Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 06:11pm PT
|
Those "trendlines" are just hand drawn.
The comedy just continues.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 06:12pm PT
|
LOL, the denial continues.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 08:31pm PT
|
Chief....Start wearing a respirator...The Borax dust is clouding your reasoning...RJ
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 08:45pm PT
|
Damn near tribal
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 11, 2013 - 09:01pm PT
|
+1 4 DMT
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 09:13pm PT
|
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 09:15pm PT
|
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 09:18pm PT
|
chief,
what or who is the source for your above chart
I don't see any source or am I missing something?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 09:28pm PT
|
You don't need a source, Norton. It's a trick the deniers use. They focus in on a small segment, then claim there is no correlation to CO2.
Look at the big picture since 1880.
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 10:00pm PT
|
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 10:53pm PT
|
Still no trend lines, Chief.
You want us to just eyeball it?
Looks like a reasonable trend to 2005. Is the 'pause' only 8 years now?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2013 - 11:48pm PT
|
DMT smells bullshet emanating from the country, apparently he's not sniffing in the big city where it really reeks. Bullshet like the Earths energy imbalance estimates which i asked Ed about reek to high hell.
Below is an abstract and discussion of the uncertainties and unknowns ( what i called margin of error) in said estimates. It seems the uncertainty range is exponentially larger than the estimated imbalance. Now what does that mean about the value of the estimate?
http://judithcurry.com/2012/11/05/uncertainty-in-observations-of-the-earths-energy-balance/
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2013 - 01:33am PT
|
Another filling day at the AGU smorgasbord. Personal favorite among talks I saw was the Shoemaker Lecture by Michael Carr, "Geological exploration of the planets: A personal retrospective of the first 50 years." Carr gave a rich first-hand account of planetary exploration from the Mariner probes through Voyager, Galileo and the Mars landers -- an era that filled in what had been totally blank (or wrong) maps, from the surface of Mars to the Jovian moons. He ended up by calling the Jet Propulsion Laboratory "a national treasure" (rightly, I think) and noting with excitement that New Horizons is now on its way toward Pluto.
Jim Hansen was the climate headliner, filling an auditorium for the Frontiers in Geophysics lecture on "Minimizing irreversible impacts of human-made climate change." The irreversible impacts he noted were sea level rise, species extinction, and extreme weather regimes (more droughts, severe storms etc.). I expected his presentation to be rousing but instead saw a man visibly struggling with the enormity of what he sees, and the difficulties of averting disaster. He was particularly poignant on the topic of species extinction, and particularly conflicted on nuclear power development -- which he reluctantly sees as necessary.
Among his economic ideas is a carbon fee, levied on fossil fuel producers and importers (of course passed along in energy prices). Of this fee he said "not one cent" should go to government, all of it should be divided equally among all legal residents of the country. Anyone who used less than an average amount of fossil fuels (about 60% of the population, he reckoned) would come out richer under this scheme, a further incentive to use less.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2013 - 01:55am PT
|
Non-headliner talks were interesting as well. A session on "Climate literacy: Impacts, evidence and best practices from research and evaluation" included a fascinating presentation showing what happens when students or (non-climate) scientists are asked to draw diagrams to illustrate what "greenhouse effect" means. There were lots of good and bad example diagrams from students struggling to express what they thought this meant, which started me wondering -- how many of those opining on this thread could sketch out such a diagram? Really, (there won't be a test), how accurately could *you* do it, by the standards of a high school science course?
Late in the day I caught part of a session on "Understanding and monitoring abrupt climate change and its impacts." Jim White, lead author of the new NAS report, gave a good intro explaining the concepts of thresholds and abrupt change. Richard Alley followed with a characteristically lively, energized and analogy-filled account of why the ice sheets will decide how fast sea level rises, and we really don't know what they will do. He noted Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica as one with particular potential to surprise us, controlling up to 3 meters of sea level. The next talk was an interesting but much drier statistical piece; after that unfortunately I had to leave to give my own talk at a side meeting before the abrupt-change program was finished.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!