Video: Mars Attacks, Or Maybe It Doesn’t

Environment • Views: 4,138

Environmentalist Peter Sinclair has been remixing some of his earlier videos debunking the talking points of climate change deniers, to improve the audio and video. This one deals with the odd, easily refuted, yet endlessly repeated talking point (showing up often in LGF climate change threads) that the planet Mars is undergoing global warming — proving that the Sun is the cause of the Earth’s warming. Except that it doesn’t prove any such thing.

Youtube Video

Jump to bottom

357 comments
1 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:14:37pm

When Mars attacks, how does Venus respond?

2 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:16:26pm

Mars doesn't have much of an atmosphere compared to Earth. I doubt the Martian climate tells us anything one way or the other.

3 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:16:30pm

If this is Mars Attacks, where's Tom Jones?

/movie humor

4 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:17:11pm
Youtube Video
5 Mad Al-Jaffee  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:17:46pm

I've never asked anything like this before on this blog, but Charles can you please post something about Norman Borlaug? I can send you some links about him if you want to. The guy revolutionized agriculture and saved a billion lives.

6 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:18:06pm

re: #3 Dark_Falcon

If this is Mars Attacks, where's Tom Jones?

/movie humor

He's at #4, doncha know.

:)

7 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:18:50pm

re: #4 Charles

Thanks for that, Charles.

8 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:19:38pm

re: #5 Mad Al-Jaffee

I've never asked anything like this before on this blog, but Charles can you please post something about Norman Borlaug? I can send you some links about him if you want to. The guy revolutionized agriculture and saved a billion lives.

put some in the spin-off links.

9 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:19:45pm

re: #5 Mad Al-Jaffee

I've never asked anything like this before on this blog, but Charles can you please post something about Norman Borlaug? I can send you some links about him if you want to. The guy revolutionized agriculture and saved a billion lives.

An excellent life.

10 jcm  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:19:51pm

re: #5 Mad Al-Jaffee

I've never asked anything like this before on this blog, but Charles can you please post something about Norman Borlaug? I can send you some links about him if you want to. The guy revolutionized agriculture and saved a billion lives.

I've been offline all day, he just passed away yesterday! WOW!

He's one of those guys few know about, but everyone should

Rest in Peace Mr. Borlaug.

11 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:20:27pm

just here for a short time, bbiab

12 Mad Al-Jaffee  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:21:02pm

A man went to the doctor with a strange complaint.

"Well it's like this Doc, when I drive to work in the morning through the country lanes I start to sing 'The green green grass of home'. If I see a cat then it's 'What's new, pussy cat?'. It's so embaracing, even when I'm asleep and dreaming, I still keep singing. Last night, it was 'Delilah', and my wife was not amused!"

"Yes, it would apear that you have the early symptoms of Tom Jones syndrome".

"Well I've never heard of that, is it common?" asked the man.

"It's not unusual", replied the doctor.

13 Cato the Elder  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:21:04pm

How you can tell I'm an effeminate socialist:

The cook at the local "gourmet" restaurant gave my service dog a shankbone of veal to take home.

He won't touch it.

14 Killgore Trout  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:21:36pm

I had no idea Pluto and Neptune were so close to each other.

15 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:22:25pm

re: #13 Cato the Elder

How you can tell I'm an effeminate socialist:

The cook at the local "gourmet" restaurant gave my service dog a shankbone of veal to take home.

He won't touch it.

All that proves is that your dog is finicky. You're no more effeminate than Brian Urlacher.

16 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:23:48pm

re: #14 Killgore Trout

I had no idea Pluto and Neptune were so close to each other.

Well, they're in a resonance with each other and can never meet, even though Pluto does spend a few decades per orbit closer to the sun than Neptune.

17 Pianobuff  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:24:03pm

I wonder if there are martians that use the example of a warming Earth as a local argument against AGW.

18 Killgore Trout  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:24:38pm

Oh, yeah. I almost forgot...
Liberal propaganda! Anti-conservative McCarthyism with a Darwinist agenda!
/Flouncer

19 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:26:35pm

re: #17 Pianobuff

I wonder if there are martians that use the example of a warming Earth as a local argument against AGW.

That's silly. There's no AGW on Mars, it's MGW. Martianogenic Global Warming.

20 fizzlogic  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:27:05pm

The credulous don't even need to read the headlines. They have Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity to do it for them.

21 brent  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:27:23pm

wtf are climate deniers? that just grates on my ears.

22 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:27:43pm

Peter Sinclair's video's are incoherent.

23 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:28:12pm

re: #13 Cato the Elder

How you can tell I'm an effeminate socialist:

The cook at the local "gourmet" restaurant gave my service dog a shankbone of veal to take home.

He won't touch it.

Doesn't that indicate that your service dog is an effeminate socialist?

24 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:28:16pm

re: #19 Coracle

That's silly. There's no AGW on Mars, it's MGW. Martianogenic Global Warming.

Oh Noes! Our Mars Probe caused teh Martian Global Warmering!

25 Mad Al-Jaffee  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:28:27pm

I'm really kind of sad about Bourlag's death, but not because he died. The guy was 95 and he live a long, productive life. I'm sad because he'll just get a brief mention in the media, unlike pop singers and actors who have entertained us but haven't changed the world like Dr. Borlaug did.

26 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:28:31pm

re: #21 brent

wtf are climate deniers? that just grates on my ears.

They're people who deny that the Earth's climate is warming, despite the overwhelming scientific evidence that it is, and that humans are responsible.

You'll probably see some of them in this thread in a little while.

27 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:28:36pm

re: #22 ted

Peter Sinclair's video's are incoherent.

