I think it's your expectation of what agreeing with each other means that needs adjustment. Based on my understanding of the limitations and expectations of climate models they agree with each other and with observations pretty well over the long run.
The late jazz critic Whitney Balliet wrote, "All first-rate criticism first defines what we are confronting."
With that in mind, perhaps the AGW alarmists would be willing to confront popular criticisms of their ideology, as opposed to making the usual straw man arguments.
That graph by Roy Spencer has a huge problem in that all of the traces he shows of climate model runs and the HADCRUT and UAH temperature series all start from the same zero point in 1983. In order to achieve that Spencer had to shift all of the graphed lines up or down so they all lined up at 0 in 1983. That is not a valid scientific technique and makes the whole graph bogus.
How much does our reduction of CO2 emission mitigate future change, and what is the reduced cost of adaptation? Without knowing those two pieces, the decision to reduce CO2 emissions to 'save future dollars' is a blind guess, and there are a lot of much, much better reasons to reduce dependency on oil from places like the ME.
That not knowing what the future effects of increased CO2 goes both ways. It could be that they will be worse than what we currently think they will be as easily as it could be they won't be as bad. One fundamental principle of risk management is the less you know about what a risk entails the more value their is in avoiding that risk. Yes, it might cost a lot of money to mitigate future climate change but not mitigating could cost more than any amount of money can cure.
Here's the important bit though. As the IPCC's most recent AR has observed, the satellite measurements show that for the duration of the CERES project, there has been NO TREND in the energy imbalance.
Unless the energy imbalance is zero the temperature is still changing. Increasing CO2 does not necessarily cause a change in the energy imbalance number. As CO2 increases it retains more heat energy but since the Earth is hotter it also radiates more heat so the actual imbalance may remain the same.
The first warning signs of the Mt. Saint Helens eruption started about 10 weeks before the eruption. 3 weeks before the eruption a red zone was established around the mountain. There were no hikers on the mountain proper, just a few people who had property there and refused to leave. Interactive map showing the locations of the people killed by the May 18th 1980 eruption of Mt. Saint Helens. Nearly all of them were well outside the red zone. The huge lateral blast of the initial eruptions pretty much surprised everyone. Now we know better.
In my entire life only times I can think of soldiers keeping anything safe was American interests in other countries overseas, think oil. Otherwise they don't keep us safe. Seems their job is more protecting US interests.
"War Is a Racket" by General Smedley Butler should be required reading in High School.
Not only that but sea level appears to be rising in Florida causing more flooding. Maybe it's just because Crashmarik moved there and is causing Florida to sink.
The letter didn't mention what Federal criminal code violation he wanted the FBI to use to justify such a response. After a quick search, I found no such law.
Right in the post is says (emphasis added):
In a letter to FBI Director James Comey, the Minnesota Democrat asked for more information about the agency's authority to police against revenge porn,...
IOW, Franken's asking them what they can do about it. I suppose if it turns out they can't do much that might lead to Franken introducing a bill but at this point he's just gathering information.
That figure may give pride to the holier than thou Masters of Silicon Valley, but it is a hardship for those poorer Californians who live inland. Coal power is much cheaper. We shouldn't let the climate shysters talk us out of it.
Coal is only cheaper if you ignore the external costs it imposes.
The Younger Dryas Period noted in the graph is a well defined cooling period in Western Europe and Greenland but not so much for the rest of the globe. No doubt the rest of the globe cooled some too during the period but Greenland was one of the places the Younger Dryas manifested itself most strongly. So again I ask, is that a fair proxy for the whole globe and the rate of temperature change or do you need to look at it in combination with other proxies from around the globe to understand the big picture?
The late Ordovician ice age period is known at the Hirnantian. It did a little searching myself and came up with a paper from 2010 that shows significant changes in CO2 levels corresponded with the late Ordovician ice age. In particular I direct you to Figure 9 that shows sea level/ice volume compared with pCO2.
