william.scherk

32,578 views

[Edited January 2 2019 -- to remove or replace dead visual-links]

Long ago Jonathan and I got some good traction out of a tangle of issues related to Global Warming slash Climate Change.  I think we are slated to renew or refresh our earlier exchanges.  I am going to poke in links to some he-said/he-saids from a few different threads at different times. One feature of the updated software is an automated 'sampling' of a link posted raw.  See below. 

So this blog entry will be kind of administrative-technical while being built and edited. I haven't figured out if Jonathan and I should impose some 'rules' going in, so your comment may be subject to arbitrary deletion before the field is ready for play. Fan notes included.

Study-links-Greenland-melting-with-Arctic-amplification.jpg

http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/VIDEOCASTS/A23KF/globalWarmingPEWpolarization.png

Adam, see what you think of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, especially the revealing map-based representations of opinion. You can drill and zoom down to state, county, district level to track data across a number of survey questions, where some of the answers are surprising. On some measures at least, the thing it is not found only in the UK, Quebec, Canada: Here's a snapshot of several maps which do not always show an expected Red State/Blue State pattern;

[images updated January 2 2019; click and go images]

http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/VIDEOCASTS/A23KF/2018YaleClimateOpinionMaps.png

http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/VIDEOCASTS/A23KF/personalHarmYaleCC.png

[Deleted image-link]

Edited 4 May 2015 by william.scherk

 

Plug my How To Get Where I Got book of books, Spencer Weart's The Discovery of Global Warming. Insert link to Amazon, Library link, and to the intro chapter of Weart's companion website to the book. Make sure you include a link to Ellen's mention of a book review. 

Bob Kolker's June 3 comment is a good hinge. What do we (J and I) think we know about the mechanism Bob sketches? What can we 'stipulate' or what can we agree on, for the sake of argument?

On 6/3/2016 at 9:31 AM, BaalChatzaf said:

CO2 does  slow down the radiation of energy in the infra-red bandwith.  The question is to what degree  given that there are other systems that tend to diffuse and disperse heat (such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and El Nino, along with convection and the Coriolis Effect that moves warm are to the polar regions).  The scientific fact is that CO2 tends to absorb radiated energy in the infra red range.  That is NOT fabricated.  That is a matter of experimental fact. 

Please see http://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-radiation

The issue is to what extent is the CO2 load of the atmosphere is slowing down heat radiation into space, when such absorbing or radiation occurs along with other heat dispersing processes.   

No denies that putting a blanket on, when it is cold slows down the rate at which one's body radiates heat.  Air is a poor heat conductor and the blanket traps air.  Also the blanket is warmed and radiates half its heat back to the source.  This produces a net slowing down of heat loss.  Heat loss still occurs (Second Law of Thermodynamics in operation)  but the rate of loss is affected. 

Tyndol and Arhenius  established the heat absorbing properties of CO2  in the late 19 th and early 20 th century.  Subsequent work has show the absorbtion to be the case and has measured it even more accurately than Tyndol and Arhenius. 

 

 

arctic1.jpg

Edited by william.scherk
Adding replacement for 404 images that did not survive my server migrtion

1,199 Comments


Recommended Comments



13 hours ago, Peter said:
19 hours ago, william.scherk said:

How would you and I know if Plimer's views as presented in Heaven and Earth are correct, Peter?

I took Physical Geography many years ago and much of what I learned at University supported Plimer's views. 

Here's a critical 2009 review of Heaven and Earth, by Gus Van Horn at the Objective Standard:

Review: Heaven and Earth, by Ian Plimer

Quote

[...] Wouldn’t it be nice if a scientist wrote a book carefully documenting and explaining, in layman’s terms, the cases for and against man-made global warming? Then, we could determine for ourselves which claims are supported by evidence and logic.

Based on favorable publicity from conservative media and politicians, Ian Plimer’s Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science would appear to be just such a book. Plimer claims to present an “integrated scientific understanding of the environment,” and the book—chock-full of figures and graphs and containing more than 2,300 footnotes in its 504 pages—certainly makes a powerful first impression. Add to that EU President (and noted climate-change skeptic) Vaclav Klaus’s statement that the work is “clear, understandable, and very useful,” and a good grasp of the arguments for and against man-made global warming would seem to be just a few hundred pages away.

Unfortunately, Heaven and Earth utterly fails to deliver on its promise. 

 

Link to comment

 

Spare a thought for the residents of New British Arizonalberta, who are not quite celebrating a weather milestone. I betcha wish you hadn't whinged about spring.

The image purports to portray the 2 metre temperature anomaly. Full rotating globe with varied atmospheric measurement depictions: Climate Reanalyzer

gfs_nh-sat1_t2anom_1-day.png

 

I testify to the truth of the bright red blob. 

 

Link to comment

What explains the Winter weather in the southern hemi? We have been breaking historic record temperatures in SA, many parts below freezing.

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, anthony said:

What explains the Winter weather in the southern hemi? We have been breaking historic record temperatures in SA, many parts below freezing.

Lack of data.

--Brant

Link to comment
1 hour ago, anthony said:

We have been breaking historic record temperatures in SA,

Our next five days here on Delmarva will be in the 90's. Odd bodkins. If climate ain't Man Made, how will Man change it? And if you have property on the water how will you sell it if sea levels are rising? Nuff said, or not? 

I think extreme temperatures are rising. Drought and / or excess rainfall are rising. I can see mankind migrating. I don't see the problem because we have always "migrated / moved." It might hurt personally or even generationally, but mankind has always moved to the best outcome. I may even learn the words to "O Canada."   

Link to comment
1 hour ago, anthony said:

many parts below freezing.