Welcome ted! Back for more fact-free refutations?

28 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:28:42pm

I think climate change is driven by solar activity. Sun spots, solar wind, etc. There's an observable record showing a relationship between sun spots and temperature over the last few thousand years. I'm not certain of the mechanism. There are several theories that have to do with cosmic rays and cloud formation, but it could be something else entirely. If the sun continues to be spot free for the next few years, temperatures should continue dropping like they have this summer if solar activity is the driver. Temperatures should continue upward if CO2 is the driving factor. I'm content, eager actually, to wait and see.

29 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:29:00pm

Oops! I mean, you can already see one of them in this thread.

30 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:29:18pm

re: #25 Mad Al-Jaffee

I'm really kind of sad about Bourlag's death, but not because he died. The guy was 95 and he live a long, productive life. I'm sad because he'll just get a brief mention in the media, unlike pop singers and actors who have entertained us but haven't changed the world like Dr. Borlaug did.

On the other hand, he did get a mention in a West Wing episode. No, it's not much, for such service to mankind, but it's kind of cool.

31 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:29:22pm

Oh boy I just had to laugh when he brought up that article in which the writer said "the change is likely a seasonal event."

Regarding Pluto.

32 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:29:41pm
33 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:29:56pm

re: #5 Mad Al-Jaffee

I've never asked anything like this before on this blog, but Charles can you please post something about Norman Borlaug? I can send you some links about him if you want to. The guy revolutionized agriculture and saved a billion lives.

I'll post a memorial thread tomorrow. Remind me if you don't see it.

34 Mad Al-Jaffee  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:30:01pm
Youtube Video
35 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:30:04pm

re: #26 Charles

They're people who deny that the Earth's climate is warming, despite the overwhelming scientific evidence that it is, and that humans are responsible.

You'll probably see some of them in this thread in a little while.

They frequently offer, as counter-evidence, that it is cold in their house at the moment. This happens a lot in winter.

36 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:30:46pm

re: #28 NukeAtomrod

I think climate change is driven by solar activity. Sun spots, solar wind, etc. There's an observable record showing a relationship between sun spots and temperature over the last few thousand years. I'm not certain of the mechanism. There are several theories that have to do with cosmic rays and cloud formation, but it could be something else entirely. If the sun continues to be spot free for the next few years, temperatures should continue dropping like they have this summer if solar activity is the driver. Temperatures should continue upward if CO2 is the driving factor. I'm content, eager actually, to wait and see.

This cooler summer was an affect of La Nina. Solar (sunspot) cycle effects are present but negligible forcings.

37 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:31:19pm

If the sun was causing GW it would support the climate deniers.

38 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:31:35pm

Bear's take the lead, 15-13. Less than 2:30 to go. I won't live blog the game, but I'll post the final score as soon as it ends.

39 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:31:40pm

re: #21 brent

wtf are climate deniers? that just grates on my ears.

THERE IS NO CLIMATE! :)

40 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:32:21pm
41 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:32:25pm

re: #37 ted

If the sun was causing GW it would support the climate deniers.

If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bus.

But of course the sun causes warming. Without it, we'd be a cold dead sphere.

42 Mad Al-Jaffee  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:32:40pm

re: #33 Charles

I'll post a memorial thread tomorrow. Remind me if you don't see it.

Thanks Charles! I appreciate it!

I never met him, but I wish I had. My brother met him once, and he knows one of the guys in the Penn & Teller video I posted (not any of the Greenpeace assholes in it, one of the guys who works with GM food.)

43 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:32:44pm

re: #37 ted

If the sun was causing GW it would support the climate deniers.

What evidence do you have to present to refute this vid? Post up, or shut up.

44 Enkidu90046  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:33:07pm

re: #5 Mad Al-Jaffee

I've never asked anything like this before on this blog, but Charles can you please post something about Norman Borlaug? I can send you some links about him if you want to. The guy revolutionized agriculture and saved a billion lives.

I had never heard of him before until I saw that Penn & Teller "Bullshit" episode that discussed him.

45 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:33:13pm

Sinclair is really a junk science salesman.

46 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:33:36pm
47 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:33:52pm

re: #5 Mad Al-Jaffee

I've never asked anything like this before on this blog, but Charles can you please post something about Norman Borlaug? I can send you some links about him if you want to. The guy revolutionized agriculture and saved a billion lives.

I love that guy. His research squelched the over-population vs. food supply fears held by people like John Holdren.

48 Pianobuff  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:34:19pm

re: #46 taxfreekiller

What we all eat for breakfast tomorrow is by his work.

He invented Spam?

49 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:34:40pm

re: #45 ted

Sinclair is really a junk science salesman.

Show us.

50 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:34:48pm

re: #36 Coracle

This cooler summer was an affect of La Nina. Solar (sunspot) cycle effects are present but negligible forcings.

The most recent climate science indicates that solar fluctuations have a much greater effect upon terrestrial climate than had previously been maintained:

[Link: www.sciencedaily.com...]

[Link: www.sciencemag.org...]

[Link: www.leif.org...]

51 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:35:08pm

re: #49 Coracle

Show us.

I hope you aren't holding your breath.

52 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:35:09pm

re: #48 Pianobuff

He invented Spam?

I think that violates the Geneva Conventions!

53 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:35:22pm

re: #41 Coracle

If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bus.

But of course the sun causes warming. Without it, we'd be a cold dead sphere.

Suns average temp has been stable for millions of years.

54 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:35:33pm

re: #45 ted

Sinclair is really a junk science salesman.

Maybe you should stick to getting your science from a "real climate expert." My guess is that it would probably be someone like Glenn Beck -- the climate comedian.

