I know the snorkel kit for M151A2 army jeep attached to the intake, the engine had a sealed ignition system, and there were floor drains which had to be open while fording so the truck would sink to the bottom and not float away. I'm not sure the snorkelling kit was ever used as intended, driving a vehicle while up to your shoulders in water is a tough sell to people who have loaded rifles and hand grenades.
Actually it is lubricating, I don't think it has a high shear strength and it's volatiles to non-volatile ratio isn't high so it only leaves a very thin layer of low viscosity lubricant after it dries; this can be an advantage.
It hasn't been debunked, 1997 - 1998 was an El Niño event, which causes increased air temperatures, 2014-2016 was also an El Niño event, which causes increased air temperatures. and It's an area of frenzied research. The warming hiatus is real, unpredicted and it's unclear if it end or continue. All you have to do is look at Google Scholar and it's 35,500 results to see it's an area of emerging research.
It used to be that 1998 was the warmest year on record, so dishonest people would say there was no warming since then, exploiting a statistical fluke. (1998 was an unusually warm year.) The "tell" here is that they use a specific number of years, such as the "18" here. Since it's been warmer than 1998 lately, the statement is not only deceptive but a flat-out lie.
No, the point is that from today, you can go 18 years into the past without finding statistically significant warming, and that includes the recent El Nino. Basicaly it measures from 1997–98 El Niño event to the 2014–16 El Niño event, two "unusually warm years" and If it were a flat-out lie, why would searching Google Scholar for Warming Hiatus return 35,500 results?
In the meantime, we're still burning billions of tons of fossil fuels each year, and so the CO2 content of the atmosphere continues to rise. In fact, earlier in your post you claimed that emissions have been about 32 billion tons in 2013, 2014, and 2015. This is pretty significant when you realize that one part per million of CO2 is about 8 billion tons.
Yes we are burning 32 GT, and that level has held for 3 years, instead of increasing with the global economic increase, which should be consider a significant milestone by anyone without a hidden agenda. You also have to contrast that against the 439GT emitted by natural processes on land and the 332GT emitted by natural ocean processes, anthropogenic CO2 emissions are about 4% of all CO2 emissions. A summary of CO2 Emissions and Sinks can be found at How do human CO2 emissions compare to natural CO2 emissions?
It's not getting warmer, it hasn't for 18 years, CO2 isn't going up except for a little out-gassing from the ocean due to the recent El Nina, the Alarmist narrative is coming apart at the seams. They should pull an Obama move, and declare victory and just walk away with their tails tucked.
In other words, the last paragraph of your post was nothing but lies and aspersions, and you are either a liar or a fool.
Boy you just threw that out there like a big turd, sorry for riling up the Chimp House, I'm not sure what your refering to, the 18 years of air temperature not increasing, the Ocean out-gassing (which is the topic of the article), my pointing out that both doesn't support past predictions or pointing out that Politicians are good at declaring victory when the polls show nobody gives a shit about an issue?
There is a billion-dollar public information campaign funded by fossil fuel companies telling you that we don't understand climate. Stop listening to them.
I'm not sure they can afford to do that after buying up all of those 200MPG carburators; after all my check for denialist shilling hasn't came yet.
Let me guess it's one of these 1) Low solar activity 2) Oceans ate the global warming 3) Chinese coal use 4) Montreal Protocol 5) What ‘pause’? 6) Volcanic aerosols 7) Stratospheric Water Vapor 8) Faster Pacific trade winds 9) Stadium Waves 10) ‘Coincidence!’ 11) Pine aerosols 12) It’s “not so unusual” and “no more than natural variability” 13) “Scientists looking at the wrong ‘lousy’ data” 14) Cold nights getting colder in Northern Hemisphere 15) We forgot to cherry-pick models in tune with natural variability 16) Negative phase of Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation 17) AMOC ocean oscillation 18) “Global brightening” has stopped 19) “Ahistorical media” 20) “It’s the hottest decade ever” Decadal averages used to hide the ‘pause’ 21) Few El Ninos since 1999 22) Temperature variations fall “roughly in the middle of the AR4 model results” 23) “Not scientifically relevant” 24) The wrong type of El Ninos 25) Slower trade winds 26) The climate is less sensitive to CO2 than previously thought 27) PDO and AMO natural cycles and here 28) ENSO 29) Solar cycle driven ocean temperature variations 30) Warming Atlantic caused cooling Pacific 31) “Experts simply do not know, and bad luck is one reason” 32) IPCC climate models are too complex, natural variability more important 33) NAO & PDO 34) Solar cycles 35) Scientists forgot “to look at our models and observations and ask questions” 36) The models really do explain the “pause” [debunked] [debunked] [debunked] 37) As