Abstract The Late Ordovician Hirnantian Stage (444 million years ago) was one of three time periods during the past half billion years in which large continental glaciers formed over Earth's polar regions. The effects of this glaciation were far-reaching and coincided with one of the largest marine mass extinction events in Earth history. The cause of this ice age is uncertain, and a paradoxical association with evidence for high atmospheric CO2 levels has been debated. Precise linkages between sea level, ice volume, and carbon isotope (13Ccarb and 13Corg) proxy records of pCO2 have been poorly understood due in part to uncertainties in stratigraphic correlation and the interpretation of globally important sections. Although correlation difficulties remain, recent Hirnantian biostratigraphic studies now allow for improved correlations. Here we show that consistent trends in both 13Ccarb and 13Corg from two well-dated stratigraphic sequences in Estonia and Anticosti Island, Canada coincide with changes in Late Ordovician (Hirnantian) climate as inferred from sea level and the extent of ice sheets. The integrated datasets are consistent with increasing pCO2 levels in response to ice-sheet expansion that reduced silicate weathering. Ultimately, the time period of elevated pCO2 levels is followed by geologic evidence of deglaciation.
And
6. Implications and conclusions Our data are consistent with the notion that a long-term drop in pCO2 due to increased silicate weathering (Kump et al., 1999; Saltzman and Young, 2005; Young et al., 2009) possibly also combined with reduced poleward ocean heat transport (Herrmann et al., 2004) resulted in the initial stage of glaciation beginning prior to Stage 1 in Fig. 9. As expanding ice sheets reduced the fraction of continental silicates available for weathering, pCO2 began to rise and 13Ccarb continued to increase due to carbonate weathering in low to mid latitudes (Stage 2 in Fig. 9). The elevated pCO2 levels eventually led to deglaciation, as recorded by the rapid transgression above an unconformity in both Estonia and Anticosti Island (start of Stage 3 in Fig. 6). Following deglaciation, renewed silicate weathering (possibly supplemented by enhanced burial of organic matter in the deepening oceans) led to a second draw down in pCO2 levels and a final episode of Hirnantian glacial advance (end of Stage 3). Organic matter burial or enhanced preservation Corg in the deep oceans through much of Hirnantian is supported by recent documentation of a large positive excursion (+10–20) in 34S of pyrites that tracks the positive 13Corg excursion potentially resulting from both isotopically light carbon (12C) and sulfur (32S) being sequestered in deeper anoxic waters during the Hirnantian (Zhang et al., 2009). However, further studies of 34S of carbonate-associated sulfates are needed to determine if the Hirnantian seawater sulfate reservoir became enriched in 34S as a result of anoxic deep waters. The resultant second episode of glaciation was short lived and deglaciation may also have been related to changes in pCO2 levels, but the available data are not at high enough resolution to determine this.
I'm not sure how to translate pCO2 into ppm and I have no doubt that CO2 levels were still higher than today's but it's obvious there was a significant change in CO2 leve
In no way should a Christian business owner be forced to do something that violates his conscience. Ditto the homosexual business owner. Civil rights in no way trump religious rights an vice versa. If someone is a homosexual and they are refused a cake for their "wedding", they should just find a homosexual baker or someone willing to bake for them. Same goes for any business.
I'm personally intolerant of homosexuality. I don't dislike the individual homosexuals, but I will NEVER affirm their way of life -- and such will never be required of me. I'm actually a middle of the road guy politically, but I am a Christian -- and God's Word on the issue is firm. Love the sinner, hate the sin. And yes, I, too, am a sinner, but I'm not making the life choice for something that God has called an abomination in His eyes. I would welcome a homosexual into my church congregation with the understanding that he is there not for judgment, but healing. The church, properly run, is a hospital for sinners's souls, not a courtroom, but God will not be mocked. Just like homosexuals, I need to daily repent of my sins and ask God for His forgiveness -- and to exercise faith and obedience. God wants two things: faith and obedience. Obey God's Word == eternal life. Disobey, homosexual or heterosexual == eternal damnation.