55 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:36:00pm

re: #36 Coracle

This cooler summer was an affect of La Nina. Solar (sunspot) cycle effects are present but negligible forcings.

Possibly. We'll see.

56 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:36:15pm

re: #15 Dark_Falcon

All that proves is that your dog is finicky. You're no more effeminate than Brian Urlacher.

Out of the game tonight with a limp wrist injury...

57 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:36:37pm

re: #45 ted

Sinclair is really a junk science salesman.

Post up, or shut up.

58 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:36:55pm

re: #49 Coracle

Show us.

His videos are sound bites of nonsense.

59 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:36:57pm

re: #50 Salamantis

The most recent climate science indicates that solar fluctuations have a much greater effect upon terrestrial climate than had previously been maintained:

[Link: www.sciencedaily.com...]

[Link: www.sciencemag.org...]

[Link: www.leif.org...]

We've done this dance already, here at LGF.
That's still talking only about the short term cyclicality of the sunspot cycle. It may (or may not) modulate the effects of ENSO, but there is no implication it effects the century plus long warming trend caused by AGW.

60 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:37:13pm

re: #55 NukeAtomrod

Possibly. We'll see.

That we will.

61 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:37:15pm

re: #56 austin_blue

Out of the game tonight with a limp wrist injury...

SMACK!

And the Packers just got a touchdown. DAMN IT!

62 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:37:28pm

re: #53 ted

Suns average temp has been stable for millions of years.

This day brought to you by the Sun: Fucking up your GW theories for a couple of million years now!

63 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:37:30pm

re: #58 ted

GAZE

64 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:37:31pm

re: #41 Coracle

If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bus.

But of course the sun causes warming. Without it, we'd be a cold dead sphere.

That's a keeper!

If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bus.

65 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:37:40pm

re: #58 ted

His videos are sound bites of nonsense.

Bullshit. Give us specifics.

66 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:38:18pm

re: #58 ted

His videos are sound bites of nonsense.

Unlike Mike Pence?

67 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:38:33pm

re: #61 Dark_Falcon

SMACK!

And the Packers just got a touchdown. DAMN IT!

And a 2 point conversion. 21- 16 GB.

68 Racer X  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:38:48pm

Pssshh.

Its cold here right now so how can we still have global warming?

69 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:39:09pm

re: #64 Gus 802

Obama's version:

"If my grandmother had wheels, she'd have raised me to be even better at throwing people under the bus."

70 shiplord kirel  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:39:26pm

re: #47 NukeAtomrod

I love that guy. His research squelched the over-population vs. food supply fears held by people like John Holdren.

Norm Borlaug's work was the reason those fears weren't realized. In the early 60s, the notion of a global famine before the end of the century was very real and credible. Borlaug and the Green Revolution (which had nothing to do with political greens) quadrupled grain yields in some of the most crucial and threatened areas, essentially resetting the fuse on the "population bomb."

71 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:39:39pm

If the sun was causing GW it would support the deniers, not refute them...Jeez

72 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:39:42pm

re: #67 austin_blue

And a 2 point conversion. 21- 16 GB.

AAAUUUGGHHH!

73 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:39:48pm
74 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:40:15pm

re: #59 Coracle

We've done this dance already, here at LGF.
That's still talking only about the short term cyclicality of the sunspot cycle. It may (or may not) modulate the effects of ENSO, but there is no implication it effects the century plus long warming trend caused by AGW.

Check the third link. Your contention assumes that there is only the basic 11 year cycle, while historically, there are larger cycles consisting of several 11 year periods back to back in which there are more sunspots, and several 11 year periods strung together in which they are less. In fact, this larger cyclical phenomenon is proposed as an explanation of the Maunder Minimum, which has been proposed as the cause of the Little Ice Age during the Middle Ages.

75 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:40:20pm

re: #59 Coracle

We've done this dance already, here at LGF.
That's still talking only about the short term cyclicality of the sunspot cycle. It may (or may not) modulate the effects of ENSO, but there is no implication it effects the century plus long warming trend caused by AGW.

Thank you.

76 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:40:55pm

re: #71 ted

If the sun was causing GW it would support the deniers, not refute them...Jeez

You have convinced us you know how to recycle. But do you know how to make a point?

77 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:41:06pm

re: #67 austin_blue

And a 2 point conversion. 21- 16 GB.

Oops, 21-15.

78 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:41:26pm
This cooler summer was an affect of La Nina. Solar (sunspot) cycle effects are present but negligible forcings.


What summer was that?
Second 2009 Warmest July on Record Globally, according to NASA

79 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:42:03pm

re: #76 Coracle

You have convinced us you know how to recycle. But do you know how to make a point?

Are you putting this to a floor vote? If so, I choose "no".

80 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:42:11pm

re: #76 Coracle

You have convinced us you know how to recycle. But do you know how to make a point?

That is my point.

81 Enkidu90046  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:42:52pm

re: #61 Dark_Falcon

SMACK!

And the Packers just got a touchdown. DAMN IT!

I wasn't really rooting for either team until GB got called for that bullshit illegal contact penalty that gave the Bears a first down and the go-ahead score as a result. After that, I was rooting for GB. Glad to see they got the improbably TD (on a completely blown coverage).

82 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:43:28pm
83 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:43:37pm

Planetary Temperatures Now?

OMG...

84 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:43:47pm

The whole notion that the other planets are warming too, while false - utterly false- is one of those actually rather impressive lies, that showed a great deal of creativity to come up with.

If only that level of intelligence was used to look at teh actual science.

