OT: Hot, Flat and Crowded

So as I said elsewhere:

As Bill likes to tell me 10 years doesn't make a trend. So we can ignore 1999 to date.

Reply to
Raveninghorde
Loading thread data ...

Obama's latest creation, the fartless cow ($100B development budget), will cure your problem ;-)

...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC\'s and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com |    1962     |

     Liberals are so cute.  Dumb as a box of rocks, but cute.
Reply to
Jim Thompson

If we burn all fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 would probably rise to what it was before the fossil fuels were formed - around 3,000 ppmv or a little more.

Global temperatures would probably as a result return to a higher level stabilized by lack of surface albedo feedback - around 22 C. Keep in mind that Greenland and Antarctica lacked deep ice sheets then and what the sea level was then.

Looks like half or often even 1/3 of that much CO2 achieved that - though admittedly before Antarctica moved to a latitude range where it took on a thick ice sheet and made our world a little more reflective of solar radiation.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Reply to
Don Klipstein

The trend from 1979 to 1997 had warming - but fairly easy to ignore up to then.

The post-1998 stretch has been much warmer than the pre-1998 stretch. Even the La-Nina-cooled 2008 was noticeably warmer than the 1979-1997 stretch.

Though 10 years does not argue a trend well, 29 years is not so dismissable.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Reply to
Don Klipstein

If it is fired by IQ, he will die of pneumonia.

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you\'re crazy.
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

That was another case of political fraud. They just used old corks from wine bottles and crazy glue. Sooner or later, either the cows or the corks will be in orbit.

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you\'re crazy.
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

1999 to date is not a trend, but 1979 to date is not so easy to ignore.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Reply to
Don Klipstein

Thank You!!! :) :)

Good laughs are very welcome!!!

I do not bill those responsible/irresponsible for damage to my monitor or keyboard from beverages spewed by my mouth becoming incontinent! (Damage report - actually none this time!)

(Though I suspect that a "fartless cow" has a bit of chance of becoming a gubmint-funded project at taxpayer cost a mere 1 order of magnitude less than the projection by Jim Thompson.

Then again, if atmospheric methane content is reduced by perhaps 1/3 for

10 gigabucks, I would consider that money well spent. But much less reduction or that much reduction costing a few 10's of gigabucks or more I would consider to be a waste of lotsa gigabucks better spent elsewhere or not spent by gubmint at all.)

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Reply to
Don Klipstein

That was the idea when it was set up, and there's nothing particularly political about climatologists taking the results of their published research seriously.

The problem with that paper isn't that it is political, but that it incorporates nonsense - a point that you haven't acknowledged.

Well, they did make it easy for me. Putting forward an obvious fallacy does damage your credibility.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

But Jim doesn't believe in global warming, and I don't believe in Hell, which makes it a less than credible threat.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

Then it can't last for eternity. Such a relief ...

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

e
f
n

Dear me. You don't go to Hell until you are dead, which would make it difficult for someone in Hell to die of pneumonia, and IQ is known to be of no use for anything except passing exams, so it wouldn't be of much use in firing up a furnace.

Michael A. Terrell's me-too's are getting progressively more pathetic.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

rote:

as

is

Not really - and certainly not at the level where you could contribute

Computer models are - by definition - over-simplified models of reality.

Newton's computational model of the solar system is an obvious example.

The over-simplification doesn't prevent such models being useful, as long as you remember that they are simplified.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

That *makes* you a denialist.

Do you deny it?

You're not helping your case.

Too late for you, sinner. The above admission has been forwarded to the Inquisition for processing, may they roast you on a bed of eco-friendly carbon credits, with a tangy rosemary-citrus sauce.

Suggestion: when they ask, confess. Denying just proves their point.

Cheers, James Arthur

Reply to
James Arthur

e
f
n

has

is

Pity about the URL - it happens to be nonsense. Here's a rather more informative graphic - showing a variety of different estimates

formatting link

For a brief commentary about climate in the remote geological past, this might be worth reading

formatting link

As for John proposition that our plants are running out of CO2 and we really ought to dig up all the fossil carbon we should before they all die off - which he has paraded here before - one can only say that it is very unselfish of him.

The plants that feed us and animals that we eat are well adapted to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels around 280ppm, and the temperatures that go with this carbon dioxide level.

If we push up the temperatures, to create conditions to which they are not well adapted. other plants, better adapted to the new conditions - usually described as weeds - will compete with them for water and sunlight, and we won't be able to harvest as much food as we used to. This is already starting to happen.

If we got too enthusiastic about the project - and it looks as if we are already overdoing it - we could reproduce the conditions that produced the Paleocene-Eocene_Thermal_Maximum some fifty million years ago

formatting link

This was a great time for small mamals - they radiated furiously shortly after the temperatures went through the roof

"The increase in mammalian abundance is intriguing. There is no evidence of any increased extinction rate among the terrestrial biota. Increased levels may have promoted dwarfing - which may (perhaps?) have encouraged speciation. Many major mammalian orders, including the Artiodactyla, horses and primates, appeared as if from nowhere, and spread across the globe, 13,000 to 22,000 years after the initiation of the PETM."

Presumably the existing animals didn't go extinct, but merely had to move away from the equator to find the cooler temperatures for which they'd evolved, leaving the tropics wide open for new adaptive radiation.

Fine for life as a whole, but not great for the existing species. We'd have the same sort of trouble if we followed John's spectacularly unselfish program - there'd be population crash, down from the billions supported by highly tuned agriculture to the millions that could make it as hunter-gatherers, and our current civilisation would not survive, but for a decidated green like John Larkin this presumably isn't a problem.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

Relax. According to William Ruddiman our ancestors have already produced enough extra greenhouse gases to forestall the next ice age (which happens to be overdue).

formatting link

formatting link
ppothesis/

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

Sno-o-o-o-ort :=)

...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC\'s and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com |    1962     |
             
 Think things are bad now?  Wait until Obama "takes care" of you.
Reply to
Jim Thompson

In , snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrote (edited for space):

Two good laughs I find in this newsgroup in one day?

How long will my monitor and my keyboard last if I don't abstain from reading this newsgroup while drinking beverages?

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Reply to
Don Klipstein

ers

The problem with the satellite data wasn't picked up by NASA but by Wentz, F. J. & Schabel, M. Nature 394, 661=96664 (1998)., who noticed that the satellite data wasn't being corrected for orbital decay, and worked out what the correction had to be.

NASA applied their correction. The "correlation" that ensued reflects the fact that Wentz and Schabel's insight was correct.

It is always nice when independent measurements agree. The global warming denial propaganda machine doesn't see it that way, but they are paid to exploit anything that can be manipulated to cast doubt on the scientific data.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

te:

n,

he

h

rks

Back in the real world, the Australian researchers are looking into persuading the intestinal bacteria that digest cellulose for kangaroos to do the same job for sheep and cattle.

formatting link

It is difficult to see how one could spend 100 billion dollars on the project, but American Republican politicians and American defence industry contractors could manage it if anybody could.

Mike Terrell may yet be silenced.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Reply to
bill.sloman

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.