the progression and the ramp up rate really stands you have to stack up the actual cycles against it, like this.
There you can see the C25 is clearly following C24 so far, even though that is no prove of where it is going to end up in it’s peak.
You can clearly see from the first chart Bindidong posted himself that a solar cycle can start off higher than another and yet finish significantly lower when done, like 23 against 22, This guy debunks his own claim right in his own post , that takes some doing.
sycomputing
February 13, 2022 7:52 pm
“There have been some recent calls for more open threads. Here you go.”
Resolved: Charles Rotter is the current incarnation of Buddha.
a) the Buddha, may he resist in pieces, has stepped aside from the soul-rending tedium of rerererere(etc)reincarnation so as to gather his wits and dignity about him before “once more into the fray”, and so is currently not to be found.
b) Charles is such an utter Rotter, and is so perfectly suited to being himself, he has neither the time, the inclination, nor the lack of appetites necessary to unseat any of the other contenders.
I challenge anyone to read Isaac Newton’s chest full of alchemical writings! Apparently Lord Maynard Keynes did, for the biography.
RMoore
February 13, 2022 8:16 pm
Super Bowl LVI halftime show points way to resurgence of convertible cars to fight heat of current hot spell in LA. Admirers on stage demonstrate how to dress for heat and still enjoy physical activity. Even elder folks participated in movement displays.
That was the most boring Superbowl half-time show I’ve ever watched. About half the audience could not see what was happening on the stage because the stage was blocking their view. I guess they had to watch the show on the stadium monitors.
It looked to me like they had a 1962 Chevy covertible, and a 1963 Chevy covertible, and a 1964 Chevy convertible lined up in a row. I guess someone has a fetish for early Chevrolet covertibles.
My buddy from highschool days had a 1963 Chevy two-door hardtop with a 327 cu. in engine and automatic. White with black interior and bucket seats. A really nice car.
No, I didn’t understand a word they were saying, so naturally I had no idea what they were talking about.
I heard a lot of praise of the halftime show from some people. It seems it’s a Millenial generation thing, since they grew up on this type of music. People like me who grew up before hip-hop became popular are not really familiar with hip-hop, and so the whole halftime didn’t make much sense.
I would have preferred some classic rock with screaming guitars, but that’s just me. That’s the kind of music I grew up listening to.
Los Angeles, California was 84.2* Fahrenheit (F) before noon on Sunday February 13. The preceding days Saturday Feb. 12 it was 87.9*F, Friday Feb. 11 it was 80.6*F, Thursday Feb. 10 it was 82.4*F, Weds. Feb. 9th it was 84.2*F and so on. Northern hemisphere winter is still the season; just not typically short pants and tee-shirt weather.
Yes during pauses of play in the broadcast there were helicopter camera shots of the Hollywood sign from the front and looking back over the sign to downtown LA. You could see everything clear as a bell due to the high pressure no humidity air.
Just have to get this off my chest here: The climate alarmists in California are the same evil hypocrite elites walking around SoFi Stadium today without masks while still requiring them of school kids—including even the kids performing at the Super Bowl. If Californians do not throw them all out of office, and demand immediate cessation of all mask rules and return to fossil fuel development and abandon carbon free goals, well, they deserve all the tyranny they get. When will the scales fall from their eyes?
The Superbowl was a good example of hypocricy. None of the elites deigned to wear masks. But they expect everyone else to comply with the mask mandate. That’s why people are starting to protest.
The NFL and the stadium officials made a big show last week of how they were going to enforce the local LA County mask rules requiring masks except while actively eating or drinking at big events. Predictably, all that was for show. In all the many crowd shots during the game, I saw maybe three masks—forget celebrities, NOBODY was masked. And there was no evident enforcement effort. As there is no evidence that similar events have been “super spreaders,” the unelected local “science” officials to whom all the people elected here have deferred in order to avoid making any decision themselves should simply give up and end the useless mask mandates, especially for kids, but instead they likely will double down and extend the mandates as punishment for what happened Sunday. Nobody needs to send us to a gulag, we already live in one!
I saw one of the last smallpox epidemics in India when I was 16. The Vaccinator suddenly got active after about 10 years of avoiding the villages. In a tiny back room in a mud hut I saw an 11 y/o girl lying unconcious on a string bed, her body completely covered with weeping scabs. Her grandmother had said “Keep her back when the vaccinator comes so she can look after her 2 younger brothers if they are sick after the vaccine”.
In the villages, people brought their children out when the vaccinator arrived because they had personal experience of the alternative. I never heard of anyone against the smallpox vaccine because the results were obvious, with pock-marked people throughout the population as enduring witnesses.
Steve Kirsch’s recent substack on the problems with the early vaccine in the 19th century show that mandating a medical treatment of any sort always leads to opposition, some of it straight out paranoia.
My refusal to get the currently mandated shot is because it a completely new technology brought out without an ACTIVE monitoring system. I have personally been involved in human pharmacological experimentation (all basic science related), and I know what the rules for experiments on human subjects.
Oh, hogwash, Courtney. I’m going to the Renaissance Faire this summer wearing a bird beak mask and yelling “Bring out yer dead!”.
This morning, the head of the Infectious Diseases at a local/well-known university said flatly that if you catch the omicron bug, it will give you 300 days of immunity from the rest of the covid bugs.
Stock up on tissues and chicken broth and learn to make a bodacious pot of chicken soup. You seem to need it.
What’s the latest stats on Spanish Flu deaths vis a vis common or garden flu deaths and have they managed to parse them out of the global warming death figures yet? Ironically I see Norway the EV capital of the world has completely given up worrying about Corona. I suppose they must figure they’re all goners with the weather dooming anyway. So much settled science everywhere.
@M Courtney – point to a single time anywhere in WUWT content history when anything resembling a majority of commenters gave any credence to wacko chemtrail conspiracy. If you can’t stand and deliver on that simple challenge, well, mark yourself as another drive-by troll who’s all show and no go.
That dates you. We used that expression when I was in high school to describe a car with a stock engine that just came back from Tijuana with a new Candy Apple Red paint job and tuck-and-roll upholstery. He spent all his money on the external appearance.
I have been puzzled by WUWT staying away from the whole Covid story because it is becoming clear that the restrictions are part of an ambition to bring in similar control of people’s daily lives in the service of the “climate emergency”.
AND, forced administration of an experimental drug is just the beginning of forcing a lot more.
tonyb
Editor
February 14, 2022 1:46 am
Having taken CO2 readings in the UK in various locations, including on an island, and had others take readings in Australia and France, the CO2 readings are between typically 500 and 600ppm outdoors. (none in a particularly urban/industrial environment)
Looking at the highly convoluted means -including the drying of the air sample- by which a CO2 reading is determined with the official readings, my simple question is why do they do this?
I can look at my thermometer and get a pretty accurate idea of the temperature but a CO2 device (not state of the art) delivers a reading that is nothing like the official readings.
Why do they subject the air sample to such adjustments? Is that an accurate way of doing this? Are the actual informal CO2 readings from devices such as mine (which are of course spot ones) more accurate as to the real levels of CO2 present in the environment?
Where do you get a CO2 reading device? I might like to get one. Yes, of course, I can google it- but just asking. I’d like to see what it measures in a forest vs. in a solar “farm”.
I was worried about CO from a wood stove, got a new meter on eBay, and it gave such erratic readings I decided it must be broken. Began to look into the electronics, sensor stuff, but after the experience with optical smoke detectors after they banned Am241 sensors, I do not trust them.
The one I have is called the jsm-131 air quality detector. i just googled it and it came up on the search. They are not hugely robust but then again they are not hugely expensive. It seems to be very accurate in measuring traffic pollution so I can only hope the co2 reading plus or minus 10% is also in the ball park
Since the gates of Kiev have been opened, have a look at
NASA planetary data from across the Solar System help resolve long-standing paleoclimatic enigmas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpUkPPtkPVc
This not the rules-based-order of radiative climate paradigm, rather its polar opposite.
Looks like the widely accepted Milankovitch hypothesis might have to be put to rest.
We are in an icehouse global climate.
Any theory which says our global average temperature is 15 C is wrong.
What determines our global climate is our cold ocean.
Any theory that doesn’t explain why the average temperature of ocean is 3.5 C is
not about our global climate.
Our global average surface temperature is the result of our cold ocean, there is huge
difference if ocean were to be 3 C rather than 3.5 C, as there huge difference if average
temperature was 4 C.
And if ocean were 4 C, it is still a cold ocean. A 5 C ocean is still a cold ocean, or we still in an icehouse climate. We have not had 5 C ocean within last 2 million years.
The last 2 million year has coldest period in our 34 million year Ice Age. Earlier in the Late Cenozoic Ice Age.
Wiki says:
“It is well established that there is strong correlation between low CO2 levels and an icehouse state. However, that does not mean that decreasing atmospheric levels CO2 is a primary driver of a transition to the icehouse state.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_and_icehouse_Earth
I would say that obviously a cold ocean is the reason we have low CO2 levels. And a warmer
ocean would result in higher global CO2 level. But .5 C increase in average ocean temperature will not have much effect in regards of CO2 levels. Warmer being 1 or 2 C warmer, which is still a cold ocean.