Please convert your current Celsius temperature to Fahrenheit. I thought it was around a hundred F in SA. 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

Lack of data.

Brant,

The IPCC needs to be defunded, dismantled and something new put it its place.

Hopefully something credible.

Michael

Link to comment
On 8/10/2021 at 5:22 AM, Peter said:

Please convert your current Celsius temperature to Fahrenheit. I thought it was around a hundred F in SA. 

0 Celsius = 32 Fahrenheit, 100C = 212F, Peter. We get the intermittent Polar storms in winter which can average SA's lows at about -2C to about +3 in many regions. This July for a few days, they dropped to about -7 in a few places (-3 in Joburg), which are record lows. An unusual occurrence at this high altitude of normally dry, sunny winters in JHB are cloudy skies, like today, which brings the rare possibility of snow here, this I've seen a few times. Although the temperature is 10C presently, so maybe not tonight.

 

Approximate calculator: "If you want to convert Fahrenheit to Celsius, do the opposite: subtract 30 from the temperature in degrees Fahrenheit, and then divide by 2 to get the temperature in degrees Celsius".

Link to comment

If this shift continues, Canada can start sending polar bears to us while the Canadians enjoy warm climes.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, anthony said:

If this shift continues, Canada can start sending polar bears to us while the Canadians enjoy warm climes.

How about we send you the Toronto Maple Leafs too?

Link to comment
59 minutes ago, anthony said:

Can the Maple Leafs play rugby? Cricket?

They have not won anything in hockey, rugby or cricket since 1967 lol, and even then they won plenty of times pre 1967 when there were 6 teams and got all the best players from Ontario!!!!!!!!!

Think the Leafs and the Dems have the two worst organizations around but I do think the Leafs are on the uptrend!!!

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Marc said:

They have not won anything in hockey, rugby or cricket since 1967 lol, and even then they won plenty of times pre 1967 when there were 6 teams and got all the best players from Ontario!!!!!!!!!

Think the Leafs and the Dems have the two worst organizations around but I do think the Leafs are on the uptrend!!!

ha. Good one!

Link to comment

How are averages derived again, it’s been a while since class. Is 1.67 degrees a meaningful amount in the context of the average ? Standard deviation enthusiasts wanna know !

 

Link to comment
On 8/11/2021 at 3:54 AM, anthony said:

This July for a few days, they dropped to about -7 in a few places (-3 in Joburg),

Wow. Talk about climate change. It is 62 degrees F, and it is going down to 58. Groovy. I may pull my quilt over on top of me tonight.

Link to comment

“A Good Year” with Russell Crowe from 2006 is very interesting. We were using the remote to find, “what do we want to see next” and we saw Crowe’s name. Ah, what the heck. How bad can it be? It was very enjoyable, with an angle on France I liked. Oh. And the little boy in the flic is Freddy Hightower from “The Good Doctor.” oh, it has to be about temperatures. Well it is 53F here on January 1st at 12:53. Happy New Year#@!

Link to comment

Just checking in. It's been a while. Any real science yet? Any answers to my questions? You know, the ones where I asked to see the details of just one single climate doom model following the scientific method to the letter? Hypothesis, experimenting, testing, results, reproducibility, repeatability, well-defined terms and conditions of the experiment's duration, falsifiability, etc., etc.?

No? That's what I thought.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Jonathan said:

Just checking in. It's been a while. Any real science yet? Any answers to my questions? You know, the ones where I asked to see the details of just one single climate doom model following the scientific method to the letter? Hypothesis, experimenting, testing, results, reproducibility, repeatability, well-defined terms and conditions of the experiment's duration, falsifiability, etc., etc.?

No? That's what I thought.

Science? I don't have to show any fucking science!

--el bandito

 

 

Link to comment

 

Quote

 

Bob Kolker's June 3 comment is a good hinge. What do we (J and I) think we know about the mechanism Bob sketches? What can we 'stipulate' or what can we agree on, for the sake of argument?

  On 6/3/2016 at 9:31 AM, BaalChatzaf said:

CO2 does  slow down the radiation of energy in the infra-red bandwith.  The question is to what degree  given that there are other systems that tend to diffuse and disperse heat (such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and El Nino, along with convection and the Coriolis Effect that moves warm are to the polar regions).  The scientific fact is that CO2 tends to absorb radiated energy in the infra red range.  That is NOT fabricated.  That is a matter of experimental fact. 

Please see http://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-radiation

The issue is to what extent is the CO2 load of the atmosphere is slowing down heat radiation into space, when such absorbing or radiation occurs along with other heat dispersing processes.   

No denies that putting a blanket on, when it is cold slows down the rate at which one's body radiates heat.  Air is a poor heat conductor and the blanket traps air.  Also the blanket is warmed and radiates half its heat back to the source.  This produces a net slowing down of heat loss.  Heat loss still occurs (Second Law of Thermodynamics in operation)  but the rate of loss is affected. 

Tyndol and Arhenius  established the heat absorbing properties of CO2  in the late 19 th and early 20 th century.  Subsequent work has show the absorbtion to be the case and has measured it even more accurately than Tyndol and Arhenius. 

 

It usually starts at the beginning ...

 

Link to comment
On 2/18/2022 at 1:37 PM, william.scherk said:

 

It usually starts at the beginning ...

 

The long way around answering "no" to my questions.

  • Smile 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Jonathan said:

The long way around answering "no" to my questions.

We're right back to Billy not understanding (or pretending to not understand) the concepts "hypothesis" and "conclusion," and what happens between the two when following the scientific method.

When I ask for the specifics of everything that should follow the hypothesis -- the predicting, experimenting, testing and analyzing, Billy provides me instead with everything that he led to the hypothesis. 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now