Yes I remeber that too.
Do you also remeber that it was areosols that prompted a MINORITY of climate scientists to predict cooling in the 70's?
Do you recall the clean air regulations that were instituted around the globe to reduce the level of said areoslos, thus significantly negating the -ve forcing the MINORITY had relied on to predict cooling?
Do you recall the coal industry successfully fighting tooth and nail against such regulations for nearly a century despite the fact that thousands of people died annually due to pea soup fog?
Do you recall that the National Acdemies of Science first warned the US government about AGW in 1958 and that they have only increased the urgency of their warning since that time?
"The day climatologists perfect the science is the day meteorologists will be able to give forecasts with extraordinary accuracy."
Here's an analogy to explain why that is incorrect; it's possible to accurately predict when a pan of water will boil (climate), it's impossible to predict where and when the first bubble will form (weather). Weather is turbulance within climate and as such predictions about it's behaviour are limited by it's chaotic nature. Climate predictions suffer no such restrictions when looking at timescales of a few millenia.
Re:Article doesn't live up to expectations
on
Bastardi's Wager
·
· Score: 1
"Sorry sir NeutronCowboy, but you made yourself sound like an idiot to me....CO2 is still increasing, and the overall temperature has leveled off."
Speaking as a non-angry representative of the "global warming crowd" I would argue that your logic is sound but your implicit assumption that proxy data sets are based on one sample is demonstratably incorrect. If you applied the same assumptions and logic to instrumental data you would also come to the same conclusion, ie: one sample is no more convincing than an anecdote.
I haven't RTFA but he may be refering to the ancient FUD surrounding the fact that sattelite data from below 30 degrees south is statistically less reliable than elsewhere due to lower sampling rates.
There is a downside if only one nation implements the restrictions. This is why an international treaty is required, something like the very successfull cap and trade treaty on sulphur emmission that Ronald Regan personally instigated to combat acid rain would seem to be in order. If all (or most) of the major polluters stick with BAU then the downside for everyone far exceeds the downside of one nation unilaterally implementing restrictions on themselves.
Depends on the specifics of the program. If the program was something like replace all coal plants with wind farms on a particular shedule, then yes they can say something about it's effect. If the program was something like spend $X to encourage the use of renewables, then no.
If you claim to be a skeptic then here's an experiment to judge the verasity of Anthony Watts claims. First plot the average temprature from all US weather stations, second plot the average temprature from the 70 US weather stations that surfacestations.org rates as "good" or "best". Compare the two plots, if Watts is correct the two plots will be significantly different.
You've posted some crap in the past but this conspiracy theory of yours where the UAE "controled" the most intense scientific debate since Darwin via their email accounts demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that you are the "wacko". My advise is to seek proffesional help for your paranoid delusions.
On the contrary, models are routinely benchmarked by their ability to reconstruct the past. There are also other ways to test models, here is a good write up of how large volcanic eruptions can be used to judge the accuracy of models.
"he has a track record of accurately describing temperature in the future."
Not really, his winter forecasts for every year since 2005 have been wrong. His method is that of a fortune teller, ie: make lots of predictions and highlight the ones that are by chance correct or close to correct.
Yes Henry Ford was a great boss by the standards of the day but his role in introducing the 40hr week (if any) was marginal, at best he was the first major company in the US to implement a 48hr week. The US in general was way behind in comparison to the UK and Australia where the movement originated.
"IT is mentally one of the most, maybe the most demanding industry"
If you want mentally demanding then try a 12hr shift driving a taxi in the city. Having spent 20yrs as a developer and 15yrs in "unskilled" jobs I can honestly say that software development is one of the least demanding jobs both physically and mentally that I've ever had, but maybe that's just because I enjoy it and treat unpaid overtime as a rare gift to my employer.
The GP is correct (but ambigously worded), the cervix dips into the semen and sucks it up, it starts doing so before the male orgasms and it continues to do so well after the act of sex is finished. However I don't think that the female orgasm is required for the cervix to start doing it's job, IIRC the fact that the penis is knocking at the door is enough to trigger the response.
"These are exceptional circumstances. Whether or not its due to climate instability/change, is for someone else, with a background in that, to argue."