So, because all that tea party stuff pissed me off, I want to ask some questions to anyone who is still "on the fence" so to speak.

The people who tell you loudly that AGW is not true, that it is some leftist hoax are frequently:

Nirthers

Deathers,

Creationists,

People who just make stuff like this up,

People who have no particular scientific credentials,

People who generally can't even do algebra,

People who have vested moneyed interests in what they say,

and LIE TO YOU ALL THE TIME.

They lie about there being on warming since 1998. They lie about the other planets warming. They lie about "plant food." They lie about vast legions of scientists who doubt the science. They cherry pick and quote mine.

So, let me ask, assuming that you never heard of AGW at all before, would you trust folks like this about science, or would you trust legions of actual scientists who tell a consistent story backed by hard data?

85 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:43:59pm

re: #60 Coracle

That we will.

La Nina and El Nino are definitely drivers of weather, but not climate. If the sun is actually going into a Dalton or Maunder-like minimum, the overall climate will get colder if solar activity is the culprit, as I believe. If the observations don't match up as time goes on, I'll reconsider, but right now I'm betting on the sun.

86 jaunte  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:44:21pm

re: #70 shiplord kirel

Borlaug on anti-gmo Luddites:

The private sector corporations in the vanguard of developing and commercializing transgenic varieties and hybrids have neglected informing adequately the public consumers and urbanites of the benefit vs risks of the new technology. This neglect has been confused unduly by the well financed, very effective anti-science and anti- technology propaganda of the extremists in the environmental movement, the neo-Luddites. It indicates clearly the USA also has a huge job on its hands to update the functional knowledge and understanding about the complexities and importance of the new biotechnology and transgenic engineering for the biology teachers of grade schools, high schools, community colleges and junior colleges. This re-education must be done as expeditiously as possible, and it appears to me Texas A&M has an important role to play in clarifying the doubts about the importance and safety/risks of the new technologies.[Link: ipgb.tamu.edu...]
87 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:45:06pm

oops:
2009 Second Warmest July on Record Globally, according to NASA

88 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:45:09pm

And Harris intercepted Cutler (4th Int tonight) and we are done with the NFL this evening.

Sorry DF.

89 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:45:24pm
90 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:45:42pm

re: #81 Enkidu90046

And Cutler just threw another interception. That's the game.

Green Bay 21, Chicago 15

[facepalm]

91 Mad Al-Jaffee  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:45:42pm

Thanks for all of the updings about Dr. Borlaug. I'm going to bed soon, looking forward to a post about him tomorrow.

92 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:46:39pm

re: #74 Salamantis

Check the third link. Your contention assumes that there is only the basic 11 year cycle, while historically, there are larger cycles consisting of several 11 year periods back to back in which there are more sunspots, and several 11 year periods strung together in which they are less. In fact, this larger cyclical phenomenon is proposed as an explanation of the Maunder Minimum, which has been proposed as the cause of the Little Ice Age during the Middle Ages.

I read that when it came out. It's a valid question. It could be answered soon enough if the cycle picks up, or if the temps rise anyway over the next few years. However, solar activity is still overprinted on the global temperature rise of the last century. It would be most unfortunate if a few years of low sunspot activity only temporarily offset rises due to CO2.

93 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:46:44pm

re: #88 austin_blue

And Harris intercepted Cutler (4th Int tonight) and we are done with the NFL this evening.

Sorry DF.

It happens. I live in Chicago, so I'm used to it. Who do you root for?

94 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:47:21pm

re: #88 austin_blue

And Harris intercepted Cutler (4th Int tonight) and we are done with the NFL this evening.

*Dr. Phil voice* So, Chicago, how's that Cutler deal workin' out for ya?

95 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:47:26pm

re: #50 Salamantis

The most recent climate science indicates that solar fluctuations have a much greater effect upon terrestrial climate than had previously been maintained:

[Link: www.sciencedaily.com...]

[Link: www.sciencemag.org...]

[Link: www.leif.org...]

Sal, this is the 11 year solar cycle, and it is specifically talking about one part of the climate in one part of the world. Even if the sun is giving us a break, then do take into acount that we are still warming even though we are getting a break, and then what happens when it gets back to normal.

What will happen is that CO2 concentrations that are still causeing warming even when we are getting a break, will cause even more warming next cycle.

What pisses me off about this, is that you have been told this again and again by me and coracle at least five times each by both of us, and yet, you still keep bringing this as if it is a question./

Will you just stop saying the same wrong stuff over and over, and understand the science that you yourself are bringing?

96 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:47:54pm

re: #78 Reginald Perrin

What summer was that?
Second 2009 Warmest July on Record Globally, according to NASA

It was a regional US phenomenon - and not all of the US, either. Dunno about Europe or other locales.

97 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:48:02pm

re: #40 taxfreekiller

some of the earth first meetings I was around
Dr. Borlaug was not talked about nice at all,,

"he messed with the plants you know"

Earth First can kiss my ass.

98 Cato the Elder  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:48:24pm

OK.

Why I'm getting out of Shitsville, Shitsville County, State of Bumwad, USA, before the end of this month, Reason No. 156,693:

Just heard 13 shots from (I'm guessing) a 9mm (guessing again) Glock emanating from maybe two blocks from here.

There are no open-air target ranges in Shitsville. Ergo, someone was (best case) firing into the air ("I shot a baker's dozen bullets into the air, they came to earth I know not where, nor do I care") or (worse case) making a statement or celebrating a good drunk or (worst case) I'll read all about it in the piss-poor rag that counts for a paper anymore tomorrow or Tuesday.

Bye-bye, Shitsville.