We not going to have ocean which 4 C within a century or two, and more likely our ocean will cool again before it could reach 4 C. Or distant future is glaciation period.
And last 5000 years our ocean has been “about” 3.5 C with variation of couple tenths of degree at most. Or our recovery from our Little Ice Age was about .1 C increase in average ocean temperature.
One could say increase .3 C within 100 years would be “alarming”, but it doesn’t seem possible or likely. If that happenned I would concede that humans are definitely having effect- it’s a crazy amount of warming over such a short time period. And could match or exceed present future global climate “projections”. And would delay our returning to glaciation period
by at least 10,000 years.
How could humans relatively easily affect global temperature. How could human stop us from going into glaciation period, and could alter our global surface air temperature by a lot- could make global air really cold or slightly cooler.
The more colder we make global air, the faster we would increasing the ocean’s temperature {to avoid a glaciation period, faster}.
I don’t think anyone want average global air of 13 C or colder, but we might want 14 C, in order to increase the ocean temperature quicker. But warm the ocean without having any significant amount cooling of global air.
So, what do, is pump warm tropical surface water to a deep ocean depth. It would require much energy to do this. But one use wave energy to do it- or require no electrical power to force the lower density warmer water to the lower depths.
But if didn’t use “free” wave energy, amount energy should around amount of energy
pump water up against gravity water about 10 meter high {or less}.
But effecting ocean temperature with time period of 100 years, requires a lot water moved in such a “short time period”. So making the infrastructure to last a long time,
and requiring much maintenance, and using wave energy seems the cheapest, unless you to change ocean temperature, quickly. One use titanium as sea water does not corrode it.
–The Eocene Epoch is a geological epoch that lasted from about 56 to 33.9 million years ago (mya). It is the second epoch of the Paleogene Period in the modern Cenozoic Era.–
And we are in Late Cenozoic Ice Age which followed this epoch. Or our icehouse global climate started 33.9 million years ago.
Or icehouse global climate has cold ocean, say ocean which is about 8 C would count as a cold ocean. Our present average ocean temperature is about 3.5 C, and it not been as warm as 5 C in last couple million years.
And over Earth long history, the ocean has warmer than 15 C, some claim as warm as 25 C. Anyhow a 10 C ocean could be what is called a greenhouse global climate, and not going to have ice sheets near sea level- though inland and high elevation could large amount of glacial ice. Or we currently have glaciers in our tropics, at higher elevations.
I’ve been learning about the science & medicine of Alzheimer’s Dementia (AD) recently – the parallels with Climate Science are depressing…
Alzheimer’s is now pretty well on epidemic proportion. It kills 12.5% of all UK folks presently and will be 25% inside as many years. Figures for the US are even worse, it presently takes down one person in six (16.6%)
Not just old folks are getting dementia – at present rate of growth, every child in the US will be born Autistic by the year 2050
So you ask, where’s the vaccine – where is the Never Better Medicine?
Contemporary medicine is nowhere on AD – despite it having first been identified by its eponymous doctor over a century ago.
Reason: Money money money and money. Background: Everybody knows that AD is ’caused’ by (amyloid) protein plaques (PP) that build up inside the affected person’s brain. Everybody knows this and they picture this ‘stuff’ choking the poor person’s brain to death. It cannot make new connections, old ones get broken, it is starved of Oxygen and other nutrient.
Simple, even a child could work it out. (you do see where I’m going by now?)
But there are problems, esp:
The PPs are proven to be anti-microbial
Folks with AD live to be 85 years old compared to non-AD folks who only get to be 78
Autopsies show brains choked full of PPs yet the person completely had no signs of AD while alive
The PPs are proven to be effective at removing divalent (heavy) metals from the brain – most notably Mercury
You get the idea and now see the parallel to Climate Science.
In the same way that CO2 and Rising Temperatures are perfectly co-incidental, so are the PPs with AD.
Where are the ‘Einstein & Feynman Sciences’ here – where “It takes only one to disprove the theory”
There are some very compelling arguements that PPs don’t ’cause’ AD in the same way as there are plenty examples where CO2 doesn’t ’cause’ climate change.
(Did you get there yet, here’s the punchline / paragraph)
There are myriad ways of catching, treating and reversing AD (if it’s seen early) just as there are myriad ways of ‘treating’ the observed climate change. Again, if its seen early and before a new desert is created or an existing one made larger.
If you like, AD is where a person’s brain, memory, personality and just everything has become ‘a desert’ – that is also the end-game of Real Climate Change
For climate and in an absolute nutshell, you Go Organic
You do not use ploughs, nitrogen fertiliser, chemicals and you never never ever let bare soil be exposed to the sun
For AD, you also go organic.
No ‘processed food’ and primarily because processed food is in its entirety = cooked starch
No equivalent to nitrogen fert = refined sugar and most hideous of all, Corn Syrup
No ‘chemicals’ – esp the same chemicals as applied to plants and their pests (esp Roundup)
No poisons = do your absolute damnedest to keep clear of shit like Mercury, also Aluminium
Boost your immune system = plenty Vitamins B, C and D also esp Zinc & Selenium
Spell it out, the protein plaques inside the sufferers of AD are there to try and protect the victim
Holy <expletive> Kow you exclaim, is that what the extra Carbon Dioxide is doing – trying to protect (the organism = haha = Gaia) and repair damage?
But what have we got in both the cases of Climate Change and Alzheimer’s Dementia?
i.e. War is being waged on the very thing that’s trying to do the protecting and to repair damage
Medical Science is busting its proverbial gut to find A Pill, A Vaccine, An Injection to get rid of the PPs inside the brain of an AD patient – just as Climate Science is busting its guts trying to get rid of CO2
The why is very simple. Vast amounts of money are to be made in both cases.
Where as the simple remedies don’t cost hardly anything and most particularly, are Natural Remedies and Substances (vitamins) that can not be patented
Something Has Got To Change around here or we all are in some very big trouble
haha “Think of the kids” the alarmists say
Doncha feel sick to the stomach that the money-grubbing path they are taking us down will see every kid born being Autistic inside 30 years and well over 50% of the adults being demented.
If you are even just ‘a bit overweight‘ or ‘pre-diabetic‘, you are well on your way there……
https://www.mediatheque.lindau-nobel.org/videos/31544/dna-between-physics-and-biology-2010/laureate-montagnier
He has strong evidence that Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, chronic Lyme syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, various neuropathies, and autism are actually from infections. Got into huge trouble, had to leave France for China to continue research. R.I.P a few days ago.
Big Pharma has a huge problem with electromagnetic diagnosis and treatment – it would bankrupt them.
Farming the air
By David Wojick
The beginning: “You are built almost entirely out of carbon dioxide and water. So is all the food you eat. Likewise for all the energy you use moving about and staying alive. Carbon dioxide and water! In short the carbon dioxide in the air is the global food supply. This is why all life on Earth is said to be “carbon based”.
The climate alarmists play a tricky word game here. They call carbon dioxide “pollution” and wind and solar power “clean.” Our food supply is not pollution. Nor is emitting carbon dioxide (which we all do when we exhale) unclean. This is just false advertising. Watching a child grow is watching processed carbon dioxide be reprocessed.
Here is how it works. Plants collect carbon dioxide from the air then use sunlight and water to create the stuff they consume to build their bodies and to live on. They also use tiny amounts of vitamins and minerals, just as we do. Fertilizer is like vitamins, not like food. So almost all of what they use is carbon dioxide and water. Animals eat the plants for food, basically reprocessing the carbon dioxide and water. Then we eat both plants and animals.
There is a saying that you cannot live on air but in fact that is just what we do. All of our food begins as airborne (or waterborne) carbon dioxide. Our farmers are literally farming the air!
Go into a grocery store and look around. All the food you see — vegetables, fruit and meat — fresh, frozen or canned — is processed carbon dioxide. So are the people shopping there. So are you.”
Extraordinary claims attract extraordinary attention, and this means such claims require reanalysis — and possibly refutation or corroboration. In scientific research, the data must fit the hypothesis, and if it does not, then the hypothesis is rejected.
The Conversation. About a, possibly, snake with legs in the fossil record.
It might become more widespread, though.
michael hart
February 14, 2022 2:59 am
The BBC has recently added “Climate” as a menu item in its own right on their News page https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
This is in addition to their “Science & Environment” page, which is better described as “Environment & Environment” page.
It has long irritated me that they, and others, try to take the widely-believed authority of Science to add to the frequent lack of intellectual rigour of Environmentalism. There is just as much case for having a “Science & Business” or a “Science & Sport” page.
same with the Bah-stin Globe- with a climate menu item- and under it- it says the paper will NOT be open to discussing climate skepticism as “the science is settled”- how absurd in a city which considers itself so ultra sophisticated as to shut off discussion on this important topic
I notice whenever there is a climate article in the Globe- then I read the comments- about 97% are even more fanatic than the article- the few who show a very modest skepticism then get slammed- any who show real skepticism get deleted- I notice that a significant percent of the comments are in fact deleted with no reason mentioned- those were almost certainly serious skeptics- as the paper says, there will be no discussion of the science.