soon as the sun, the weather and volcanoes – all natural factors – allow, the world will start warming again. Who knew? 38) Trenberth’s “missing heat” is hiding in the Atlantic, not Pacific as Trenberth claimed 39) “Slowdown” due to “a delayed rebound effect from 1991 Mount Pinatubo aerosols and deep prolonged solar minimum” 40) The “pause” is “probably just barely statistically significant” with 95% confidence:The “slowdown” is “probably just barely statistically significant” and not “meaningful in terms of the public discourse about climate change” 41) Internal variability, because Chinese aerosols can either warm or cool the climate: 42) Trenberth’s ‘missing heat’ really is missing and is not “supported by the data itself” in the “real ocean”: 43) Ocean Variability: 44) The data showing the missing heat going into the oceans is robust and not robust: 45) We don’t have a theory that fits all of the data: 46) We don’t have enough data of natural climate cycles lasting 60-70 years to determine if the “pause” is due to such natural cycles: 47) Could be pure internal [natural] variability or increased CO2 or both 48) Its either in the Atlantic or Pacific, but definitely not a statistical fluke: 49) The other papers with excuses for the “pause” are not “science done right”: 50) The observational data we have is inadequate, but we ignore uncertainty to publish anyway 51) If our models could time-travel back in time, “we could have forecast ‘the pause’ – if we had the tools of the future back then” 52) ‘Unusual climate anomaly’ of unprecedented deceleration of a secular warming trend Save time just pick a number.
Renewables are already cheaper than fossil fuels, especially once you remove all fossil fuel subsidies and exemptions.
If that was really the case then all of the Evil(tm) Capitalist RobberBarons would be jumping like lemmings off of a cliff into the renewables markets, better to get in early and erect artificial barriers to entry!
Didn't everyone agree? Isn't it settled science? Or are you saying that everyone who drives a car is a denialist? Money talks. People don't REALLY believe in AGW.
If you look at the Map you'll easily see that the most CO2 is in the Sahara Desert, followed by the Indian Subcontinent and South-east Asia. None of these places are where Evil(tm) white people live. Australia where they whine the most about reducing CO2 emissions is actually a CO2 sink!
It's not getting warmer, it hasn't for 18 years, CO2 isn't going up except for a little out-gassing from the ocean due to the recent El Nina, the Alarmist narrative is coming apart at the seams. They should pull an Obama move, and declare victory and just walk away with their tails tucked.
My view is that environmentalists have already demonstrated they are willing to meddle in such things via climate change treaties. It's not a stretch to go on to bigger problems like overpopulation, poverty, or government corruption.
Nah, we could just nuc the Indian sub-continent and China, that would take care of the over-population and the nuclear winter would cool things down a bit too. \sarc
Seriously if we as a world could actually do something to stop government corruption, very likely poverty would dramatically decrease and most people would quit popping out ten kids in the hopes that 2 or 3 will survive and over-population would start to sort itself out as well.
“Credibility may require climate researchers to decrease their carbon footprint,” Attari said. “Effective communicators about climate change do sometimes discuss their own behavior and our research indicates that this can be a good way to enhance their credibility,” Attari added. “Whether the climate scientists are male or female, what they do in private can have a pronounced effect on how their message is perceived by the public.” Climate scientists are more credible when they practice what they preach Attari, S. Z. et al. (2016). Statements about climate researchers’ carbon footprints affect their credibility and the impact of their advice, Climatic Change. DOI 10.1007/s10584-016-1713-2
If most of the true believers can't make the effort then why should the average 6-pack Joe? Additionally why should Americans "Set the Example" for the World to follow when the People calling for the Americans to set the example, can't set the example?
Nope. The scientists are applying the physics of infrared heat transfer to the atmosphere of the Earth.
This is a pretty well known subject-- in fact, you have to have the greenhouse effect, or else the Earth would have an average temperature below freezing. We know the greenhouse effect of trace gasses in the atmosphere is real.
Yes, all things being equal it is certainly true, but the atmosphere is messy and thing are never equal. We can't model the Atmosphere-Ocean interface and the planet is 70% water! We can't model the effect of Clouds, we're still debating whether clouds are a positive, negative or both feedback and when it changes categories. What we don't know is greater than what we do.
Scientists are still arguing over the value for Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity, that's equivalent to physicists arguing over Special Relativity while only knowing the speed of light to one significant digit!