It is indeed an exceptional event. It is a direct result of the strongest El-Nina event on record, the El-Nina/El-Nino cycle is basically large scale, long term turbulance and most climatologists will readily acknowledge it's reaction to AGW is poorly understood.
The most extreme variability I've experienced in Melbourne was on the day of the Black Saturday bushfires, the temprature dropped 15 degC in 15 minutes. The reason for such dramatic temprature changes is that cold fronts that come up from Antartica are always preceeded by strong winds from the desert.
He never said it did, miners pay taxes and our economy is largely based on being the world's quarry, Qld coal exports are not an insignificant part of that.
"Rome had bread and circuses, now we have contests for old games. When a civilization has the time to waste on things like this it's the beginning of the end."
OTOH, if bread and circuses cease to exist, so does civilization.
"We cannot explore all questions about the universe, we don't have the time, materials, and scientist-power."
I'm not proposing exploring every question, I'm saying you cannot plan scientific discoveries so it's best to just let human curiosity follow it's natural path.
"Should we leave the question of where to devote our limited resources to chance?"
It's worked well so far, discovery is by it's very nature a game of chance, who could predict that watching mayonaise flow would be the first demonstration of a macro QM effect, or that measuring the speed of light would lead to nuclear weapons, or that space exploration would lead to non-stick frypans? Sure we prioritize our questions to what looks interseting but we should never forget that such shopping lists are purely subjective speculations, not "disciplined critical thinking".
Slashdot Mirror
"I remember the global cooling scare of the 1970s
Yes I remeber that too.
Do you also remeber that it was areosols that prompted a MINORITY of climate scientists to predict cooling in the 70's?
Do you recall the clean air regulations that were instituted around the globe to reduce the level of said areoslos, thus significantly negating the -ve forcing the MINORITY had relied on to predict cooling?
Do you recall the coal industry successfully fighting tooth and nail against such regulations for nearly a century despite the fact that thousands of people died annually due to pea soup fog?
Do you recall that the National Acdemies of Science first warned the US government about AGW in 1958 and that they have only increased the urgency of their warning since that time?
"The day climatologists perfect the science is the day meteorologists will be able to give forecasts with extraordinary accuracy."
Here's an analogy to explain why that is incorrect; it's possible to accurately predict when a pan of water will boil (climate), it's impossible to predict where and when the first bubble will form (weather). Weather is turbulance within climate and as such predictions about it's behaviour are limited by it's chaotic nature. Climate predictions suffer no such restrictions when looking at timescales of a few millenia.
"Sorry sir NeutronCowboy, but you made yourself sound like an idiot to me....CO2 is still increasing, and the overall temperature has leveled off."
Sorry but this makes you sound like the idiot.
Speaking as a non-angry representative of the "global warming crowd" I would argue that your logic is sound but your implicit assumption that proxy data sets are based on one sample is demonstratably incorrect. If you applied the same assumptions and logic to instrumental data you would also come to the same conclusion, ie: one sample is no more convincing than an anecdote.
I haven't RTFA but he may be refering to the ancient FUD surrounding the fact that sattelite data from below 30 degrees south is statistically less reliable than elsewhere due to lower sampling rates.
"I think this sort of high profile bet is actually a good start."
It's been done, and the guy who lost by betting on cooling had a lot more credibility than Bastardi.
There is a downside if only one nation implements the restrictions. This is why an international treaty is required, something like the very successfull cap and trade treaty on sulphur emmission that Ronald Regan personally instigated to combat acid rain would seem to be in order. If all (or most) of the major polluters stick with BAU then the downside for everyone far exceeds the downside of one nation unilaterally implementing restrictions on themselves.
Depends on the specifics of the program. If the program was something like replace all coal plants with wind farms on a particular shedule, then yes they can say something about it's effect. If the program was something like spend $X to encourage the use of renewables, then no.
"if governments actually do something about climate change, the climate scientist would (probably) lose the bet."
From what I've read from the mouths of climate scientists they would be delighted to lose such a bet.
