Moderated Global Warming Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
ehcks said:
Even though that's just crazy, wouldn't it still be in our best interest to use less gasoline and coal?
Click to expand...

Rationally, yes, politically, impossible.

And we are supposed to be the thinking species. :(
 
mike3 said:
So you don't think he's really changed his mind? What if he has? Have you ever heard of anyone who was a "denier" and dissed all the evidence as incompetent and then eventually gave up the belief? Or do you think he hasn't really given it up ("my study is right, but all the rest are still wrong", etc.)?
Click to expand...

My post was in regard to Muller being an egotist. Naturally he believes these results because he founded the project and he is an egotist. As is clear from his op-ed in the NY Times he's still spouting denialist crap about other scientists' work, including some outright lies. He's well aware that AGW denial gets you air-time so he's not about to give it up entirely.
 
rcfieldz said:
Perhaps with the tons of fossel fuel that's been removed from the core of our planet and refined to gasolne then transformed to vapor has left the planet lighter and Earh is being pulled gravitationally closer to the Sun?
Click to expand...

The core is a lot further down than you apparently think; that, or the fossil fuels are a lot further up than you think. Mind you, that's the least of your problems if you're being serious :).
 
Furcifer said:
Sorry you're just misinformed. The changes in albedo do have a profound effect on weather while admittedly little effect on climate. You keep using examples of climate when we're talking about weather. :boggled:
Click to expand...
Sorry, you are still unable to understand what I cited.
The urbanization and deforestation changes in albedo do not have a profound effect on climate. You get that right!

The urbanization changes in albedo do have a profound effect on urban temperature (i.e. weather). You get that right!

The deforestation changes in albedo do have an effect on rural temperature (i.e. weather).. But they are the opposite to your assertion of heat waves. You get that wrong:
We are talking about climate and weather :eye-poppi.
 
lomiller said:
What’s really jaw dropping is how much he says it will fall. He says that between the crust rebounding and the gravitational effects of the ice sheet, if the Greenland ice sheet were to disappear rapidly sea levels at Greenland would drop by 100[m]!
Click to expand...

That must mostly be down to isostatic rebound, and would surely take thousands of years. Scotland and Scandinavia are still rebounding from the last glaciation.
 
bit_pattern said:
Apparently it was such a momentous announcement that he had to breathlessly CEASE PUBLISHING his blog until this Very Important Announcement came through.

Clearly it is Very Dramatic stuff!

Haven't read it yet but let's just hope that poor Anthony doesn't end up with egg on his face again like last time he pre-published on his blog prior to peer-review :D
Click to expand...

McIntyre and Christy have given him the lead author role, so I doubt they're particularly hopeful of its chances out there.

This is clearly no coincidence, given the small world of denialism and Curry's close involvement with McIntyre (remember Lisbon, anybody? No? Me neither). They couldn't have foreseen the Esper paper so they've been baking their own response to BEST and here it is. The mountain gave forth a mouse.

Were one wedded to consistency the Watts results either blow the "missing hot-spot" theme away or they rubbish Christy's UAH temperature record, but I doubt that'll feature much over there in lal-la land. Consistency is not high on the priority list there.
 
Dcdrac said:
Prof Richard Muller, a physicist and climate change sceptic who founded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (Best) project, said he was surprised by the findings. "We were not expecting this, but as scientists, it is our duty to let the evidence change our minds." He added that he now considers himself a "converted sceptic" and his views had undergone a "total turnaround" in a short space of time.
Click to expand...

Good that he can reconsider his views but the fact that he was surprised is telling IMO. There are already 3 data sets based on surface station temperatures that say the same thing, 2 more based on satellite measurements, several more based on ocean temperature measurements and a whole raft of proxy indicators like melting ice, shifting ice in/out date, shifting ecological zones etc.
 
uke2se said:
Poptech's site is not a proper source. It's about as biased and erroneous as they come. Possibly worse than WattsUpHisButt.
Click to expand...


"possibly"?

The threads are probably all locked but you can probably still look up his posts here to see just how out to lunch the guys ideas are.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
It'll be sadly ironic when the heat requires more air conditioning which requires more power which requires more hydrocarbon burning to produce.
Click to expand...