Maybe we should just see it, oh that's right Phil Jones lost the original data, we'll just have to accept his version of the adjusted data product; after all the Climate Research Community has demonstrated themselves to be so ethical in the past, we should just accept their opinions unchallenged.
Well the inverse is true as well, there really is no evidence that that the past warming will continue to dangerous levels a century from now as there hasn't been any warming for a little over 18 years now. There are some computer simulations that didn't predict the current warming hiatus, and none of those simulations have demonstrated any predictive ability.
You know that sucking sound? that is money that could have been spent on remediating real environmental problems getting spent on sending Government Bureaucrats to parties all over the World called Climate Conferences.
Regardless of whether "gravity" is "an instantaneous or nonlocal phenomenon" or not, LIGO detects the changes in gravity and the propagation of that change isn't instantaneous. I didn't understand how LIGO worked, until I wrapped my head around the fact that gravity waves are non-instantanious.
If the detectors arms aren't parallel and perpendicular to each other and the source that would give them an additional data point and make it possible to triangulate; 4 arms in two locations, could give you 3 data points.
If the gravity waves were travelling faster than the speed of light, we would not have detected them.
Not necessarily, C, the speed of light (In Vacuum) in is available to both sub-luminal and super-luminal events, so a super-luminal particle could cause a flash of light that could be seen by us in our sub-luminal universe. The effect would be similar to but not the same as Cherenkov radiation where neutrons travelling faster than the speed of light in water cause a blue glow in reactor pools.
No She's more of a Boss Hogg trying to be another and more successful DeWitt Clinton and establish a federal version of Tammany Hall. The biggest difference between Hillary and J.D. Hogg is with Hogg nobody got hurt, with the Clintons they drop like flies and Hillary was a Carpetbagger.
The Bernie-Hillary cross-contamination was supposedly a lack of robust separation of two groups of authorised users, where this is the penetration by two groups of unauthorised users to probably everything. If they had the security cranked up, only the long-term cadre would have been able to learn how to use, because the volunteers would be their long enough to train.
Slashdot Mirror
I know the snorkel kit for M151A2 army jeep attached to the intake, the engine had a sealed ignition system, and there were floor drains which had to be open while fording so the truck would sink to the bottom and not float away. I'm not sure the snorkelling kit was ever used as intended, driving a vehicle while up to your shoulders in water is a tough sell to people who have loaded rifles and hand grenades.
Actually it is lubricating, I don't think it has a high shear strength and it's volatiles to non-volatile ratio isn't high so it only leaves a very thin layer of low viscosity lubricant after it dries; this can be an advantage.
It hasn't been debunked, 1997 - 1998 was an El Niño event, which causes increased air temperatures, 2014-2016 was also an El Niño event, which causes increased air temperatures. and It's an area of frenzied research. The warming hiatus is real, unpredicted and it's unclear if it end or continue. All you have to do is look at Google Scholar and it's 35,500 results to see it's an area of emerging research.
It used to be that 1998 was the warmest year on record, so dishonest people would say there was no warming since then, exploiting a statistical fluke. (1998 was an unusually warm year.) The "tell" here is that they use a specific number of years, such as the "18" here. Since it's been warmer than 1998 lately, the statement is not only deceptive but a flat-out lie.
No, the point is that from today, you can go 18 years into the past without finding statistically significant warming, and that includes the recent El Nino. Basicaly it measures from 1997–98 El Niño event to the 2014–16 El Niño event, two "unusually warm years" and If it were a flat-out lie, why would searching Google Scholar for Warming Hiatus return 35,500 results?
In the meantime, we're still burning billions of tons of fossil fuels each year, and so the CO2 content of the atmosphere continues to rise. In fact, earlier in your post you claimed that emissions have been about 32 billion tons in 2013, 2014, and 2015. This is pretty significant when you realize that one part per million of CO2 is about 8 billion tons.
Yes we are burning 32 GT, and that level has held for 3 years, instead of increasing with the global economic increase, which should be consider a significant milestone by anyone without a hidden agenda. You also have to contrast that against the 439GT emitted by natural processes on land and the 332GT emitted by natural ocean processes, anthropogenic CO2 emissions are about 4% of all CO2 emissions. A summary of CO2 Emissions and Sinks can be found at How do human CO2 emissions compare to natural CO2 emissions?
It's not getting warmer, it hasn't for 18 years, CO2 isn't going up except for a little out-gassing from the ocean due to the recent El Nina, the Alarmist narrative is coming apart at the seams. They should pull an Obama move, and declare victory and just walk away with their tails tucked.
In other words, the last paragraph of your post was nothing but lies and aspersions, and you are either a liar or a fool.