99 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:48:39pm

My favourite one is when AGW deniers quote the 2 degree increase in temp on Pluto!

Just think what an increase in the suns output capable of raising temperatures on that incredibly distant body by 2 degrees C would do to the much closer earth! We'd have burnt to a crisp! Obviously, it's not increases in the suns output that have raised temps there.

100 Desert Dog  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:49:09pm

re: #98 Cato the Elder

OK.

Why I'm getting out of Shitsville, Shitsville County, State of Bumwad, USA, before the end of this month, Reason No. 156,693:

Just heard 13 shots from (I'm guessing) a 9mm (guessing again) Glock emanating from maybe two blocks from here.

There are no open-air target ranges in Shitsville. Ergo, someone was (best case) firing into the air ("I shot a baker's dozen bullets into the air, they came to earth I know not where, nor do I care") or (worse case) making a statement or celebrating a good drunk or (worst case) I'll read all about it in the piss-poor rag that counts for a paper anymore tomorrow or Tuesday.

Bye-bye, Shitsville.

I didn't know you lived in Phoenix, Cato.

101 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:49:21pm
102 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:49:47pm

re: #96 Coracle

Exactly: people confusing local weather with climate.

103 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:50:04pm

re: #99 Jimmah

My favourite one is when AGW deniers quote the 2 degree increase in temp on Pluto!

Just think what an increase in the suns output capable of raising temperatures on that incredibly distant body by 2 degrees C would do to the much closer earth! We'd have burnt to a crisp! Obviously, it's not increases in the suns output that have raised temps there.

Think about how that contradicts the notion that the sun is putting out less energy due to the lack of sunspots... They are too stupid to even lie consistently.

104 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:50:25pm

re: #94 SteveC

*Dr. Phil voice* So, Chicago, how's that Cutler deal workin' out for ya?

And I really can't laugh. Jake Delhomme = FAIL.

105 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:50:43pm

re: #84 LudwigVanQuixote

The whole notion that the other planets are warming too, while false - utterly false- is one of those actually rather impressive lies, that showed a great deal of creativity to come up with.

If only that level of intelligence was used to look at teh actual science.

So, because all that tea party stuff pissed me off, I want to ask some questions to anyone who is still "on the fence" so to speak.

The people who tell you loudly that AGW is not true, that it is some leftist hoax are frequently:

Nirthers

Deathers,

Creationists,

People who just make stuff like this up,

People who have no particular scientific credentials,

People who generally can't even do algebra,

People who have vested moneyed interests in what they say,

and LIE TO YOU ALL THE TIME.

They lie about there being on warming since 1998. They lie about the other planets warming. They lie about "plant food." They lie about vast legions of scientists who doubt the science. They cherry pick and quote mine.

So, let me ask, assuming that you never heard of AGW at all before, would you trust folks like this about science, or would you trust legions of actual scientists who tell a consistent story backed by hard data?

I am going to trust my politicians, who know more about reality than any academic egghead!

///

Seriously, you have no idea how many times I have heard this argument. As a registered PG, I have simply no idea what to do about perceived and accepted ignorance. It's beyond me why the lies have been accepted as accepted wisdom by so many, including a large number of people on this board.

Pitiful.

106 shiplord kirel  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:51:21pm

re: #98 Cato the Elder

OK.

Why I'm getting out of Shitsville, Shitsville County, State of Bumwad, USA, before the end of this month, Reason No. 156,693:

Just heard 13 shots from (I'm guessing) a 9mm (guessing again) Glock emanating from maybe two blocks from here.

There are no open-air target ranges in Shitsville. Ergo, someone was (best case) firing into the air ("I shot a baker's dozen bullets into the air, they came to earth I know not where, nor do I care") or (worse case) making a statement or celebrating a good drunk or (worst case) I'll read all about it in the piss-poor rag that counts for a paper anymore tomorrow or Tuesday.

Bye-bye, Shitsville.

You're in Lubbock? Nah, you never mentioned our official municipal fungus, the orange traffic cone.

107 Desert Dog  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:51:50pm

re: #106 shiplord kirel

You're in Lubbock? Nah, you never mentioned our official municipal fungus, the orange traffic cone.

Those grow wild out here too

108 Locker  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:51:56pm

re: #21 brent

wtf are climate deniers? that just grates on my ears.

Personally I like to think they are reincarnated flat earthers.

109 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:52:13pm

re: #101 taxfreekiller

Ya, but Dr. Borlaug's plants all need lots of CO2.

What to do.

There's no shortage of it, tfk. Don't you worry.

110 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:52:19pm

re: #95 LudwigVanQuixote

Sal, this is the 11 year solar cycle, and it is specifically talking about one part of the climate in one part of the world. Even if the sun is giving us a break, then do take into acount that we are still warming even though we are getting a break, and then what happens when it gets back to normal.

What will happen is that CO2 concentrations that are still causeing warming even when we are getting a break, will cause even more warming next cycle.

What pisses me off about this, is that you have been told this again and again by me and coracle at least five times each by both of us, and yet, you still keep bringing this as if it is a question./

Will you just stop saying the same wrong stuff over and over, and understand the science that you yourself are bringing?

I can only assume that you wrote this before you read my post #74.

Notice also that I updinged Coracle's reasonable reply to it.

111 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:52:52pm

re: #93 Dark_Falcon

It happens. I live in Chicago, so I'm used to it. Who do you root for?

I mourn for the 'Skins.

I prefer the college game. Much more exciting. The UT-Texas Tech game (with that Star Wars offense) should be a hoot next week.

112 shiplord kirel  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:53:26pm

re: #107 Desert Dog

Those grow wild out here too

Good thing they're made by slave labor in the prisons, otherwise the State of Texas would go bankrupt keeping up with demand.
/

113 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:53:39pm

Heh. Killer lakes, dead trees, and lots of CO2.

114 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:53:41pm

re: #98 Cato the Elder

OK.

Why I'm getting out of Shitsville, Shitsville County, State of Bumwad, USA, before the end of this month, Reason No. 156,693:

Just heard 13 shots from (I'm guessing) a 9mm (guessing again) Glock emanating from maybe two blocks from here.

There are no open-air target ranges in Shitsville. Ergo, someone was (best case) firing into the air ("I shot a baker's dozen bullets into the air, they came to earth I know not where, nor do I care") or (worse case) making a statement or celebrating a good drunk or (worst case) I'll read all about it in the piss-poor rag that counts for a paper anymore tomorrow or Tuesday.

Bye-bye, Shitsville.

Good luck with your move.

Some friends of mine live in a rather sketchy neighborhood in San Pablo. One fine evening, rather jacked up by such an incident as you describe above, he nearly opened fire in the dark on his girlfriend's peacock feather collection, which had not answered his challenge.

115 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:55:03pm

re: #78 Reginald Perrin

What summer was that?
Second 2009 Warmest July on Record Globally, according to NASA

That link shows a cooling trend for the last decade over just about the entire populated area of the Earth. Also a warming trend at the poles. Very interesting. That could be a recipe for glaciation. I don't think anyone knows the mechanism that drives an Ice Age. Maybe we're seeing the beginnings of one here.

116 Silvergirl  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:55:06pm

re: #1 ggt

When Mars attacks, how does Venus respond?

Probably with kick boxing since she has no arms.

117 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:55:28pm

re: #99 Jimmah

My favourite one is when AGW deniers quote the 2 degree increase in temp on Pluto!

Just think what an increase in the suns output capable of raising temperatures on that incredibly distant body by 2 degrees C would do to the much closer earth! We'd have burnt to a crisp! Obviously, it's not increases in the suns output that have raised temps there.

I thought it was that new sun near Europa - I saw it myself in the movie 2010!

118 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:55:33pm

Solar variation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Last 30 years of solar variability
Solar variations are changes in the amount of solar radiation emitted by the Sun. There are periodic components to these variations, the principal one being the 11-year solar cycle (or sunspot cycle), as well as aperiodic fluctuations.[1] Solar activity has been measured via satellites during recent decades and through 'proxy' variables in prior times. Climate scientists are interested in understanding what, if any, effect variations in solar activity have on the Earth. Effects on the earth caused by solar activity are called "solar forcing".
The variations in total solar irradiance remained at or below the threshold of detectability until the satellite era, although the small fraction in ultra-violet wavelengths varies by a few percent. Total solar output is now measured to vary (over the last three 11-year sunspot cycles) by approximately 0.1% [2][3][4] or about 1.3 W/m² peak-to-trough during the 11 year sunspot cycle. The amount of solar radiation received at the outer surface of Earth's atmosphere averages 1,366 watts per square meter (W/m²).[5][6][7] There are no direct measurements of the longer-term variation and interpretations of proxy measures of variations differ. On the low side North et al. report results suggesting ~ 0.1% variation over the last 2,000 years. [8] Others suggest the change has been ~ 0.2% increase in solar irradiance just since the 17th century.[9][10] The combination of solar variation and volcanic effects are likely to have contributed to climate change, for example during the Maunder Minimum. Apart from solar brightness variations, more subtle solar magnetic activity influences on climate from cosmic rays or the Sun's ultraviolet radiation cannot be excluded although confirmation is not at hand since physical models for such effects are still too poorly developed.[11]

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

119 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:55:45pm

re: #85 NukeAtomrod

La Nina and El Nino are definitely drivers of weather, but not climate. If the sun is actually going into a Dalton or Maunder-like minimum, the overall climate will get colder if solar activity is the culprit, as I believe. If the observations don't match up as time goes on, I'll reconsider, but right now I'm betting on the sun.

Both El Niño and La Niña are ocean and atmospheric phenomenoms that drive weather patterns and effect climate over a period of time.

120 [deleted]  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:55:52pm
121 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:56:01pm

The sneaky down-dingers are winning on the 'No Nazi Imagery?' post, by the way.

They've been filtering in all day and down-dinging that thread, because they don't want anyone to think it's important.

122 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:56:17pm

re: #110 Salamantis

I can only assume that you wrote this before you read my post #74.

Notice also that I updinged Coracle's reasonable reply to it.

And yet, none of those cycles are on the timescale of the warming, and the sun does not, and has not shown any significant variation in output during that time.

I am begging you to give this a rest.

Can you acknowledge that even if your contentions are correct beyond your wildest dreams, we are still warming, when the sun is giving us a break? What happens when it isn't?

123 Desert Dog  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:56:22pm

re: #113 Slumbering Behemoth

Heh. Killer lakes, dead trees, and lots of CO2.

More CO2 attacks from Gaia!
Lake Nyos

124 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:56:47pm

Mr Sinclair is pretty funny. Reading... lol.

125 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:58:00pm

re: #115 NukeAtomrod

That link shows a cooling trend for the last decade over just about the entire populated area of the Earth. Also a warming trend at the poles. Very interesting. That could be a recipe for glaciation. I don't think anyone knows the mechanism that drives an Ice Age. Maybe we're seeing the beginnings of one here.

Look at it again. The zero point is near the bottom of the plots. The first plot has positive numbers even in the midlatitudes except for around ~55S and ~35N.

126 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:58:52pm

"Apart from solar brightness variations, more subtle solar magnetic activity influences on climate from cosmic rays or the Sun's ultraviolet radiation cannot be excluded although confirmation is not at hand since physical models for such effects are still too poorly developed.[11]"

Except for Sinclair...

127 Enkidu90046  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 8:59:18pm

re: #90 Dark_Falcon

And Cutler just threw another interception. That's the game.

Green Bay 21, Chicago 15

[facepalm]

Glad Harris got the game-sealing INT, given that he got a BS illegal contact penalty called against him that allowed CHI to go ahead score.

128 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:00:09pm

re: #121 Charles

The sneaky down-dingers are winning on the 'No Nazi Imagery?' post, by the way.

They've been filtering in all day and down-dinging that thread, because they don't want anyone to think it's important.

Come out and post, you chickenshits!

/sorry for stealing your line, Sal

129 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:00:22pm

re: #102 Reginald Perrin

Exactly: people confusing local weather with climate.

Sort of, but not completely accurate.

Weather is what's happening right now. Climate is a long term trend.

130 Randall Gross  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:00:45pm

re: #113 Slumbering Behemoth

Heh. Killer lakes, dead trees, and lots of CO2.

There's also a very marginal science hypothesis about frozen methyl hydrates at the bottom of the oceans. If a large warming occurred beneath one of those beds (say a magma plume) it would erupt from the ocean in a great fireball, if enough of it warmed or depressurized quick enough then we could have a global fireball.

/or so the marginal but semi-plausible hypothesis goes

131 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:01:23pm

re: #84 LudwigVanQuixote

The whole notion that the other planets are warming too, while false - utterly false- is one of those actually rather impressive lies, that showed a great deal of creativity to come up with.

If only that level of intelligence was used to look at teh actual science.

So, because all that tea party stuff pissed me off, I want to ask some questions to anyone who is still "on the fence" so to speak.

The people who tell you loudly that AGW is not true, that it is some leftist hoax are frequently:

Nirthers

Deathers,

Creationists,

People who just make stuff like this up,

People who have no particular scientific credentials,

People who generally can't even do algebra,

People who have vested moneyed interests in what they say,

and LIE TO YOU ALL THE TIME.

They lie about there being on warming since 1998. They lie about the other planets warming. They lie about "plant food." They lie about vast legions of scientists who doubt the science. They cherry pick and quote mine.

So, let me ask, assuming that you never heard of AGW at all before, would you trust folks like this about science, or would you trust legions of actual scientists who tell a consistent story backed by hard data?

I just thought this should be repeated.

132 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:01:27pm

re: #126 ted

"Apart from solar brightness variations, more subtle solar magnetic activity influences on climate from cosmic rays or the Sun's ultraviolet radiation cannot be excluded although confirmation is not at hand since physical models for such effects are still too poorly developed.[11]"

Except for Sinclair...

That's almost a citation. What is [11]? Where is your quote from?
Solar brightness variations have been negligible for the last several decades.
There is currently no evidence that cosmic rays are a forcing either way.

133 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:02:23pm

re: #129 NukeAtomrod

Sort of, but not completely accurate.

Weather is what's happening right now. Climate is a long term trend.

Weather is also local. Climate is regional and global.

134 Killgore Trout  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:02:52pm

re: #98 Cato the Elder

I haven't heard a gunshot since I left Chicago 8 years ago.

135 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:03:07pm

re: #131 Sharmuta

I just thought this should be repeated.

I really do love you Sharm...

136 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:03:17pm

re: #119 Gus 802

Both El Niño and La Niña are ocean and atmospheric phenomenoms that drive weather patterns

Yes!

and effect climate over a period of time.

Probably not. Unless we only have one of them for a very extended period, which I doubt will happen.

137 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:03:44pm

re: #78 Reginald Perrin

What summer was that?
Second 2009 Warmest July on Record Globally, according to NASA

This is a better reference:

State of the Climate
Global Analysis
July 2009

All the red dots indicate higher temps.

138 Racer X  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:03:59pm

Charles, why do you hate the sun?

139 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:04:02pm

re: #117 SteveC

I thought it was that new sun near Europa - I saw it myself in the movie 2010!

'All these worlds are yours except Europa.'

140 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:04:08pm

re: #130 Thanos

There's also a very marginal science hypothesis about frozen methyl hydrates at the bottom of the oceans. If a large warming occurred beneath one of those beds (say a magma plume) it would erupt from the ocean in a great fireball, if enough of it warmed or depressurized quick enough then we could have a global fireball.

/or so the marginal but semi-plausible hypothesis goes

Global fireball is, I think, rather hyperbolic. Release of methan from the hydrates is currently happening, and if the reservoir is large (as is thought) and the release continues (possible if the oceans continue to warm) then we have another major source of a powerful greenhouse gas.

141 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:04:29pm

re: #115 NukeAtomrod

What university did you receive your graduate degree in climatology?
Would it be Limbaugh University or Glenn Beck College?

142 ted  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:04:57pm

11:

Changes in Solar Brightness Too Weak to Explain Global Warming

September 13, 2006

BOULDER—Changes in the Sun's brightness over the past millennium have had only a small effect on Earth's climate, according to a review of existing results and new calculations performed by researchers in the United States, Switzerland, and Germany.

The review, led by Peter Foukal (Heliophysics, Inc.), appears in the September 14 issue of Nature. Among the coauthors is Tom Wigley of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. NCAR’s primary sponsor is the National Science Foundation.