“The Supreme Court in late February is to hear West Virginia v. EPA, a case challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gasses as pollutants. This site in November explored best- and worst-case scenario outcomes from the perspective of climate action advocates based on arguments in initial briefs filed by parties to the case.”
Tom Abbott
February 14, 2022 3:28 am
I see where Special Counsel John Durham has now linked Hillary Clinton to spying on Trump during his campaign for president and even after Trump was elected.
Hillary made up the “Russia Collusion” lie, paid people to perpetrate it, including leftwing media types, and conspired with the Obama-Biden administration to use the power of the federal government in the form of the FBI, CIA, other Intelligence agencies and the “Justice” Department to attack and try to destroy their political opponents.
And these crimes are ongoing in the Biden administration.
The Democrats are led by a cabal of Traitors to their Country. Personal political power is more important to them than laws or morals.
Yes, I did. I expect Trump will have a lot more to say about it in the future.
I wonder what Hillary is going to say about it? Some lie or another, no doubt.
The next question is does Hillary face indictment?
The leftwing media is ignoring this story, as per usual. I can see why, especially in this case, because the leftwing media are complicit in spreading the Trump/Russia collusion lie. They knew it was a lie when they reported it.
They simply gear-shifted to China, without missing a ratchet.
And just recently down-shifted again – Russia is to invade Ukraine on Wednesday 16.02.2022.
Likely means Kiev will attack Donbass on Wednesday.
Major war is then the best cover for Hilary and the midterms.
Problem is, Europe is then toast, as Macron and Scholz have sniffed out.
Biden was point man for Obama’s Nuland Maidan coup in Kiev, costing $5 billion. The game is to start a war with Russia, Ukraine is slowly finding out they are Afghanistan 2. Their economy is a total ruin already.
here is my take on the durham investigation. durham does not like trump but hates hillary more. durham knows hillary must never be in control of anything attached to government. durham also knows how the media spin doctors could and would make hillary go from criminal to victim. if durham would have fired all of his guns a year or so ago, the spin doctors would have years to change the minds of half the country. durham dribbles out his investigation to keep a steady flow to the public that hillary is, was and always will be bad for the country. durham is running out the clock.
News reports are saying a lot of Clinton’s people are starting to talk. No doubt, trying to make a deal with the prosecutors.
The leftwing media is not covering this at all. This is typcial for propaganda organs. They selectively report the news to benefit their political ambitions.
Ten percent of those who voted for Biden in 2020, said they would not have voted for Biden had they known about the scandals involving Biden and his son, Hunter. That would have given the election to Trump. But, of course, the leftwing media didn’t tell anyone about the corruption of the Bidens before the election.
And Biden is hip-deep in this Clinton scandal. Just watch and see.
Tom Abbott
February 14, 2022 3:29 am
I see where Biden lost his bid to increase the cost of carbon dioxide. A federal judge shot down Biden’s attempt to raise the price. The judge was appointed by Trump. 🙂
Visualization is a powerful way to learn. I would like to encourage WUWT readers to view the high-resolution NASA GOES-East and GOES-West animations from the imagers on the geostationary satellites. You can select from the 16 wavelength bands and choose how many images to put in motion. Pasted below is a link to the default animation for Band 16 (the “CO2” band centered at 13.3 microns) for the full-disk view from GOES-East.
Consider the implications of the constant motion and the altitudes achieved in the circulation at local, regional, and planetary scales. First, the planet is readily visualized from space as a huge array of highly variable emitter/reflector elements. A further implication, as I see it, is that heat energy cannot, in fact, be accumulated to harmful effect at the surface by what non-condensing GHGs do.
I have posited before here on WUWT that griff is 6’9″ tall. Unfortunately, the joists in griff’s mom’s basement are 6’5″ above the floor.
So, every time griff makes a trip to the loo or to get a soda or some crisps, it’s *Clunk* “ow!” *Clunk* “ow!” *Clunk* “ow!” *Clunk* “ow!” all the way across the basement and back to the computer.
Knocked half-silly, griff then proceeds to post.
Does anyone have a better explanation for griff’s posts?
Not only is The Grifter the alter-ego of the grand high mystic ruler, and Moderator, Charles Rotten. The Grifter was invented to generate more page views. Mr. Rotten, few people realize, was formerly the lead singer of the punk band The Sex Pistols, when he was known as Johnny Rotten.
The Grifter comments are cleverly written in the spirit of the Johnny Carson character Floyd R. Turbo, and are great fun for Mr. Rotten.
Why else would someone take a job as Moderator, where the official website “office” is a bar stool, in a seedy bar, down by the docks? Answer: Being Moderator is an opportunity for creative writing, Babylon Bee style, as The Grifter. Not only does Mr. Rotten write the Grifter comments, but he also places bets on how many thumbs down each one will generate.
Earlier this morning on the BBC News front page was an article telling us how BoJo was going to use the excuse that his alcohol-fuelled lockdown parties were for ‘Business Purposes’
The article has disappeared now and to describe the BBC’s own search feature as surreal and bizarre in a truly epic understatement.
IOW: Boris has admitted that UK Government Policy is now formulated by alcoholics while they are actually inebriated.
He might also claim, I’m sure he has, that the parties were for ‘Team Building‘ and for strengthening interpersonal ties – that they were good for the mental health of the attendees.
The first point is beyond mind-blowing all on its own but that, while at these ‘team building and mental health‘ parties, it was decided that the whole rest of the country should be denied these things.
The guy should hang. period.
But he won’t will he?
Because they only hangmen available (Yes Metropolitan Police, I am looking at you) will be just as guilty of all the same sort of crimes as he is and they damn well know it
Climate Change is not the real problem we have here…..
Abstract
uw_ir assumes the ground beneath radiates as a black body.
As explained in theory and demonstrated by experiment such is not possible.
Wihtou out uw_ir there is no dw_ir, no GHG energy loop and no greenhouse effect.
SURFRAD consists of seven instrumentation sites collecting and recording CONUS terrestrial radiation data.
dw_solar is the downwelling solar radiation between 200 and 3,000 nm. This is akin to the 160 W/m^2 net/net to the ground on a K-T diagram.
uw_solar is the upwelling solar radiation between 200 and 3,000 nm and is akin to the 63 W/m^2 of the K-T diagram.
The difference between these two is akin to the upwelling kinetic sensible and latent energies on the K-T diagram. Some suggest that this lowered energy/cooling difference is the magical “back” radiation of the greenhouse gas loop. (It’s not.)
uw_ir “measures” the IR between 3,000 and 50,000 nm upwelling from the ground and is akin to the 396 of the K-T diagram, displaying more energy than arrived from the sun in the first place. This number is actually a theoretical, “What if?” calculation that fills the denominator of the emissivity ratio: energy leaving a system by radiation over the energy leaving by radiation were the system an ideal BB at its temperature. In the K-T that would be 63/396=0.16. For SURFRAD that would be uw_solar/uw_ir. And since uw_ir is the BB of the ground temperature that number can be back calculated w/ the S-B equation. Did that elsewhere. If the correct emissivity is applied to uw_ir the dw_ir goes to zero.
Summary: uw_solar and uw_ir * correct emissivity are one and the same energy (2 + 2 = 2) and dw_ir goes to zero.
So, what about dw_ir, 3,000 to 50,000 LWIR downwelling from the sky? Is that even possible to measure? Shouldn’t it be the missing difference of the dw – uw solar above? Should it be uw_ir – uw_solar like on the K-T?
I just could not make sense of the origin of dw_ir so I compared the ratio of the dw_ir to the uw_ir and plotted against the uw_ir to see what I might see. I expected to see evidence that dw_ir was independent from uw_ir especially at night and during storms, cloudy weather, etc.
It seems to me that dw_ir is not an independent measurement but is some kind of algorithm driven mathematical/fixed percentage of uw_ir and the dw_ir instrument and data are “calibrated” to conform.
There is an easy way to check this. Disconnect uw_ir and observe dw_ir. Whether dw_ir changes or not will be a problem either way.
As others often request, respond to the contents of the post.
Time to jump paradigm from radiative to adiabatic – see my post above.
Looks like the Milankovitch hypothesis must be put to rest.
Sara
February 14, 2022 5:28 am
We are having a rather DRY winter in my AO. Cold, yes, and slightly above average humidity, but snow? Not as much as we should get.
Should I wish for more and possibly get a blizzard, or just enjoy the fact that the geese are already coming back (as always) and looking for nesting spots?
Bruce Cobb
February 14, 2022 5:42 am
Needless to say, open threads are not for closed minds.
74 UK customers got checks for £2.3 TRILLION from Northern Powergrid because of Storm Arwen.
Now Marc Carney of UN Climate Finance must be wondering where his $100 TRILLION actually went!
Couple of new hurricanes on the way right now – check the impacted zones, and collect!
Bruce Cobb
February 14, 2022 5:54 am
This just in under the Strange But True category; Mike Pence is now being pressured to declare the Bengals the actual winners of the Super Bowl, as the game was stolen. More to follow.