I'm losing my mind to the heat. It usually gets around 100-105 rarely in the summer here, but now it's 105 daily and spiking to 110+. My window unit seems to stop working around 101, and my room feels like it's in the 90s. As a result I am going to great effort to seal anything I can in the room and working on tactical placement of said window unit.

But from about 3pm to 12am I am miserable.
 
CapelDodger said:
The Esper et al paper and its rather overblown conclusions has come at an opportune moment for the denial movement, and will no doubt be the default response to the upcoming BEST finale (when they can't ignore it entirely). It's in the fine old tradition of one paper overturning a huge body of science (when looked at from a very particular perspective).

Rumour has it that BEST will just get better :). From the moment I heard of the project I've had a feeling it'll be a treasure. After all, there's a good reason why denialists never use any of the data they so vehemently demand, and even the data Watts gathered himself with the Surface Stations photo-shoot was eaten by the dog.

The denier response to both projects is telling. With the photo-shoot they started crowing about what the data would show from the moment the project started, only to go gradually silent as it came in. With BEST they nailed themselves to its mast at the moment of launched, quite certain that Muller, Curry and the Kochs made it a sure-fire good thing. Which lends weight to the theory that many of them actually believe that mainstream science is engaged in a conspiracy to distort the data.

I must say I'm enjoying watching the denier meltdown. I've been looking forward to it and so far I have not been disappointed. This BEST thing, for instance - who saw that coming? Pure gold.
Click to expand...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19047501
Ex-sceptic says climate change is down to humans

In a US newspaper opinion piece, Prof Richard Muller says: "Call me a converted sceptic."
 
CapelDodger said:
That must mostly be down to isostatic rebound, and would surely take thousands of years. Scotland and Scandinavia are still rebounding from the last glaciation.
Click to expand...

no, as far i unerstood, its mainly do to gravity. Sure rebound is also a factor. but its not a factor to have falling sea level in Scotland. reduced gravitational attraction is the main fatctor for this.
 
CapelDodger said:
It's far from likely that the US will be taking the lead at any time; it certainly isn't now.
Click to expand...

Hard to take the lead in anything when both faces of America's political party are making bank on maintaining the status quo.

There's the rub. Vested interests, entrenched mindsets and simpletons currently rule the roost in far too many places. The US is pretty much a leader there, but not unique.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
Halfcentaur said:
I'm losing my mind to the heat. It usually gets around 100-105 rarely in the summer here, but now it's 105 daily and spiking to 110+. My window unit seems to stop working around 101, and my room feels like it's in the 90s. As a result I am going to great effort to seal anything I can in the room and working on tactical placement of said window unit.

But from about 3pm to 12am I am miserable.
Click to expand...
I've used ice on more than one similar occasion. Just constantly let it melt on my forehead. :)

An icebag on the head is good for more than a hangover. ;)
 
CapelDodger said:
McIntyre and Christy have given him the lead author role, so I doubt they're particularly hopeful of its chances out there.

This is clearly no coincidence, given the small world of denialism and Curry's close involvement with McIntyre (remember Lisbon, anybody? No? Me neither). They couldn't have foreseen the Esper paper so they've been baking their own response to BEST and here it is. The mountain gave forth a mouse.

Were one wedded to consistency the Watts results either blow the "missing hot-spot" theme away or they rubbish Christy's UAH temperature record, but I doubt that'll feature much over there in lal-la land. Consistency is not high on the priority list there.
Click to expand...

Apparently McIntyre is not too happy to be listed as an author. He was only asked to help out at the last minute, and really knows nothing much about the paper at all. That is a coded statement that he wants nothing to do with the paper, since he knows it is a mess. McIntyre's form has been to complain much, but commit as little as possible to the formal scientific process, while giving all his friends missives a free pass. Now Watts has gone and roped him into a paper he doesn't want to be associated with.
 
DC said:
no, as far i unerstood, its mainly do to gravity. Sure rebound is also a factor. but its not a factor to have falling sea level in Scotland. reduced gravitational attraction is the main fatctor for this.
Click to expand...

I can see this mechanism; The ice dome is two miles high, and so is a mass above the water and would have the effect of changing the force vector so that the astronomical nadir is no longer the direction of the vector. And the vector will generally be towards Greenland mounding up water along its coast.

But I wonder at the size of that number. Ten meters seems more reasonable.

I'll try to compute this over the weekend if I have any time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom