John has a nice little horse in Highland Technology, but he seems to think that this gives him a license to wear a huge hat of expertise in a wide variety of unrelated areas.
When he retails denialist nonsense which he gets - directly or indirectly - from Exon-Mobil funded web-sites, he's riding a little wooden hobby-horse that really should be confined to the infant play- room. Denialist propaganda doesn't really belong in the infant playroom either, but infants do have an excuse for being too ignorant to distinguish plausible rubbish from scientifically coherent fact.
Unfortunately your opinions about what is "obviously bad science" are harvested from denialist web-sites with a vested interest in casting doubt on what is actually perfectly good science.
Not that you have any idea what a "suitable" measurment might be.
It shouldn't.
The historical record for the last 420 thousand years has the inter- glacial temperatures peaking at 3K above the current level.
We can be pretty confident that warming up to that level won't get us into another climate regime, or destabilise any interesting volumes of methane hydrates.
If we manage to get more than 3K of temperature rise, we are moving into unknown territory.
55.8 Million years ago, a slow progressive warming managed to get to a temperature where methane hydrates started coming apart, producing the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum
formatting link
"Other "hyperthermal" events can be recognised during this period of warming, including the Elmo event (ETM2). During these events =96 of which the PETM was by far the most severe =96 around 1,500 to 2,000 gigatons of carbon were released into the ocean/atmosphere system over the course of 1,000 years. This rate of carbon addition almost equals the rate at which carbon is being released into the atmosphere today through anthropogenic activity."
We aren't talking about "1%" regulation in a system which is controlled by neat negative feedbacks, but rather about driving a system that includes weak positve feedback loops into a regime when strong positive feedbacks - run-away warming - has been seen in the geological past.
John really doesn't like having his pretensions to climatic expertise deflated, and is now dedicated to seeing me as some kind of vicious curmudgeon who has no other interest in life than deflating his (admittedly over-blown) ego.
I don't start climate threads any more - I promised not to a few months ago, and I've kept my word
Unless you have a deeply embedded aversion to total nonsense.
Unfortunately, it is an importatn subject, and the denialist propaganda peddled by Exxon-Mobil and an a number of other self- interested liars needs to be identified as such, rather than accepted as common sense.
John's regular get out of jail free card, usually played after a long post explaining why he is free to post denialist nonsense, while the people who respond to point out that he doesn't know what he is talking about should confine themselves to electronics.
I gave you a great pair of references which just happen to address this directly for you and you haven't even bothered to read them. That's clear. One in 1969 and another 40 years later in 2009 which supplements the topics, as well as going further. Nice bookends and you never could have written the above if you so much as had glancing familiarity with mathematics or had read even one of those two papers.
Just one time I'd like to see a single _informed_ statement from some naysayer here instead of just pulling numbers out of butts and making up, entirely out of whole cloth, what the randomly conjured number then supposedly means in a situation they know nothing about.
Reminds me of a hillbilly joke, but it's too crass to post here.
I've been around the group long enough to have seen this card played by John, time and time again. It's a highly predictable knee-jerk, now. Rather than deal with his own overflowing ignorance.
Sloman is probably the single most-frequent poster to this group and is literally 99% off-topic. And virtually every one of his posts contains pompous insults. He is never helpful, never amusing, never hopeful, never has ideas; he hasn't done interesting electronics in decades and probably never will again.
With that many latching relays no reasonable capacitor will hold up if=20 you try to switch them all at the same time. I found out the hard way. =20 I had to sequence them. Then again i only had room for 4000 uF per 10=20 relays. My reset drive was only 0.5 A for 75 ms per relay for=20 reliable switching. So i drove the reset totally sequentially. I could=20 pull the power plug and punch reset in that order and reliably get reset.
80 relays at 75 ms per comes out to some 600 ms. Not an unreasonable = power=20 supply hold up for 25 to 30 years ago.
Why would it matter? A reasonable 1500uF electrolytic charged to 24V can easily supply 800mA for 6ms. If external resistance and ESR isn't too high, then it's just energy storage that matters.
1.5A * 12V * 0.006 = 0.11J
Eg. EEV-FK1V152M (SMT, at that)
Ignoring losses, it will discharge from 24V to about 20.8V to supply that energy. If a buck regulator works down to 15V then there is a margin of more than 2:1 (to account for losses in the regulator, capacitor tolerance/aging and temperature changes)
With the regards to the same published people being involved with tobacco= defenders=20 and being AGW skeptics, please do provide names and publications and = dates. Please=20 note that the implication that science for hire can (and has been) be = used against=20 AGW as well.
Who's picking friends here? I still suspect you were giving me a bunch of bull about the holier-than-thou high road you want to take here when you, on the same very day, continue the very thing you were saying you don't want to encourage.
WTF is wrong with you? Do you have insufficient drama in your life? This is an electronics design discussion group, not some self-help online neurosis therapy clinic.
Actually, I'd really like to know WTF is your problem, following me around like a puppy. Why are you even here? To discuss climate, for gosh sake? Or politics?
I know why I'm here. I'm a hobbyist and sometimes something very nice happens -- like the post Jim placed in today which gives me an enjoyable moment. I've enjoyed discussions on a reverse biased diode noise, low overhead constant current sources, and you name it. I like to learn and sometimes I get to observe and learn from the interacting discussions here. Not so much, lately. But even today!! yes!
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.