I was pulling for the Bengals to win, but the Bengals actually got away with a blantant foul on one play that could have determined the game. The Bengals pass reciever grabbed the facemask of the L.A. defender and threw him off balance which enabled the Bengals pass reciever to catch the ball on an important play. No foul was called, so the Bengals got away with one.
I like the Bengals because the coach is from Oklahoma and two of the Bengals running backs are former Oklahoma University players.
Realizing that surface emissivity is only ~0.91, surface emission only ~355W/m2 and the GHE only has a magnitude of about 115W/m2 would be a great start. At least if we want to get the “science” eventually right.
https://greenhousedefect.com/what-is-the-surface-emissivity-of-earth
It is a good idea to question the assumed surface flux property. This boundary condition should be scrutinized because problems there would filter all the way up.
A value of 355 W m-2 implies an atmospheric window flux of over 60 W m-2 compared to the standard scheme of 40. I will explain below.
That is a difference of 20 watts per square meter that is lost directly to space compared to standard diagrams.
Standard atmosphere gives surface flux 398.2 and OLR 239.9
Standard greenhouse factor = surface flux / OLR = 1.66
Standard atmosphere emission = surface flux / 2 = 199.8 = 169.9 + 29.9
Standard atmospheric window = OLR – atmospheric emission = 40.1
Because the atmosphere does not absorb in the window region OLR must be the sum of flux from the atmosphere (including clouds) and flux in the window portion. Total atmospheric emission is approximated by surface flux / 2.
Schaffer atmosphere gives surface flux 355 and OLR 240
Schaffer greenhouse factor = 355 / 240 = 1.48
Schaffer atmosphere emission = surface flux / 2 = 355 / 2 = 177.5
Schaffer atmospheric window = OLR – 177.5 = 62.5
Atmospheric window difference = 62.5 – 40.1 = 22.4 W m-2
Standard models would require extra forcings at the surface to account for an extra 22.4 W m-2. With the Schaffer surface boundary condition estimation no such extra forcing is required.
In the case of CO2 at 20% greenhouse factor in standard radiation theory 22.4 W m-2 would account to approximately 4.5 W m-2 extra CO2 forcing.
When we change the surface boundary condition to 355 W m-2 according to the Schaffer estimate no such extra forcing is required. 4.5 W m-2 is conspicuously similar to the hypothetical forcing from extra non condensing greenhouse gases.
An extra 22.4 W m-2 is also conspicuously similar to the surface errors originally identified and then glazed over in the widely cited Trenberth 2009 https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/90/3/2008bams2634_1.xml
The atmospheric window is my favorite bit but this post highlights the importance of scrutinizing the nature of surface flux.
JCM
Average surface temp of 288 C gives IR emission from ground upwards of 390 W. So how do you calculate 355 W? That would be 281 C average, kind of low average temp to escape attention.
The surface is NOT a perfect black body. And 0.91 x 390 = 355
The K-T diagram ground/surface emissivity is 0.16 = 63 / 396.
396 or 390 is a theoretical calculation, i.e. it is NOT real!
Your graphic is arithmetic and thermodynamic trash.
If I have understood correctly your value of radiation net flux from the surface 63 is similar to the 60 in my example above. In my view the nature of net flux density delivered from the surface to the atmospheric boundary layer is by nonradiation mechanisms such as turbulent diffusion. So in my view radiation emissivity isn’t the right conceptual framework to describe the nature of net surface flux. There I am in disagreement with both Schaffer and standard atmospheric diagrams. That is another matter. Surface radiation concepts such as emissivity may only have a discernible impact on atmospheric window flux density.
It’s not my value, it’s Trenberth’s.
Which 60/63? (57.9)
It’s on the graphic twice.
163.3-18.4-86.4-0.6=57.9
398.2-340.3=57.9
Two sets of books?
BTW 398.2 is a theoretical “What if?” calc for the denominator of the emissivity ratio.
It – is – NOT real!!!
Neither is the 340.3.
It could be that we are in agreement but it’s difficult to follow you. I would argue the atmosphere does not receive net radiation from the surface. Radiation equilibrium extends to the surface. While flux density is measured in W m-2 it does not imply what proportion is radiation in nature. Nonradiation flux is also quantified in W m-2. If you are suggesting the atmosphere cannot receive an additional net +63 LWIR from the surface then I am in agreement.
How difficult is third grade math?
The atmosphere cannot receive the same 63 twice.
I have a problem with the whole diagram. These are averages and averages just don’t work when you have exponential functions involved. The sun’s insolation is not averaged over the earth, it varies according to a trig function that itself is modified by clouds/albedo/etc. Similarly, the earth’s ground/water temps vary by the insolation received at that point. That is why we have temperature zones.
If SB is going to be used then calculations will be based upon an exponential of the 4th power in addition to the trig functions. As a consequence averages just don’t work properly.
You would think Phd. climate scientists would have and should have developed a more sophisticated mathematical description of how the radiation balance actually works. I know it is enticing to use averaged temperatures but that is ignoring the real world.
Furthermore, they divided the ISR by 4 to spread the discular area over the spherical ToA. Dumb!
Btw. I get the same result as Huang et al 2016 for the hemispheric emissivity of water. Note: the bulk of emissions @288K occur at <10µm wavelength.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/73/9/jas-d-15-0355.1.xml
oops.. meant to say below WN 1000, or above 10µm respectively
Thanks for the link
The kinetic +heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules render any emissivity approaching BB as not possible.
Even over water.
Schaffer’s emissivity could be valid for local radiation exchange equilibrium between surface and atmosphere + IR window.
Then conceptually set net LW radiation exchange between surface and atmosphere to zero. This is a separate matter from total energy exchange between the surface and atmosphere where net surface to atmosphere is dominated by turbulent heat flux and eddy covariance K. You have illustrated that in your diagram. https://www.met.reading.ac.uk/~swrhgnrj/teaching/MT23E/mt23e_notes.pdf
All too often talented scientists burn bridges by their own arrogance but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.
From the linked paper: “The Earth’s surface emits like a blackbody with a temperature of about 290 K.”
It does not!
I knew you would go there in some attempt to deflect from the point. I’m afraid I can’t help you. Good luck to you.
The emission and absorption characteristics of the atmosphere vary with the concentrations of green-house gases such as water vapour and carbon dioxide.
Even if this were a real thang at .04% there is not enough mass to matter.
I’ll give you one more shot. Being in defensive mode will not win you allies. Regardless of assumed emissivity and the radiation characteristics of the atmosphere my view is that net LW radiation exchange sums to zero. Full stop. The slightest change to K will offset any radiation perturbation. That is my point. As soon as radiation is perturbed the temperature lapse rate becomes greater than the adiabatic lapse rate and the atmosphere becomes instable. This instability initiates an immediate feedback response denoted by K.
How do I respond to esoteric handwavium?
The sun heats the surface, the surface heats the air.
The atmos obeys Q=U A dT.
Q and/U go up/down dT goes up/down and surface temperature goes up/down.
It’s not that complicated.
Wow! Thanks for the link. Most informative.
In an earlier post referencing SURFRAD I commented that dw_ir and uw_ir must be chained at the hip liked escaped convicts by some kind of algorithm.
HEY, there they are: section 5! These are what SURFRAD uses!
I’ve attached a slide with the nomenclature cross referenced.
dw_ir moves energy from the cooler upper atmosphere back towards the surface, an egregious violation of LoT 2.
Not that it matters.
uw_ir radiates energy from the surface. Emissivity is assumed to be 1.0. It’s not, it’s uw_solar/uw_ir.
uw_ir basically duplicates uw_solar
If I were to discard a duplicate calc it would be the imaginary ir ones not the real solar ones.
No uw_ir = no dw_ir.
It’s disappointing because we likely agree. Speaking of esotericism look to your most recent comment. Sprinkled with sarcasm it’s impossible to digest. Good luck to you.
Let’s take a closer look at the LWIR equation.
Lu = ε σ T^4 + (1 – ε) Ld
If ε= 1 then Lu = σ T^4 = uw_i
Emissivity = the radiation leaving a system divided by the radiation that would leave were the system a BB at temperature.
ε = uw_s/uw_i
uwi = uw_s/uw_i * uw_i +(1 – uw_s/uw_i) dw_i
(uw_i – uw_s) = (uw_i – uw_s)/uw_i * dw_i
uw_i = dw_i
and since uw_i and dw_i are in opposite directions their sum is zero, i.e. consistent with LoT 1.
And the GHG “extra” energy loop goes kerbluey and the greenhouse effect goes straight in the dumpster along with 30 years of crap science based on it.
Btw. you are taking this “energy budget” way too serious. Not just are the figures largely incorrect, the ideas it represents are just stupid. We can simplify the relevant parts.
Earth absorbs some 240W/m2 of solar radiation and emits about the same amount at various emission levels, strongly correlated to the respective emission temperatures. And that is about it.
What happens underneath these emission levels is largely irrelevant. There are no “radiative energy flows” or something like it. The effects of latent heat are best described by the magnitude of the lapse rate, not by a W/m2 figure.
Let me explain it with the example of surface-atmosphere “radiative exchange”, the core concept of the above budget diagram. The atmosphere absorbs about 85% of all radiation emitted by the surface. With updated surface emissivity that would be about 300W/m2 (355 x 0.85). About the same amount of radiation is emitted by the atmosphere onto the surface. Again, it is not 340W/m2 of “back radiation”, but only 300W/m2, or a bit less.
Anyhow, this is not an “energy flow”, but a lump sum game. And it happens everywhere. Every molecule emits radiation and absorps from neighboring molecules. We just do not care, as it is neither a (net) flow of energy, nor would it heat anything. Only “climate science” tries to make it matter..
What can I say? I’m a serious guy.
Sounds like we all agree the surface net LW radiation is roughly zero. or about the same amount upwelling from the surface and downwelling from the atmosphere (regardless of their magnitude). We probably each conceptualize it differently.
To each their own. Total convection K (latent and sensible heat flux or evaporation/condensation and wind currents at various heights) spreads out the lapse rate in the boundary layer to the observed value compared to one by radiation alone.
Surface temperature can respond to solar input, changing landuse/surface properties, or nonradiation forcing such as ocean upwelling variations. The lapse rate then proceeds as normal up from there.
The consequence of K is to optimize energy dissipation regardless of the IR radiation properties of the atmosphere. Ultimately the total lapse rate is bound by the atmospheric pressure profile and K is the mechanism that makes it so.
K is free to move energy where it needs to be to dissipate effectively. Without it hydrostatic equilibrium of our atmosphere wouldn’t be possible.
The Earth’s ground surface cannot radiate at 0.91.
The K-T diagram says it’s 0.16 = 63 / 396.
Just wrong.. 😉
I’ve got experimental backup.
Not only that, engineers designing and building heat exchangers are showing this process every day.
And you have?????
Well, if anyone is wanting to talk about anything, how about this coming Sunspot Cycle. The Greybeard offers a look at some of the competing forecasts:
Still Looking at the Sunspot Cycle Data
About the solar cycle predictions and progression.
With the current ramping up of the cycle 25 and possible terminator event occurrence there is a lot of buzzing and claims that the cycle 25 is significantly stronger than the predictions of low cycle similar to 24. These claims are made by both amateur enthusiasts but surprisingly by prominent professionals as well.
they are accompanied by charts like this as the evidence.
This is not only wrong but just plain stupid. The predictions in these charts are just a general depiction of the C25 duration and the maximum peak reduced to a simple smooth hump like curve. It should be totally obvious the curve itself is not to be followed as an exact prediction as no cycle actually even looks like this.
If you want to see how the progression and the ramp up rate really stands you have to stack up the actual cycles against it, like this.
There you can see the C25 is clearly following C24 so far, even though that is no prove of where it is going to end up in it’s peak.
OK, well, sunspots and their cycles do seem to have an effect on the weather patterns, so it’s probably a valid thing to do to speculate on that.
Are we going to have more rain/snow or less rain/snow? You might want to address that issue.
OK S.
In the post accessed by your link, we can see another link to a graph I down/uploaded to make it visible:
This SILSO-based SSN data fits pretty good to what we can obtain from Canada’s Space Weather agency, based on solar flux observations
https://www.spaceweather.gc.ca/forecast-prevision/solar-solaire/solarflux/sx-5-mavg-en.php
what I reproduce here:
The point is not to demonstrate that SC25 would be stronger than SC24.
The point is the inverse, namely to contradict early claims that SC25 would keep below SC24 from the very beginning. What is simply wrong.
You can clearly see from the first chart Bindidong posted himself that a solar cycle can start off higher than another and yet finish significantly lower when done, like 23 against 22, This guy debunks his own claim right in his own post , that takes some doing.
“There have been some recent calls for more open threads. Here you go.”
Resolved: Charles Rotter is the current incarnation of Buddha.
a) the Buddha, may he resist in pieces, has stepped aside from the soul-rending tedium of rerererere(etc)reincarnation so as to gather his wits and dignity about him before “once more into the fray”, and so is currently not to be found.
b) Charles is such an utter Rotter, and is so perfectly suited to being himself, he has neither the time, the inclination, nor the lack of appetites necessary to unseat any of the other contenders.
I was under the assumption that this was a mumbo-jumbo free space!
I challenge anyone to read Mdme Blavatsky’s ‘Secret Doctrine’ (1888) from cover to cover.
I challenge anyone to read Isaac Newton’s chest full of alchemical writings! Apparently Lord Maynard Keynes did, for the biography.
Super Bowl LVI halftime show points way to resurgence of convertible cars to fight heat of current hot spell in LA. Admirers on stage demonstrate how to dress for heat and still enjoy physical activity. Even elder folks participated in movement displays.
That was the most boring Superbowl half-time show I’ve ever watched. About half the audience could not see what was happening on the stage because the stage was blocking their view. I guess they had to watch the show on the stadium monitors.
It looked to me like they had a 1962 Chevy covertible, and a 1963 Chevy covertible, and a 1964 Chevy convertible lined up in a row. I guess someone has a fetish for early Chevrolet covertibles.
My buddy from highschool days had a 1963 Chevy two-door hardtop with a 327 cu. in engine and automatic. White with black interior and bucket seats. A really nice car.
The show was for TV just like the game.
I didn’t understand a word of it.
I wonder if we are supposed to.
…there were words?
No, I didn’t understand a word they were saying, so naturally I had no idea what they were talking about.
I heard a lot of praise of the halftime show from some people. It seems it’s a Millenial generation thing, since they grew up on this type of music. People like me who grew up before hip-hop became popular are not really familiar with hip-hop, and so the whole halftime didn’t make much sense.
I would have preferred some classic rock with screaming guitars, but that’s just me. That’s the kind of music I grew up listening to.
Watch any commercials nowdays? Half the time, you can’t figure out what they’re pedaling, which should be the purpose of the commercial..
I’ve lost interest in the Super Bowl lately, and the commercials are nowhere near as good as they used to be.
Yes, some of the commercials were not very explanatory. Some were good and some were a big waste of money.
Those commercial writers ought to hire me as their consultant. I could make their commercials so much better. 🙂
Maybe that helps explain the vandalism that occurred after the game was over.
Failure by the Democrats to lock up the criminals and keep them locked up is the cause of the vandalism and crime.
It will get “chilly” in California tomorrow night.
Los Angeles, California was 84.2* Fahrenheit (F) before noon on Sunday February 13. The preceding days Saturday Feb. 12 it was 87.9*F, Friday Feb. 11 it was 80.6*F, Thursday Feb. 10 it was 82.4*F, Weds. Feb. 9th it was 84.2*F and so on. Northern hemisphere winter is still the season; just not typically short pants and tee-shirt weather.
The reason for the high temperatures in California is there is a high-pressure system hovering over the area. The center of the high is marked:
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/500hPa/orthographic=-108.20,30.72,403/loc=-119.395,33.810
3 deg F here near Detroit now, supposed to be 50 on Wednesday, that will be a nice change.
Yes during pauses of play in the broadcast there were helicopter camera shots of the Hollywood sign from the front and looking back over the sign to downtown LA. You could see everything clear as a bell due to the high pressure no humidity air.
In two days in California.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2022/02/16/0800Z/wind/isobaric/500hPa/orthographic=-108.20,30.72,403
In three days, Arctic air will return to the Rocky Mountains.
Thank you for taking advantage of the Open Thread instead of your usual random off-topic insertions.
Just have to get this off my chest here: The climate alarmists in California are the same evil hypocrite elites walking around SoFi Stadium today without masks while still requiring them of school kids—including even the kids performing at the Super Bowl. If Californians do not throw them all out of office, and demand immediate cessation of all mask rules and return to fossil fuel development and abandon carbon free goals, well, they deserve all the tyranny they get. When will the scales fall from their eyes?
The Superbowl was a good example of hypocricy. None of the elites deigned to wear masks. But they expect everyone else to comply with the mask mandate. That’s why people are starting to protest.
Bingo. Masks for thee but not for me.
The NFL and the stadium officials made a big show last week of how they were going to enforce the local LA County mask rules requiring masks except while actively eating or drinking at big events. Predictably, all that was for show. In all the many crowd shots during the game, I saw maybe three masks—forget celebrities, NOBODY was masked. And there was no evident enforcement effort. As there is no evidence that similar events have been “super spreaders,” the unelected local “science” officials to whom all the people elected here have deferred in order to avoid making any decision themselves should simply give up and end the useless mask mandates, especially for kids, but instead they likely will double down and extend the mandates as punishment for what happened Sunday. Nobody needs to send us to a gulag, we already live in one!
“forget celebrities, NOBODY was masked”
Exactly right. Mask mandates have become a sham and a scam.
This will get filled with Anti-Vaxxers and other neo-chemtrail nonsense.
Us anti vaxxers prefer the term pure blood. Funny how I’m an anti jabber ( they are not vaccines) who still had MMR, Hep B etc.
so did the Nazis.
Congrats Izaak.
You win the Godwin’s Law trophy for this thread.
Can everybody get in line please, M Courtney is going to paint us all with his “deplorables” brush.
So you are voting against having an open thread?
You know, if someone says something outrageous, it can always be corrected in an open thread.
No, even Open Thread is still moderated the main difference from regular topical posts is that you will not be off topic here.
Policy rules are still in effect here, however.
Well I guess that makes you a Holocaust denier 😉
Since 1802 there have been problems
I saw one of the last smallpox epidemics in India when I was 16. The Vaccinator suddenly got active after about 10 years of avoiding the villages. In a tiny back room in a mud hut I saw an 11 y/o girl lying unconcious on a string bed, her body completely covered with weeping scabs. Her grandmother had said “Keep her back when the vaccinator comes so she can look after her 2 younger brothers if they are sick after the vaccine”.
In the villages, people brought their children out when the vaccinator arrived because they had personal experience of the alternative. I never heard of anyone against the smallpox vaccine because the results were obvious, with pock-marked people throughout the population as enduring witnesses.
Steve Kirsch’s recent substack on the problems with the early vaccine in the 19th century show that mandating a medical treatment of any sort always leads to opposition, some of it straight out paranoia.
My refusal to get the currently mandated shot is because it a completely new technology brought out without an ACTIVE monitoring system. I have personally been involved in human pharmacological experimentation (all basic science related), and I know what the rules for experiments on human subjects.
Oh, hogwash, Courtney. I’m going to the Renaissance Faire this summer wearing a bird beak mask and yelling “Bring out yer dead!”.
This morning, the head of the Infectious Diseases at a local/well-known university said flatly that if you catch the omicron bug, it will give you 300 days of immunity from the rest of the covid bugs.
Stock up on tissues and chicken broth and learn to make a bodacious pot of chicken soup. You seem to need it.
Charles, can posts like these just be deleted? They are trolling baits, nothing more.
https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html
Some data for doomsters rolling in-
Study: COVID recovery gave Israelis longer-lasting Delta defense than vaccines | The Times of Israel
Fourth COVID vaccine still doesn’t stop Omicron: Israeli study (nypost.com)
What’s the latest stats on Spanish Flu deaths vis a vis common or garden flu deaths and have they managed to parse them out of the global warming death figures yet? Ironically I see Norway the EV capital of the world has completely given up worrying about Corona. I suppose they must figure they’re all goners with the weather dooming anyway. So much settled science everywhere.
We live in a Vaccination Nation (US) where no prophylactics are allowed. Lucky us!
https://drjessesantiano.com/solved-the-ivermectin-african-enigma/
Don’t you mean “vaccine deniers”, since you’re using it in the same manner?
@M Courtney – point to a single time anywhere in WUWT content history when anything resembling a majority of commenters gave any credence to wacko chemtrail conspiracy. If you can’t stand and deliver on that simple challenge, well, mark yourself as another drive-by troll who’s all show and no go.
That dates you. We used that expression when I was in high school to describe a car with a stock engine that just came back from Tijuana with a new Candy Apple Red paint job and tuck-and-roll upholstery. He spent all his money on the external appearance.
Eeek. Busted, put the cuffs on me, guilty as charged!
I have been puzzled by WUWT staying away from the whole Covid story because it is becoming clear that the restrictions are part of an ambition to bring in similar control of people’s daily lives in the service of the “climate emergency”.
AND, forced administration of an experimental drug is just the beginning of forcing a lot more.
Having taken CO2 readings in the UK in various locations, including on an island, and had others take readings in Australia and France, the CO2 readings are between typically 500 and 600ppm outdoors. (none in a particularly urban/industrial environment)
Looking at the highly convoluted means -including the drying of the air sample- by which a CO2 reading is determined with the official readings, my simple question is why do they do this?
I can look at my thermometer and get a pretty accurate idea of the temperature but a CO2 device (not state of the art) delivers a reading that is nothing like the official readings.
Why do they subject the air sample to such adjustments? Is that an accurate way of doing this? Are the actual informal CO2 readings from devices such as mine (which are of course spot ones) more accurate as to the real levels of CO2 present in the environment?
tonyb
Where do you get a CO2 reading device? I might like to get one. Yes, of course, I can google it- but just asking. I’d like to see what it measures in a forest vs. in a solar “farm”.
I was worried about CO from a wood stove, got a new meter on eBay, and it gave such erratic readings I decided it must be broken. Began to look into the electronics, sensor stuff, but after the experience with optical smoke detectors after they banned Am241 sensors, I do not trust them.
The one I have is called the jsm-131 air quality detector. i just googled it and it came up on the search. They are not hugely robust but then again they are not hugely expensive. It seems to be very accurate in measuring traffic pollution so I can only hope the co2 reading plus or minus 10% is also in the ball park
tonyb
Since the gates of Kiev have been opened, have a look at
NASA planetary data from across the Solar System help resolve long-standing paleoclimatic enigmas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpUkPPtkPVc
This not the rules-based-order of radiative climate paradigm, rather its polar opposite.
Looks like the widely accepted Milankovitch hypothesis might have to be put to rest.
Major discussion at
https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2022/01/03/ned-nikolov-dispelling-the-milankovitch-myth/
Let’s keep this diplomatic, shall we?
We are in an icehouse global climate.
Any theory which says our global average temperature is 15 C is wrong.
What determines our global climate is our cold ocean.
Any theory that doesn’t explain why the average temperature of ocean is 3.5 C is
not about our global climate.
Our global average surface temperature is the result of our cold ocean, there is huge
difference if ocean were to be 3 C rather than 3.5 C, as there huge difference if average
temperature was 4 C.
And if ocean were 4 C, it is still a cold ocean. A 5 C ocean is still a cold ocean, or we still in an icehouse climate. We have not had 5 C ocean within last 2 million years.
The last 2 million year has coldest period in our 34 million year Ice Age. Earlier in the Late Cenozoic Ice Age.
Wiki says:
“It is well established that there is strong correlation between low CO2 levels and an icehouse state. However, that does not mean that decreasing atmospheric levels CO2 is a primary driver of a transition to the icehouse state.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_and_icehouse_Earth
I would say that obviously a cold ocean is the reason we have low CO2 levels. And a warmer
ocean would result in higher global CO2 level. But .5 C increase in average ocean temperature will not have much effect in regards of CO2 levels. Warmer being 1 or 2 C warmer, which is still a cold ocean.
We not going to have ocean which 4 C within a century or two, and more likely our ocean will cool again before it could reach 4 C. Or distant future is glaciation period.
And last 5000 years our ocean has been “about” 3.5 C with variation of couple tenths of degree at most. Or our recovery from our Little Ice Age was about .1 C increase in average ocean temperature.
One could say increase .3 C within 100 years would be “alarming”, but it doesn’t seem possible or likely. If that happenned I would concede that humans are definitely having effect- it’s a crazy amount of warming over such a short time period. And could match or exceed present future global climate “projections”. And would delay our returning to glaciation period
by at least 10,000 years.
How could humans relatively easily affect global temperature. How could human stop us from going into glaciation period, and could alter our global surface air temperature by a lot- could make global air really cold or slightly cooler.
The more colder we make global air, the faster we would increasing the ocean’s temperature {to avoid a glaciation period, faster}.
I don’t think anyone want average global air of 13 C or colder, but we might want 14 C, in order to increase the ocean temperature quicker. But warm the ocean without having any significant amount cooling of global air.
So, what do, is pump warm tropical surface water to a deep ocean depth. It would require much energy to do this. But one use wave energy to do it- or require no electrical power to force the lower density warmer water to the lower depths.
But if didn’t use “free” wave energy, amount energy should around amount of energy
pump water up against gravity water about 10 meter high {or less}.
But effecting ocean temperature with time period of 100 years, requires a lot water moved in such a “short time period”. So making the infrastructure to last a long time,
and requiring much maintenance, and using wave energy seems the cheapest, unless you to change ocean temperature, quickly. One use titanium as sea water does not corrode it.
Have a look here, slide 27 from Dr. Nikolov’s presentation :
https://slideplayer.com/slide/15439964/
No glaciation at Eocene anywhere, higher pressure.
–The Eocene Epoch is a geological epoch that lasted from about 56 to 33.9 million years ago (mya). It is the second epoch of the Paleogene Period in the modern Cenozoic Era.–
And we are in Late Cenozoic Ice Age which followed this epoch. Or our icehouse global climate started 33.9 million years ago.
Or icehouse global climate has cold ocean, say ocean which is about 8 C would count as a cold ocean. Our present average ocean temperature is about 3.5 C, and it not been as warm as 5 C in last couple million years.
And over Earth long history, the ocean has warmer than 15 C, some claim as warm as 25 C. Anyhow a 10 C ocean could be what is called a greenhouse global climate, and not going to have ice sheets near sea level- though inland and high elevation could large amount of glacial ice. Or we currently have glaciers in our tropics, at higher elevations.
I’ve been learning about the science & medicine of Alzheimer’s Dementia (AD) recently – the parallels with Climate Science are depressing…
Alzheimer’s is now pretty well on epidemic proportion. It kills 12.5% of all UK folks presently and will be 25% inside as many years. Figures for the US are even worse, it presently takes down one person in six (16.6%)
Not just old folks are getting dementia – at present rate of growth, every child in the US will be born Autistic by the year 2050
So you ask, where’s the vaccine – where is the Never Better Medicine?