If God thinks homosexuality is such an abomination then why did he create homosexuality in the first place?* Homosexuality is not just a human trait. It occurs and has been documented in many other animal species often in similar proportions to humans. Why would there be homosexuality in the non-human animal kingdom unless it's something that happens naturally?
* As an agnostic that's a rhetorical question for me.
The study I cite is about some blue oak in a specific location so I'm not sure how broad an area it can be applied to. But the main point was that although the lack of precipitation was not unprecedented the high temperatures that exacerbated the drought by drying out the soil more than in past droughts may well be unprecedented. The study I cited asserted that. At this point I'm not trying to tie it to AGW other than to say it's the sort of thing you'd expect to happen because of it. The real answer is in the long term statistics and how they change over time.
I'm not sure that brain size by itself is a particular indicator of intelligence but when it's combined with poor nutrition and stressful living it probably is correlated. If you're concerned about the welfare state then it's something that should concern you. People with low intelligence are much more likely to require welfare to get along in life.
Thanks, that was an interesting paper. But it was published in 1999 so it would be interesting to see something more recent than that and they talk more about regional changes than global changes.
No it couldn't. I certainly could cause a cold period that lasts for a decade or two but after all the aerosols that got kicked up fell back out of the atmosphere you'd be back where you were before.
It is not a guess. It's what scientists who have studied the matter say. And I was being generous. Scientists say CO2 levels probably have to get down around 250 ppm for a new glaciation to commence.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's your expectation of what agreeing with each other means that needs adjustment. Based on my understanding of the limitations and expectations of climate models they agree with each other and with observations pretty well over the long run.
The late jazz critic Whitney Balliet wrote, "All first-rate criticism first defines what we are confronting."
With that in mind, perhaps the AGW alarmists would be willing to confront popular criticisms of their ideology, as opposed to making the usual straw man arguments.
"Climate Change Is Real. Too Bad Accurate Climate Models Aren’t." would be a good starting place.
That graph by Roy Spencer has a huge problem in that all of the traces he shows of climate model runs and the HADCRUT and UAH temperature series all start from the same zero point in 1983. In order to achieve that Spencer had to shift all of the graphed lines up or down so they all lined up at 0 in 1983. That is not a valid scientific technique and makes the whole graph bogus.
How much does our reduction of CO2 emission mitigate future change, and what is the reduced cost of adaptation? Without knowing those two pieces, the decision to reduce CO2 emissions to 'save future dollars' is a blind guess, and there are a lot of much, much better reasons to reduce dependency on oil from places like the ME.
That not knowing what the future effects of increased CO2 goes both ways. It could be that they will be worse than what we currently think they will be as easily as it could be they won't be as bad. One fundamental principle of risk management is the less you know about what a risk entails the more value their is in avoiding that risk. Yes, it might cost a lot of money to mitigate future climate change but not mitigating could cost more than any amount of money can cure.
Here's the important bit though. As the IPCC's most recent AR has observed, the satellite measurements show that for the duration of the CERES project, there has been NO TREND in the energy imbalance.
Unless the energy imbalance is zero the temperature is still changing. Increasing CO2 does not necessarily cause a change in the energy imbalance number. As CO2 increases it retains more heat energy but since the Earth is hotter it also radiates more heat so the actual imbalance may remain the same.
The first warning signs of the Mt. Saint Helens eruption started about 10 weeks before the eruption. 3 weeks before the eruption a red zone was established around the mountain. There were no hikers on the mountain proper, just a few people who had property there and refused to leave. Interactive map showing the locations of the people killed by the May 18th 1980 eruption of Mt. Saint Helens. Nearly all of them were well outside the red zone. The huge lateral blast of the initial eruptions pretty much surprised everyone. Now we know better.
In my entire life only times I can think of soldiers keeping anything safe was American interests in other countries overseas, think oil. Otherwise they don't keep us safe. Seems their job is more protecting US interests.
"War Is a Racket" by General Smedley Butler should be required reading in High School.
"Geologists believe that the Yellowstone supervolcano could explode at any moment. ...
For a geologist "any moment" is sometime in the next million years.
Not only that but sea level appears to be rising in Florida causing more flooding. Maybe it's just because Crashmarik moved there and is causing Florida to sink.
By the time that Leaf requires replacement batteries the replacement batteries will have longer range than the originals.
It was apparently a point of emphasis for the authors.
In this context I'd think inexpensive means less expensive to own than the equivalent gasoline or diesel powered vehicle.
The letter didn't mention what Federal criminal code violation he wanted the FBI to use to justify such a response. After a quick search, I found no such law.
Right in the post is says (emphasis added):
In a letter to FBI Director James Comey, the Minnesota Democrat asked for more information about the agency's authority to police against revenge porn, ...
IOW, Franken's asking them what they can do about it. I suppose if it turns out they can't do much that might lead to Franken introducing a bill but at this point he's just gathering information.
I would have gone to my boss and asked for the reasons I should be on LinkedIn. Thank God I never signed up for Facebook.
The Boardman coal generating plant is supposed to be permanently shut down by 2018.
That figure may give pride to the holier than thou Masters of Silicon Valley, but it is a hardship for those poorer Californians who live inland. Coal power is much cheaper. We shouldn't let the climate shysters talk us out of it.
Coal is only cheaper if you ignore the external costs it imposes.
The Younger Dryas Period noted in the graph is a well defined cooling period in Western Europe and Greenland but not so much for the rest of the globe. No doubt the rest of the globe cooled some too during the period but Greenland was one of the places the Younger Dryas manifested itself most strongly. So again I ask, is that a fair proxy for the whole globe and the rate of temperature change or do you need to look at it in combination with other proxies from around the globe to understand the big picture?
The late Ordovician ice age period is known at the Hirnantian. It did a little searching myself and came up with a paper from 2010 that shows significant changes in CO2 levels corresponded with the late Ordovician ice age. In particular I direct you to Figure 9 that shows sea level/ice volume compared with pCO2.
Did changes in atmospheric CO2 coincide with latest Ordovician glacial–interglacial cycles? [PDF]
Seth A. Young, Matthew R. Saltzman, William I. Ausich, André Desrochers, Dimitri Kaljo
Abstract
The Late Ordovician Hirnantian Stage (444 million years ago) was one of three time periods during the past half billion years in which large continental glaciers formed over Earth's polar regions. The effects of this glaciation were far-reaching and coincided with one of the largest marine mass extinction events in Earth history. The cause of this ice age is uncertain, and a paradoxical association with evidence for high atmospheric CO2 levels has been debated. Precise linkages between sea level, ice volume, and carbon isotope (13Ccarb and 13Corg) proxy records of pCO2 have been poorly understood due in part to uncertainties in stratigraphic correlation and the interpretation of globally important sections. Although correlation difficulties remain, recent Hirnantian biostratigraphic studies now allow for improved correlations. Here we show that consistent trends in both 13Ccarb and 13Corg from two well-dated stratigraphic sequences in Estonia and Anticosti Island, Canada coincide with changes in Late Ordovician (Hirnantian) climate as inferred from sea level and the extent of ice sheets. The integrated datasets are consistent with increasing pCO2 levels in response to ice-sheet expansion that reduced silicate weathering. Ultimately, the time period of elevated pCO2 levels is followed by geologic evidence of deglaciation.