Boy you just threw that out there like a big turd, sorry for riling up the Chimp House, I'm not sure what your refering to, the 18 years of air temperature not increasing, the Ocean out-gassing (which is the topic of the article), my pointing out that both doesn't support past predictions or pointing out that Politicians are good at declaring victory when the polls show nobody gives a shit about an issue?
There is a billion-dollar public information campaign funded by fossil fuel companies telling you that we don't understand climate. Stop listening to them.
I'm not sure they can afford to do that after buying up all of those 200MPG carburators; after all my check for denialist shilling hasn't came yet.
Let me guess it's one of these
1) Low solar activity
2) Oceans ate the global warming
3) Chinese coal use
4) Montreal Protocol
5) What ‘pause’?
6) Volcanic aerosols
7) Stratospheric Water Vapor
8) Faster Pacific trade winds
9) Stadium Waves
10) ‘Coincidence!’
11) Pine aerosols
12) It’s “not so unusual” and “no more than natural variability”
13) “Scientists looking at the wrong ‘lousy’ data”
14) Cold nights getting colder in Northern Hemisphere
15) We forgot to cherry-pick models in tune with natural variability
16) Negative phase of Interdecadal Pacific Oscillation
17) AMOC ocean oscillation
18) “Global brightening” has stopped
19) “Ahistorical media”
20) “It’s the hottest decade ever” Decadal averages used to hide the ‘pause’
21) Few El Ninos since 1999
22) Temperature variations fall “roughly in the middle of the AR4 model results”
23) “Not scientifically relevant”
24) The wrong type of El Ninos
25) Slower trade winds
26) The climate is less sensitive to CO2 than previously thought
27) PDO and AMO natural cycles and here
28) ENSO
29) Solar cycle driven ocean temperature variations
30) Warming Atlantic caused cooling Pacific
31) “Experts simply do not know, and bad luck is one reason”
32) IPCC climate models are too complex, natural variability more important
33) NAO & PDO
34) Solar cycles
35) Scientists forgot “to look at our models and observations and ask questions”
36) The models really do explain the “pause” [debunked] [debunked] [debunked]
37) As soon as the sun, the weather and volcanoes – all natural factors – allow, the world will start warming again. Who knew?
38) Trenberth’s “missing heat” is hiding in the Atlantic, not Pacific as Trenberth claimed
39) “Slowdown” due to “a delayed rebound effect from 1991 Mount Pinatubo aerosols and deep prolonged solar minimum”
40) The “pause” is “probably just barely statistically significant” with 95% confidence:The “slowdown” is “probably just barely statistically significant” and not “meaningful in terms of the public discourse about climate change”
41) Internal variability, because Chinese aerosols can either warm or cool the climate:
42) Trenberth’s ‘missing heat’ really is missing and is not “supported by the data itself” in the “real ocean”:
43) Ocean Variability:
44) The data showing the missing heat going into the oceans is robust and not robust:
45) We don’t have a theory that fits all of the data:
46) We don’t have enough data of natural climate cycles lasting 60-70 years to determine if the “pause” is due to such natural cycles:
47) Could be pure internal [natural] variability or increased CO2 or both
48) Its either in the Atlantic or Pacific, but definitely not a statistical fluke:
49) The other papers with excuses for the “pause” are not “science done right”:
50) The observational data we have is inadequate, but we ignore uncertainty to publish anyway
51) If our models could time-travel back in time, “we could have forecast ‘the pause’ – if we had the tools of the future back then”
52) ‘Unusual climate anomaly’ of unprecedented deceleration of a secular warming trend
Save time just pick a number.
So go grow some Redwoods.
Renewables are already cheaper than fossil fuels, especially once you remove all fossil fuel subsidies and exemptions.
If that was really the case then all of the Evil(tm) Capitalist RobberBarons would be jumping like lemmings off of a cliff into the renewables markets, better to get in early and erect artificial barriers to entry!
CO2 Emissions have been flat for the last two years, Decoupling of global emissions and economic growth confirmed, BAU is now less than the Modellers foresaw.
You forgot "and the continents were joined and the ocean currents were vastly different, so you can't compare the two"
If the science is in, then why haven't the acceleration of emissions stopped?
Sorry but the facts are,
emissions are not accelerating
Didn't everyone agree? Isn't it settled science? Or are you saying that everyone who drives a car is a denialist? Money talks. People don't REALLY believe in AGW.