If you claim to be a skeptic then here's an experiment to judge the verasity of Anthony Watts claims. First plot the average temprature from all US weather stations, second plot the average temprature from the 70 US weather stations that surfacestations.org rates as "good" or "best". Compare the two plots, if Watts is correct the two plots will be significantly different.
Luckily NASA has already performed that experiment. Peter Sinclair created a youtube video detailing the experiment and the results (results appear ~5:10 mark). Apparently this contra-evidence annoyed Watts so much that he filed a false DCMA notice against it.
In other words if you don't like frauds, you should not be using Anthony Watts as a source.
"Rarely does anyone point to data."
Here, knock yourself out.
You've posted some crap in the past but this conspiracy theory of yours where the UAE "controled" the most intense scientific debate since Darwin via their email accounts demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that you are the "wacko". My advise is to seek proffesional help for your paranoid delusions.
"Not one of the models can predict the past"
On the contrary, models are routinely benchmarked by their ability to reconstruct the past. There are also other ways to test models, here is a good write up of how large volcanic eruptions can be used to judge the accuracy of models.
"he has a track record of accurately describing temperature in the future."
Not really, his winter forecasts for every year since 2005 have been wrong. His method is that of a fortune teller, ie: make lots of predictions and highlight the ones that are by chance correct or close to correct.
On a side note, climate scientists are not adverse to betting against global cooling.
"You'd think a gin delay line would have no trouble getting finance."
A "gin delay line" sounds like a queue at the gentlemen's club, Sir Humphrey would never allow it.
Yes Henry Ford was a great boss by the standards of the day but his role in introducing the 40hr week (if any) was marginal, at best he was the first major company in the US to implement a 48hr week. The US in general was way behind in comparison to the UK and Australia where the movement originated.
"IT is mentally one of the most, maybe the most demanding industry"
If you want mentally demanding then try a 12hr shift driving a taxi in the city. Having spent 20yrs as a developer and 15yrs in "unskilled" jobs I can honestly say that software development is one of the least demanding jobs both physically and mentally that I've ever had, but maybe that's just because I enjoy it and treat unpaid overtime as a rare gift to my employer.
The 40hr week was fought for and won by the union movement, it had absolutely nothing to do with Henry Ford.
The GP is correct (but ambigously worded), the cervix dips into the semen and sucks it up, it starts doing so before the male orgasms and it continues to do so well after the act of sex is finished. However I don't think that the female orgasm is required for the cervix to start doing it's job, IIRC the fact that the penis is knocking at the door is enough to trigger the response.
"Why are NGOs incapable of being this safety net?"
Read Charles Dickens.
"These are exceptional circumstances. Whether or not its due to climate instability/change, is for someone else, with a background in that, to argue."
It is indeed an exceptional event. It is a direct result of the strongest El-Nina event on record, the El-Nina/El-Nino cycle is basically large scale, long term turbulance and most climatologists will readily acknowledge it's reaction to AGW is poorly understood.
Disclaimer IANAC, just an interested amature.
"I see your instability and raise you."
The most extreme variability I've experienced in Melbourne was on the day of the Black Saturday bushfires, the temprature dropped 15 degC in 15 minutes. The reason for such dramatic temprature changes is that cold fronts that come up from Antartica are always preceeded by strong winds from the desert.
"the QLD government does not run the mines"
He never said it did, miners pay taxes and our economy is largely based on being the world's quarry, Qld coal exports are not an insignificant part of that.
"Rome had bread and circuses, now we have contests for old games. When a civilization has the time to waste on things like this it's the beginning of the end."
OTOH, if bread and circuses cease to exist, so does civilization.
"We cannot explore all questions about the universe, we don't have the time, materials, and scientist-power."
I'm not proposing exploring every question, I'm saying you cannot plan scientific discoveries so it's best to just let human curiosity follow it's natural path.
"Should we leave the question of where to devote our limited resources to chance?"
It's worked well so far, discovery is by it's very nature a game of chance, who could predict that watching mayonaise flow would be the first demonstration of a macro QM effect, or that measuring the speed of light would lead to nuclear weapons, or that space exploration would lead to non-stick frypans? Sure we prioritize our questions to what looks interseting but we should never forget that such shopping lists are purely subjective speculations, not "disciplined critical thinking".