Ping Bil Slowman; The global warming hoax reveiled
in [Design]
|
From: Raveninghorde on 27 Nov 2009 14:44 On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:26:54 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Nov 24, 12:35�pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde(a)invalid> wrote: >> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:08:17 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com >> wrote: > ><snip> > >> And some rats are trying to sacrifice Phil Jones to save AGW >> >> http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/11/23/the-knights-carbonic/ >> >> /quote >> >> Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the >> publication of work by climate sceptics(5,6), or to keep it out of a >> report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(7). I believe >> that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the >> data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed. >> >> /end quote > >You have posted links to some terminally inept work by climate >sceptics - some by people who obviously haven't even heard of the >Suess Effect. > >Preventing the publication of that sort of rubbish, or ousting the >editors who were incompetent or corrupt enough to publish it, would >strike me as the kind of behaviour expected of senior scientists aware >of their responsibilities in their area of expertise. > >And you don't seem to have noticed that George Monbiot went on to >satirise your position even more obviously. > >"Our co-option of the physical world has been just as successful. The >thinning of the Arctic ice cap was a masterstroke. The ring of secret >nuclear power stations around the Arctic Circle, attached to giant >immersion heaters, remains undetected, as do the space-based lasers >dissolving the world�s glaciers." > >Once again, your inability to understand what you posting has made you >look remarkably dim. Nice to see Monbiot, in your favourite rag, is still calling for Jones to be go and that Jones "advocating potentially criminal activity". http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/nov/25/monbiot-climate-leak-crisis-response /quote When it comes to his handling of Freedom of Information requests, Professor Jones might struggle even to use a technical defence. If you take the wording literally, in one case he appears to be suggesting that emails subject to a request be deleted, which means that he seems to be advocating potentially criminal activity. Even if no other message had been hacked, this would be sufficient to ensure his resignation as head of the unit. I feel desperately sorry for him: he must be walking through hell. But there is no helping it; he has to go, and the longer he leaves it, the worse it will get. He has a few days left in which to make an honourable exit. /end quote
From: Rich Grise on 27 Nov 2009 15:21 On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:23:27 -0600, krw wrote: > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:10:09 -0800, Rich Grise <richgrise(a)example.net> >>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:11:34 -0800, Joerg wrote: >>> John Larkin wrote: >>>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:59:25 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>> >>>>>> You live in Oregon. Here is a web site that gives the locations of >>>>>> potentially active volcanoes in your state. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nationalatlas.gov/dynamic/dyn_vol-or.html >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd suggest that if you are worried by potential sources of danger >>>>>> under your feet, you should pack up and move to Barendrecht >>>>>> immediately. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://scienceray.com/earth-sciences/five-worst-volcanic-disasters-in-history/ >>>>>> >>>>> I live in Northern California, about 35 miles east of Sacramento. And >>>>> I am rather unafraid of volcanos, earthquakes and fires versus some >>>>> "grand" ideas of man to "solve" a perceived crisis. >>>> >>>> Listen up, Joerg. If Sloman says you live in Oregon, you live in >>>> Oregon. It's a peer-reviewed fact. >>>> >>> What I was told before I married my sweetheart: If the father-in-law >>> says that the water runs up the drain then it does run up the drain. >>> >>> But he turned out to be a fun guy. Wish he was still around. >> >>When I was stationed at Beale, we'd sometimes drive to Reno on the >>weekends by the "back" route (through the mountain forests - real pretty >>country); anyway, on the way back, there's an aqueduct that looks like >>the water is running uphill. ;-) > > I probably runs to the left, from which ever way you look at it too. Actually, it's parallel to the road; the thing is, the road is a very gentle downslope, which you don't notice, and it "feels" flat. It's like you get inured or something. ;-) I don't know how to get there except out the back gate of Beale - I'm sure there's a highway number, but I never learned it - we always just went by landmarks. :-) Cheers! Rich
From: Rich Grise on 27 Nov 2009 15:23 On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:26:01 -0600, krw wrote: > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:23:59 -0800, Rich Grise <richgrise(a)example.net> > wrote: > >>On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:48:49 -0800, John Larkin wrote: >> >>> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574559630382048494.html?mod=googlenews_wsj >> >>"Climategate" - I LOVE it! ;-) ;-) ;-) > > Short version: "Weathergate"? Mark Steyn: "Climaquiddick". ;-) http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/peer-221438-reviewed-climate.html Admittedly, he makes no bones about being a hard-right-winger. Cheers! Rich