Contemporary medicine is nowhere on AD – despite it having first been identified by its eponymous doctor over a century ago.
Reason: Money money money and money.
Background:
Everybody knows that AD is ’caused’ by (amyloid) protein plaques (PP) that build up inside the affected person’s brain. Everybody knows this and they picture this ‘stuff’ choking the poor person’s brain to death. It cannot make new connections, old ones get broken, it is starved of Oxygen and other nutrient.
Simple, even a child could work it out. (you do see where I’m going by now?)
But there are problems, esp:
You get the idea and now see the parallel to Climate Science.
In the same way that CO2 and Rising Temperatures are perfectly co-incidental, so are the PPs with AD.
Where are the ‘Einstein & Feynman Sciences’ here – where “It takes only one to disprove the theory”
There are some very compelling arguements that PPs don’t ’cause’ AD in the same way as there are plenty examples where CO2 doesn’t ’cause’ climate change.
(Did you get there yet, here’s the punchline / paragraph)
There are myriad ways of catching, treating and reversing AD (if it’s seen early) just as there are myriad ways of ‘treating’ the observed climate change. Again, if its seen early and before a new desert is created or an existing one made larger.
If you like, AD is where a person’s brain, memory, personality and just everything has become ‘a desert’ – that is also the end-game of Real Climate Change
For climate and in an absolute nutshell, you Go Organic
You do not use ploughs, nitrogen fertiliser, chemicals and you never never ever let bare soil be exposed to the sun
For AD, you also go organic.
No ‘processed food’ and primarily because processed food is in its entirety = cooked starch
No equivalent to nitrogen fert = refined sugar and most hideous of all, Corn Syrup
No ‘chemicals’ – esp the same chemicals as applied to plants and their pests (esp Roundup)
No poisons = do your absolute damnedest to keep clear of shit like Mercury, also Aluminium
Boost your immune system = plenty Vitamins B, C and D also esp Zinc & Selenium
Spell it out, the protein plaques inside the sufferers of AD are there to try and protect the victim
Holy <expletive> Kow you exclaim, is that what the extra Carbon Dioxide is doing – trying to protect (the organism = haha = Gaia) and repair damage?
But what have we got in both the cases of Climate Change and Alzheimer’s Dementia?
i.e. War is being waged on the very thing that’s trying to do the protecting and to repair damage
Medical Science is busting its proverbial gut to find A Pill, A Vaccine, An Injection to get rid of the PPs inside the brain of an AD patient – just as Climate Science is busting its guts trying to get rid of CO2
The why is very simple. Vast amounts of money are to be made in both cases.
Where as the simple remedies don’t cost hardly anything and most particularly, are Natural Remedies and Substances (vitamins) that can not be patented
Something Has Got To Change around here or we all are in some very big trouble
haha “Think of the kids” the alarmists say
Doncha feel sick to the stomach that the money-grubbing path they are taking us down will see every kid born being Autistic inside 30 years and well over 50% of the adults being demented.
If you are even just ‘a bit overweight‘ or ‘pre-diabetic‘, you are well on your way there……
Sulforaphane in broccoli may help against these brain deaseases you mention, but not against the CC meme…
Check Luc Montagnier – Nobel for HIV virus.
https://www.mediatheque.lindau-nobel.org/videos/31544/dna-between-physics-and-biology-2010/laureate-montagnier
He has strong evidence that Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, chronic Lyme syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, various neuropathies, and autism are actually from infections. Got into huge trouble, had to leave France for China to continue research. R.I.P a few days ago.
Big Pharma has a huge problem with electromagnetic diagnosis and treatment – it would bankrupt them.
https://www.cfact.org/2022/02/12/farming-the-air/
Farming the air
By David Wojick
The beginning: “You are built almost entirely out of carbon dioxide and water. So is all the food you eat. Likewise for all the energy you use moving about and staying alive. Carbon dioxide and water! In short the carbon dioxide in the air is the global food supply. This is why all life on Earth is said to be “carbon based”.
The climate alarmists play a tricky word game here. They call carbon dioxide “pollution” and wind and solar power “clean.” Our food supply is not pollution. Nor is emitting carbon dioxide (which we all do when we exhale) unclean. This is just false advertising. Watching a child grow is watching processed carbon dioxide be reprocessed.
Here is how it works. Plants collect carbon dioxide from the air then use sunlight and water to create the stuff they consume to build their bodies and to live on. They also use tiny amounts of vitamins and minerals, just as we do. Fertilizer is like vitamins, not like food. So almost all of what they use is carbon dioxide and water. Animals eat the plants for food, basically reprocessing the carbon dioxide and water. Then we eat both plants and animals.
There is a saying that you cannot live on air but in fact that is just what we do. All of our food begins as airborne (or waterborne) carbon dioxide. Our farmers are literally farming the air!
Go into a grocery store and look around. All the food you see — vegetables, fruit and meat — fresh, frozen or canned — is processed carbon dioxide. So are the people shopping there. So are you.”
More in the article. Please share it.
The Conversation. About a, possibly, snake with legs in the fossil record.
It might become more widespread, though.
The BBC has recently added “Climate” as a menu item in its own right on their News page https://www.bbc.co.uk/news
This is in addition to their “Science & Environment” page, which is better described as “Environment & Environment” page.
It has long irritated me that they, and others, try to take the widely-believed authority of Science to add to the frequent lack of intellectual rigour of Environmentalism. There is just as much case for having a “Science & Business” or a “Science & Sport” page.
same with the Bah-stin Globe- with a climate menu item- and under it- it says the paper will NOT be open to discussing climate skepticism as “the science is settled”- how absurd in a city which considers itself so ultra sophisticated as to shut off discussion on this important topic
““the science is settled””
The Boston Globe demonstrates their ignorance and arrogance.
I notice whenever there is a climate article in the Globe- then I read the comments- about 97% are even more fanatic than the article- the few who show a very modest skepticism then get slammed- any who show real skepticism get deleted- I notice that a significant percent of the comments are in fact deleted with no reason mentioned- those were almost certainly serious skeptics- as the paper says, there will be no discussion of the science.
at Yale Climate Connections
“Update: Supreme Court to weigh EPA authority on greenhouse pollutants”
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/02/update-supreme-court-to-weigh-epa-authority-on-greenhouse-pollutants/
I see where Special Counsel John Durham has now linked Hillary Clinton to spying on Trump during his campaign for president and even after Trump was elected.
Hillary made up the “Russia Collusion” lie, paid people to perpetrate it, including leftwing media types, and conspired with the Obama-Biden administration to use the power of the federal government in the form of the FBI, CIA, other Intelligence agencies and the “Justice” Department to attack and try to destroy their political opponents.
And these crimes are ongoing in the Biden administration.
The Democrats are led by a cabal of Traitors to their Country. Personal political power is more important to them than laws or morals.
But now the truth is starting to come out.
I presume you saw Trump’s comment on this?
Yes, I did. I expect Trump will have a lot more to say about it in the future.
I wonder what Hillary is going to say about it? Some lie or another, no doubt.
The next question is does Hillary face indictment?
The leftwing media is ignoring this story, as per usual. I can see why, especially in this case, because the leftwing media are complicit in spreading the Trump/Russia collusion lie. They knew it was a lie when they reported it.
They simply gear-shifted to China, without missing a ratchet.
And just recently down-shifted again – Russia is to invade Ukraine on Wednesday 16.02.2022.
Likely means Kiev will attack Donbass on Wednesday.
Major war is then the best cover for Hilary and the midterms.
Problem is, Europe is then toast, as Macron and Scholz have sniffed out.
I am still trying to figure out the game the Obama administration was playing in Ukraine.
Biden was point man for Obama’s Nuland Maidan coup in Kiev, costing $5 billion. The game is to start a war with Russia, Ukraine is slowly finding out they are Afghanistan 2. Their economy is a total ruin already.
“I don’t remember. All the information was on the hard-drive of my server that got ‘bleached’ somehow.”
https://nypost.com/2022/02/13/hillary-clinton-campaign-paid-tech-workers-to-dig-up-donald-trump-russia-connections/
Fox News is reporting that 66 percent of *Democrats* want Hillary investigated over these allegations she spied on Trump’s campaign and presidency.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10509123/More-Democrats-want-Hillary-Clinton-investigated-amid-bombshell-report.html
Oh, that is priceless, Tom Abbott!
here is my take on the durham investigation. durham does not like trump but hates hillary more. durham knows hillary must never be in control of anything attached to government. durham also knows how the media spin doctors could and would make hillary go from criminal to victim. if durham would have fired all of his guns a year or so ago, the spin doctors would have years to change the minds of half the country. durham dribbles out his investigation to keep a steady flow to the public that hillary is, was and always will be bad for the country. durham is running out the clock.
“But now the truth is starting to come out.”
I keep seeing people going on about how “that sort of surveillance is normal in a criminal investigation”. I don’t see anything coming of this.