And
6. Implications and conclusions
Our data are consistent with the notion that a long-term drop in pCO2 due to increased silicate weathering (Kump et al., 1999; Saltzman and Young, 2005; Young et al., 2009) possibly also combined with reduced poleward ocean heat transport (Herrmann et al., 2004) resulted in the initial stage of glaciation beginning prior to Stage 1 in Fig. 9. As expanding ice sheets reduced the fraction of continental silicates available for weathering, pCO2 began to rise and 13Ccarb continued to increase due to carbonate weathering in low to mid latitudes (Stage 2 in Fig. 9). The elevated pCO2 levels eventually led to deglaciation, as recorded by the rapid transgression above an unconformity in both Estonia and Anticosti Island (start of Stage 3 in Fig. 6). Following deglaciation, renewed silicate weathering (possibly supplemented by enhanced burial of organic matter in the deepening oceans) led to a second draw down in pCO2 levels and a final episode of Hirnantian glacial advance (end of Stage 3). Organic matter burial or enhanced preservation Corg in the deep oceans through much of Hirnantian is supported by recent documentation of a large positive excursion (+10–20) in 34S of pyrites that tracks the positive 13Corg excursion potentially resulting from both isotopically light carbon (12C) and sulfur (32S) being sequestered in deeper anoxic waters during the Hirnantian (Zhang et al., 2009). However, further studies of 34S of carbonate-associated sulfates are needed to determine if the Hirnantian seawater sulfate reservoir became enriched in 34S as a result of anoxic deep waters. The resultant second episode of glaciation was short lived and deglaciation may also have been related to changes in pCO2 levels, but the available data are not at high enough resolution to determine this.
I'm not sure how to translate pCO2 into ppm and I have no doubt that CO2 levels were still higher than today's but it's obvious there was a significant change in CO2 leve
Tolerance goes both ways.
In no way should a Christian business owner be forced to do something that violates his conscience. Ditto the homosexual business owner. Civil rights in no way trump religious rights an vice versa. If someone is a homosexual and they are refused a cake for their "wedding", they should just find a homosexual baker or someone willing to bake for them. Same goes for any business.
I'm personally intolerant of homosexuality. I don't dislike the individual homosexuals, but I will NEVER affirm their way of life -- and such will never be required of me. I'm actually a middle of the road guy politically, but I am a Christian -- and God's Word on the issue is firm. Love the sinner, hate the sin. And yes, I, too, am a sinner, but I'm not making the life choice for something that God has called an abomination in His eyes. I would welcome a homosexual into my church congregation with the understanding that he is there not for judgment, but healing. The church, properly run, is a hospital for sinners's souls, not a courtroom, but God will not be mocked. Just like homosexuals, I need to daily repent of my sins and ask God for His forgiveness -- and to exercise faith and obedience. God wants two things: faith and obedience. Obey God's Word == eternal life. Disobey, homosexual or heterosexual == eternal damnation.
If God thinks homosexuality is such an abomination then why did he create homosexuality in the first place?* Homosexuality is not just a human trait. It occurs and has been documented in many other animal species often in similar proportions to humans. Why would there be homosexuality in the non-human animal kingdom unless it's something that happens naturally?
* As an agnostic that's a rhetorical question for me.
Being a Nazi or a member of the KKK are not protected classes since they are personal choices, not inherent qualities.
The study I cite is about some blue oak in a specific location so I'm not sure how broad an area it can be applied to. But the main point was that although the lack of precipitation was not unprecedented the high temperatures that exacerbated the drought by drying out the soil more than in past droughts may well be unprecedented. The study I cited asserted that. At this point I'm not trying to tie it to AGW other than to say it's the sort of thing you'd expect to happen because of it. The real answer is in the long term statistics and how they change over time.
I'm not sure that brain size by itself is a particular indicator of intelligence but when it's combined with poor nutrition and stressful living it probably is correlated. If you're concerned about the welfare state then it's something that should concern you. People with low intelligence are much more likely to require welfare to get along in life.
Thanks, that was an interesting paper. But it was published in 1999 so it would be interesting to see something more recent than that and they talk more about regional changes than global changes.
I don't see that your cite necessarily contradicts the one I cited.
No it couldn't. I certainly could cause a cold period that lasts for a decade or two but after all the aerosols that got kicked up fell back out of the atmosphere you'd be back where you were before.
No doubt but that goes both ways.
It is not a guess. It's what scientists who have studied the matter say. And I was being generous. Scientists say CO2 levels probably have to get down around 250 ppm for a new glaciation to commence.