Pretend solution to pretend problem

I always have trouble fathoming how leftists can be so phenomenally ignorant. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    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     |
             
I love to cook with wine.     Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On a sunny day (Tue, 4 Jan 2011 15:21:14 -0600) it happened "amdx" wrote in :

Whatever way you look at it, we are at the top of a 95,000 year cycle, and it will get colder:

Scroll all thw way down and look at the combined wave forms. You will notice the 95,000 year cycle is top at present, and always a minimum of that cycle corresponds with an ice age. The rest is just Al Gore's and Slowman's bullshit.

er

t

Whereas we have no trouble understanding why right-wingers are phenomenally ignorant - if they weren't as thick as bricks they'd recognise that the vacuity of the arguments they put forward.

And since when is believing nonsense about the climate an exclusively left wing defect? Most right-wingers endorse an even bigger nonsense, which that there is no anthropgenic global warming.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

er

t

imum

It's usually referred to as one of the Milankovich cycles.

The obvious Milankovitch cycle period is 41,000 years and that was the dominant frequency in the climate fluctuations until about a million years ago, when the fluctuations switched to a roughly 100,000 year period.

It does seem that we are a few thousand years past the peak of the current inter-glacial, though it is gradually becoming clear that - even without anthropogenic global warming - the next ice age isn't due for another 50,000 years.

Jan Panteltje doesn't understand much of this, and doesn't like that little that he can understand, so he is a little too willing believe everything he reads on web-sites that can't even get Milankovitch's profession right - he wasn't an astronomer, but a geophysicist and civil engineer.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Since weather is chaotic, it's highly probable that the BP spill has affected weather in Europe. About as much as my trips to Safeway last year.

John

er

t

Probably not. We all know that that butterfly in Brazil hsd an equal chance of affecting the weather, and there are a lot more butterflies in Brazil than there are oil spills in the Gulf, or Larkin trips to the supermarket.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

So, are you enjoying shoveling all that denialist propaganda off your driveway?

Thanks, Rich

So, are you enjoying shoveling all that denialist propaganda off your driveway?

Thanks, Rich

...do not forget that doing all of that work injects more heat in to the environment thereby increasing the GW effect.

It has been hypothesised that the reduced sea ice cover in the Barents and Kara Seas (north of Finland) is responsible for the changed weather pattern that has dumped nearly a foot of snow onto my driveway. The occasional severe winters over the last few decades have also been associated with reduced sea ice cover up there, but anthropogenic global warming has more or less permantly reduced the sea ice cover in the Arctic, so the snow in my driveway may well be warmingist propaganda.

We haven't had enough severe winters in succession to be entirely sure that this isn't confusing weather with climate.

And the snow in my drive-way is associated with exceptionally warm weather in parts of the Arctic, so global warming is still going on ...

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Who is doing "all that work"? I've shovelled quite a lot of snow off the steps outside the front door, and cleared a space alongside the road in front of the house so that my wife can park my car there, rather than having to negotiate the top of the drive, but digging out the drive so that she can get her car out of the garage under the house and up the steep bit of the drive onto the road is a great deal more work than I fancy doing, particularly since there isn't any place convenient to dump the snow that I'd have to dig out.

The pile of snow from clearing the steps is as high as the steps, and has pretty much blocked the access to the place where we usually park my car.

-- Bill Sloman,Nijmegen

I guess this must be that new kind of science, where warming causes cooling. Well, there _are_ gas refrigerators, so who knows? Oh, yeah, you do.

Thanks! Rich

That's the beauty of strongly chaotic systems. Everything changes their states wildly after a time. After a few years of stirring, my driving changes the weather, worldwide, just as much as all the butterflies in Brazil.

Suppose I were to get on a bus. But suppose I deliberately stand for two seconds longer than I might have, before I enter. That delays the bus by those two seconds. A hundred years later, that would radically change the world. Hey, anybody can do that.

John

ly

e,

r

he

And when I see a Sloman block, I just skip most of it as it's extremely predictable. I guess I'm just too stupid to comprehend his brilliance.

G=B2

I guess we have to throw away all those old obsolete science books written by dead white men, like Newton, Archimedes, Copernicus, Galileo, and that lot.

Evidently Bill knows about the New Science, where warming causes cooling, up is down, and inside is outside.

As far as the UK and parts of northern Europe are concerned it is quite likely that even with global warming they could end up being cooler in winter (at least in the short term). The present cold weather patterns over the UK are possibly due to heat escaping from ice free Arctic Oceans establishing an atypical high pressure region. The net result is that the UK gets very cold northerly winds instead of the usual prevailing warm SW wind off the Atlantic warmed by the Gulf stream.

It has caused much interest in a paper published in 2009 that pretty much predicted what has been happening recently. Summary online at:

Regards, Martin Brown

n

aster

rent

...

You display a sentimental attachement to your favourite fallacy. Weather is chaotic, and you can't predict more than about ten days in advance. Climate - while it is just weather averaged over over a year or two - isn't chaotic. Set up the computer models and - independent of the starting conditions - you get the same pattern cyclones and anticyclones shifting heat from the equator towards the poles. You don't know when an anticyclone is going to pass over a particular place - that's weather - but you do know that you will get a tolerably stable number going through every year, because there's only so much heat to be moved.

Climate is complicated - the heat moves towards the poles in the oceans as well, and the ocean curents interact with the atmosphere, giving us things like the El Nino/La Nina alternation - but it doesn't seem to be chaotic.

So you can't radically change the world over periods longer than about ten days ...

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

But the "tolerably stable" climate could kill you if you go hiking on a sunny morning in November.

That's insane. Are you saying that the temperature in New York on January 1, 2050 will be the same, no matter how many nukes we detonate in the atmosphere next week? That causality somehow heals itself from disturbances? It doesn't: it diverges.

John