From: Jon Kirwan on 27 Nov 2009 15:52 On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:43:33 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >Jon Kirwan wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:03:28 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>> On Nov 25, 12:09 pm, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> [...] >>> >>>>> But the glaciers, those will further retreat from Europe, and north of America, >>>>> only to come back then later, in thousands of years cycles. >>>> Since we've messed up the positive feedback that drove that cycle and >>>> added more than enough CO2 and methane to the atmosphere, the glacier >>>> aren't going to be coming back any time soon. >>>> >>>> The shapes and locations ofof the continents will still be pretty much >>>> the same. I doubt if the world will look that different. >>>> >>> Ahm, the glacier north of us on Mt.Shasta is growing ... >>> >>> Maybe it hasn't heard of AGW and someone should tell it :-) >> >> Joerg, you should know better than to be this highly selective in what >> you consider a good argument. Read this USA Today article from a year >> and a half ago more closely: >> >> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2008-07-08-mt-shasta-growing-glaciers_N.htm >Only problem is that the proof doesn't seem to be in the pudding: > >http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMONtpre.pl?ca5983 Did you read through at least half the article I mentioned above? >They should know better than to publish something like this without >_showing_ the underlaying statistics :-) Which publisher, Joerg? The link I mentioned or the link you did? If you are talking about the USA Today article, my motivation was to show you that you are being very selective in choosing that isolated data point. Just as I might choose a 6-sigma noise-spiked data point to try and show you a rise when you know darned well the trend of the data was to fall. You'd rightly point out my mistake. As I did, yours. >Here in Northern California people look at their water bills, they see >drought rates being charged more and more often. Warmingists predicted >we'd be swamped with precipitation by now. Didn't happen. > >Then they look at their heating bills. Amounts of required fuel rising, >for example we went from 2 cords to 4 cords. So it ain't getting warmer. >We would never again buy a house with a pool around here. > >This is a middle class neighborhood with a fairly high percentage of >engineers, so you'd normally assume people with a pretty level head. >Nearly all now think that AGW is just one gigantic ruse to raise taxes >in one way or another. Again, this is not me ranting, it's what we hear >from the people. Meaning voters :-) None of that changes anything about what I said. Climate is averages and I think you _know_ this. If you said, "the average voltage, at 1Hz bandwidth, at this node is 4 volts" and I responded by using a high bandwidth tool and pointing out a 5 nanosecond spike at 8V and said, "no, it's 8V", you'd know I was being disingenuous. And you'd be right. If you are interested in access to specific details, you might read: http://nsidc.org/glims/ However, if scarfing through a database is a pain, an informed summary of the circumstances of mountain glaciers around the world can be had from: Cogley, J. G., 2009, "Geodetic and direct mass-balance measurements: comparison and joint analysis," Annals of Glaciology 50, 96-100. I can get you a copy, if you intend to read it. The average is remarkably different from your attempt at using an isolated data point. Jon
From: Raveninghorde on 27 Nov 2009 17:04
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:04:43 +1300, Malcolm Moore <abor1953needle(a)yahoodagger.co.nz> wrote: >On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:47:17 +0000, Raveninghorde ><raveninghorde(a)invalid> wrote: > >>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:03:48 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >>wrote: >> >>>Bill Sloman wrote: >>>> On Nov 24, 3:28 am, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>SNIP >> >>> >>>> Sourcewatch gets its data from Exxon-Mobil's published accounts, which >>>> provide rather better evidence than the kinds of conspiracy theories >>>> with which Ravinghorde regales us. >>>> >>> >>>Got a link the _proves_ that Exxon tries to fudge science here? Similar >>>to those embarrassing email? >> >>Here's a link to more AGW, academic global warming: >> >>http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/uh-oh-raw-data-in-new-zealand-tells-a-different-story-than-the-official-one/#more-13215 >> >>/quote >> >>But analysis of the raw climate data from the same temperature >>stations has just turned up a very different result: >> >>Gone is the relentless rising temperature trend, and instead there >>appears to have been a much smaller growth in warming, consistent with >>the warming up of the planet after the end of the Little Ice Age in >>1850. >> >>/end quote > >For a bit of balance > >http://hot-topic.co.nz/nz-sceptics-lie-about-temp-records-try-to-smear-top-scientist/ /quote I�m not too impressed, especially when you see where the weather station for National Institute of Water and Atmosphere (NIWA) is, right on the rooftop next to the air conditioners: /end quote http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/27/more-on-the-niwa-new-zealand-data-adjustment-story/#more-13287 |