News reports are saying a lot of Clinton’s people are starting to talk. No doubt, trying to make a deal with the prosecutors.
The leftwing media is not covering this at all. This is typcial for propaganda organs. They selectively report the news to benefit their political ambitions.
Ten percent of those who voted for Biden in 2020, said they would not have voted for Biden had they known about the scandals involving Biden and his son, Hunter. That would have given the election to Trump. But, of course, the leftwing media didn’t tell anyone about the corruption of the Bidens before the election.
And Biden is hip-deep in this Clinton scandal. Just watch and see.
I see where Biden lost his bid to increase the cost of carbon dioxide. A federal judge shot down Biden’s attempt to raise the price. The judge was appointed by Trump. 🙂
I guess I ought to post a link:
https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2022-02-11/us-judge-strikes-down-biden-climate-damage-cost-estimate
Visualization is a powerful way to learn. I would like to encourage WUWT readers to view the high-resolution NASA GOES-East and GOES-West animations from the imagers on the geostationary satellites. You can select from the 16 wavelength bands and choose how many images to put in motion. Pasted below is a link to the default animation for Band 16 (the “CO2” band centered at 13.3 microns) for the full-disk view from GOES-East.
Consider the implications of the constant motion and the altitudes achieved in the circulation at local, regional, and planetary scales. First, the planet is readily visualized from space as a huge array of highly variable emitter/reflector elements. A further implication, as I see it, is that heat energy cannot, in fact, be accumulated to harmful effect at the surface by what non-condensing GHGs do.
Science.
https://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/GOES/fulldisk_band.php?sat=G16&band=16&length=12
I should clarify that the data for the imagery is from the NASA satellites; the images and animations are provided by NOAA.
Can anything be off topic on an open thread? If so this is it. I am just asking, is Griff really CTM just having some fun with us all?
OT (off topic) = OT (open thread) 😀
OTAN = NATO . See :
Top French, German BIS bankers call for OTANexit immediately. Have Scholz and Macron gotten the memo?
https://www.marianne.net/agora/tribunes-libres/face-a-la-crise-ukrainienne-lotanexit-de-la-france-est-une-urgence-absolue
No. griff is taller than ctm.
I have posited before here on WUWT that griff is 6’9″ tall. Unfortunately, the joists in griff’s mom’s basement are 6’5″ above the floor.
So, every time griff makes a trip to the loo or to get a soda or some crisps, it’s *Clunk* “ow!” *Clunk* “ow!” *Clunk* “ow!” *Clunk* “ow!” all the way across the basement and back to the computer.
Knocked half-silly, griff then proceeds to post.
Does anyone have a better explanation for griff’s posts?
Griff simply reminds everyone what MSM is spouting in all megaphones – the Mighty Wurlitzer.
Not only is The Grifter the alter-ego of the grand high mystic ruler, and Moderator, Charles Rotten. The Grifter was invented to generate more page views. Mr. Rotten, few people realize, was formerly the lead singer of the punk band The Sex Pistols, when he was known as Johnny Rotten.
The Grifter comments are cleverly written in the spirit of the Johnny Carson character Floyd R. Turbo, and are great fun for Mr. Rotten.
Why else would someone take a job as Moderator, where the official website “office” is a bar stool, in a seedy bar, down by the docks? Answer: Being Moderator is an opportunity for creative writing, Babylon Bee style, as The Grifter. Not only does Mr. Rotten write the Grifter comments, but he also places bets on how many thumbs down each one will generate.
Wow, that would explain why he’s in Denmark so much.
Who was in Denmark? Griff or the Moderator? Or both?
“Floyd R. Turbo”
There’s a name I haven’t heard in a while. The Johnny Carson Show was excellent.
If Griff is primarily played by CTM, then Sunset Tommy is only a stand in for the part?
The BBC. what are they like…
Earlier this morning on the BBC News front page was an article telling us how BoJo was going to use the excuse that his alcohol-fuelled lockdown parties were for ‘Business Purposes’
The article has disappeared now and to describe the BBC’s own search feature as surreal and bizarre in a truly epic understatement.
IOW: Boris has admitted that UK Government Policy is now formulated by alcoholics while they are actually inebriated.
He might also claim, I’m sure he has, that the parties were for ‘Team Building‘ and for strengthening interpersonal ties – that they were good for the mental health of the attendees.
The first point is beyond mind-blowing all on its own but that, while at these ‘team building and mental health‘ parties, it was decided that the whole rest of the country should be denied these things.
The guy should hang. period.
But he won’t will he?
Because they only hangmen available (Yes Metropolitan Police, I am looking at you) will be just as guilty of all the same sort of crimes as he is and they damn well know it
Climate Change is not the real problem we have here…..
Alcohol kills covid! Who knew?
I experimented on myself. Unfortunately after many many determined efforts using red wine and Guinness I can’t remember my results.
Abstract
uw_ir assumes the ground beneath radiates as a black body.
As explained in theory and demonstrated by experiment such is not possible.
Wihtou out uw_ir there is no dw_ir, no GHG energy loop and no greenhouse effect.
SURFRAD consists of seven instrumentation sites collecting and recording CONUS terrestrial radiation data.
dw_solar is the downwelling solar radiation between 200 and 3,000 nm. This is akin to the 160 W/m^2 net/net to the ground on a K-T diagram.
uw_solar is the upwelling solar radiation between 200 and 3,000 nm and is akin to the 63 W/m^2 of the K-T diagram.
The difference between these two is akin to the upwelling kinetic sensible and latent energies on the K-T diagram. Some suggest that this lowered energy/cooling difference is the magical “back” radiation of the greenhouse gas loop. (It’s not.)
uw_ir “measures” the IR between 3,000 and 50,000 nm upwelling from the ground and is akin to the 396 of the K-T diagram, displaying more energy than arrived from the sun in the first place. This number is actually a theoretical, “What if?” calculation that fills the denominator of the emissivity ratio: energy leaving a system by radiation over the energy leaving by radiation were the system an ideal BB at its temperature. In the K-T that would be 63/396=0.16. For SURFRAD that would be uw_solar/uw_ir. And since uw_ir is the BB of the ground temperature that number can be back calculated w/ the S-B equation. Did that elsewhere. If the correct emissivity is applied to uw_ir the dw_ir goes to zero.
Summary: uw_solar and uw_ir * correct emissivity are one and the same energy (2 + 2 = 2) and dw_ir goes to zero.
So, what about dw_ir, 3,000 to 50,000 LWIR downwelling from the sky? Is that even possible to measure? Shouldn’t it be the missing difference of the dw – uw solar above? Should it be uw_ir – uw_solar like on the K-T?
I just could not make sense of the origin of dw_ir so I compared the ratio of the dw_ir to the uw_ir and plotted against the uw_ir to see what I might see. I expected to see evidence that dw_ir was independent from uw_ir especially at night and during storms, cloudy weather, etc.
It seems to me that dw_ir is not an independent measurement but is some kind of algorithm driven mathematical/fixed percentage of uw_ir and the dw_ir instrument and data are “calibrated” to conform.
There is an easy way to check this. Disconnect uw_ir and observe dw_ir. Whether dw_ir changes or not will be a problem either way.
As others often request, respond to the contents of the post.
Time to jump paradigm from radiative to adiabatic – see my post above.
Looks like the Milankovitch hypothesis must be put to rest.
We are having a rather DRY winter in my AO. Cold, yes, and slightly above average humidity, but snow? Not as much as we should get.
Should I wish for more and possibly get a blizzard, or just enjoy the fact that the geese are already coming back (as always) and looking for nesting spots?
Needless to say, open threads are not for closed minds.
Not for control-freaks.
74 UK customers got checks for £2.3 TRILLION from Northern Powergrid because of Storm Arwen.
Now Marc Carney of UN Climate Finance must be wondering where his $100 TRILLION actually went!
https://news.sky.com/story/northern-powergrid-apologises-to-customers-for-2-3tr-storm-arwen-compensation-cheque-mistake-12541260
“74 UK customers got checks for £2.3 TRILLION from Northern Powergrid because of Storm Arwen.”
I’m moving to the UK to get my 2.3 Trillion! Can I sign up with just any electricity provider, or does it have to be Northern Powergrid specifically?
Couple of new hurricanes on the way right now – check the impacted zones, and collect!
This just in under the Strange But True category; Mike Pence is now being pressured to declare the Bengals the actual winners of the Super Bowl, as the game was stolen. More to follow.
Of course, some people just can’t handle the truth.
And some people ignore the truth.
I was pulling for the Bengals to win, but the Bengals actually got away with a blantant foul on one play that could have determined the game. The Bengals pass reciever grabbed the facemask of the L.A. defender and threw him off balance which enabled the Bengals pass reciever to catch the ball on an important play. No foul was called, so the Bengals got away with one.
I like the Bengals because the coach is from Oklahoma and two of the Bengals running backs are former Oklahoma University players.
Since this is an Open Thread –
Lee Smolin: String Theory Is Still Wrong
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyV_5aWa9zU
From an expert in Quantum Mechanics, Gravity, Cosmology, String Theory.