If you look at the Map you'll easily see that the most CO2 is in the Sahara Desert, followed by the Indian Subcontinent and South-east Asia. None of these places are where Evil(tm) white people live. Australia where they whine the most about reducing CO2 emissions is actually a CO2 sink!
It's not getting warmer, it hasn't for 18 years, CO2 isn't going up except for a little out-gassing from the ocean due to the recent El Nina, the Alarmist narrative is coming apart at the seams. They should pull an Obama move, and declare victory and just walk away with their tails tucked.
Doesn't matter how high you go up, it's still 407.7 ppm CO2 at that altitude as well. You can't escape it by going up!
You sure about that, CO2 is heavier than air you know, about 53% heavier.
My view is that environmentalists have already demonstrated they are willing to meddle in such things via climate change treaties. It's not a stretch to go on to bigger problems like overpopulation, poverty, or government corruption.
Nah, we could just nuc the Indian sub-continent and China, that would take care of the over-population and the nuclear winter would cool things down a bit too. \sarc
Seriously if we as a world could actually do something to stop government corruption, very likely poverty would dramatically decrease and most people would quit popping out ten kids in the hopes that 2 or 3 will survive and over-population would start to sort itself out as well.
Because Anthony Watts has an Electric Vehicle and Solar Panels on his home and everybody knows he's an Evil(TM) denier.
Watts has an interesting post on who in the Climate Debate has and hasn't Renewable Solar on their personal residences, Study: ‘Climate scientists are more credible when they practice what they preach’ – but my aerial surveys show many don’t.
If most of the true believers can't make the effort then why should the average 6-pack Joe? Additionally why should Americans "Set the Example" for the World to follow when the People calling for the Americans to set the example, can't set the example?
Nope. The scientists are applying the physics of infrared heat transfer to the atmosphere of the Earth.
This is a pretty well known subject-- in fact, you have to have the greenhouse effect, or else the Earth would have an average temperature below freezing. We know the greenhouse effect of trace gasses in the atmosphere is real.
Yes, all things being equal it is certainly true, but the atmosphere is messy and thing are never equal. We can't model the Atmosphere-Ocean interface and the planet is 70% water! We can't model the effect of Clouds, we're still debating whether clouds are a positive, negative or both feedback and when it changes categories. What we don't know is greater than what we do.
Scientists are still arguing over the value for Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity, that's equivalent to physicists arguing over Special Relativity while only knowing the speed of light to one significant digit!
Maybe we should just see it, oh that's right Phil Jones lost the original data, we'll just have to accept his version of the adjusted data product; after all the Climate Research Community has demonstrated themselves to be so ethical in the past, we should just accept their opinions unchallenged.
Well the inverse is true as well, there really is no evidence that that the past warming will continue to dangerous levels a century from now as there hasn't been any warming for a little over 18 years now. There are some computer simulations that didn't predict the current warming hiatus, and none of those simulations have demonstrated any predictive ability.
You know that sucking sound? that is money that could have been spent on remediating real environmental problems getting spent on sending Government Bureaucrats to parties all over the World called Climate Conferences.
Regardless of whether "gravity" is "an instantaneous or nonlocal phenomenon" or not, LIGO detects the changes in gravity and the propagation of that change isn't instantaneous. I didn't understand how LIGO worked, until I wrapped my head around the fact that gravity waves are non-instantanious.
It's easy if you just think of it in terms of kilopounds per megainch.
How many stones per megainch is that for our British readers?
Most taxes were a lot lower back then as well. Most Astronomers had to make their living casting horoscopes for the idle rich back in the day.
If the detectors arms aren't parallel and perpendicular to each other and the source that would give them an additional data point and make it possible to triangulate; 4 arms in two locations, could give you 3 data points.
If the gravity waves were travelling faster than the speed of light, we would not have detected them.
Not necessarily, C, the speed of light (In Vacuum) in is available to both sub-luminal and super-luminal events, so a super-luminal particle could cause a flash of light that could be seen by us in our sub-luminal universe.
The effect would be similar to but not the same as Cherenkov radiation where neutrons travelling faster than the speed of light in water cause a blue glow in reactor pools.
No She's more of a Boss Hogg trying to be another and more successful DeWitt Clinton and establish a federal version of Tammany Hall.
The biggest difference between Hillary and J.D. Hogg is with Hogg nobody got hurt, with the Clintons they drop like flies and Hillary was a Carpetbagger.
The Bernie-Hillary cross-contamination was supposedly a lack of robust separation of two groups of authorised users, where this is the penetration by two groups of unauthorised users to probably everything. If they had the security cranked up, only the long-term cadre would have been able to learn how to use, because the volunteers would be their long enough to train.