In this image from an active solar period in March 2001, colors are shifted to highlight the contrast between sunspots (black and dark red) and the faculae that surround them (bright yellow). During the peak of the 11-year solar cycle, the expansion of faculae outweighs the darkening from increased sunspot activity. The result is a net increase in solar brightness. Click here or on the image to enlarge. (Image courtesy NASA.)
“Our results imply that, over the past century, climate change due to human influences must far outweigh the effects of changes in the Sun's brightness,” says Wigley.

Reconstructions of climate over the past millennium show a warming since the 17th century, which has accelerated dramatically over the past 100 years. Many recent studies have attributed the bulk of 20th-century global warming to an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. Natural internal variability of Earth’s climate system may also have played a role. However, the discussion is complicated by a third possibility: that the Sun's brightness could have increased.

The new review in Nature examines the factors observed by astronomers that relate to solar brightness. It then analyzes how those factors have changed along with global temperature over the last 1,000 years.

Brightness variations are the result of changes in the amount of the Sun’s surface covered by dark sunspots and by bright points called faculae. The sunspots act as thermal plugs, diverting heat from the solar surface, while the faculae act as thermal leaks, allowing heat from subsurface layers to escape more readily. During times of high solar activity, both the sunspots and faculae increase, but the effect of the faculae dominates, leading to an overall increase in brightness.

The new study looked at observations of solar brightness since 1978 and at indirect measures before then, in order to assess how sunspots and faculae affect the Sun’s brightness. Data collected from radiometers on U.S. and European spacecraft show that the Sun is about 0.07 percent brighter in years of peak sunspot activity, such as around 2000, than when spots are rare (as they are now, at the low end of the 11-year solar cycle). Variations of this magnitude are too small to have contributed appreciably to the accelerated global warming observed since the mid-1970s, according to the study, and there is no sign of a net increase in brightness over the period.

To assess the period before 1978, the authors used historical records of sunspot activity and examined radioisotopes produced in Earth's atmosphere and recorded in the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. During periods of high solar activity, the enhanced solar wind shields Earth from cosmic rays that produce the isotopes, thus giving scientists a record of the activity.

The authors used a blend of seven recent reconstructions of Northern Hemisphere temperature over the past millennium to test the effects of long-term changes in brightness. They then assessed how much the changes in solar brightness produced by sunspots and faculae (as measured by the sunspot and radioisotope data) might have affected temperature. Even though sunspots and faculae have increased over the last 400 years, these phenomena explain only a small fraction of global warming over the period, according to the authors.

[Link: www.ucar.edu...]

143 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:05:16pm

Dumping large quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere is very likely A Bad Thing.

Our beloved elected class needs to address the energy issue with something more than wind and solar.

Unicorn farts won't work either.

Start building nukes. Start now.
Or we will be screwed when the costs of 'carbon sequestration' start showing up on our electrical bills.

DOE

144 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:05:23pm

re: #136 NukeAtomrod

Probably not. Unless we only have one of them for a very extended period, which I doubt will happen.

Here:

El Niño/La Niña is a naturally occurring 2-7 year cycle of the ocean-atmosphere system in the Tropical Pacific having important consequences for weather and climate around the globe. This page provides a one-stop source for NOAA National Data Center (NNDC) reports and data related to El Niño and La Niña. It links to on-line reports describing El Niño/La Niña-influenced weather events, to various datasets and images, and to other sites with additional information.

It's from NOAA:

[Link: www.ncdc.noaa.gov...]

145 jorline  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:06:48pm

Jack about health care.

Youtube Video

Good night all.

146 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:07:10pm

re: #84 LudwigVanQuixote

The whole notion that the other planets are warming too, while false - utterly false- is one of those actually rather impressive lies, that showed a great deal of creativity to come up with.

If only that level of intelligence was used to look at teh actual science.

So, because all that tea party stuff pissed me off, I want to ask some questions to anyone who is still "on the fence" so to speak.

The people who tell you loudly that AGW is not true, that it is some leftist hoax are frequently:

Nirthers

Deathers,

Creationists,

People who just make stuff like this up,

People who have no particular scientific credentials,

People who generally can't even do algebra,

People who have vested moneyed interests in what they say,

and LIE TO YOU ALL THE TIME.

They lie about there being on warming since 1998. They lie about the other planets warming. They lie about "plant food." They lie about vast legions of scientists who doubt the science. They cherry pick and quote mine.

So, let me ask, assuming that you never heard of AGW at all before, would you trust folks like this about science, or would you trust legions of actual scientists who tell a consistent story backed by hard data?

Most of those statements could be applied to our beloved elected class.

147 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:07:15pm

re: #140 Coracle

Global fireball is, I think, rather hyperbolic. Release of methan from the hydrates is currently happening, and if the reservoir is large (as is thought) and the release continues (possible if the oceans continue to warm) then we have another major source of a powerful greenhouse gas.

Not to mention the release of CO2 from permafrost that is more and more subject to melting and releasing it's locked carbon to the atmosphere through rot.

148 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:08:19pm

re: #129 NukeAtomrod

I know the difference between the two, I took three courses in climatology when I went to university.

149 Pianobuff  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:08:46pm

You know what theory I've never seen, and I'm kind of surprised.

Aren't there are supposedly billions or up to a trillion "small" meteorites that enter the atmosphere and are burned up.

Has anyone ever tried to suggest that these have any kind of warming effect?

Honestly curious if this has ever been a subject of speculation/study.

150 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:08:55pm

re: #122 LudwigVanQuixote

And yet, none of those cycles are on the timescale of the warming, and the sun does not, and has not shown any significant variation in output during that time.

I am begging you to give this a rest.

Can you acknowledge that even if your contentions are correct beyond your wildest dreams, we are still warming, when the sun is giving us a break? What happens when it isn't?

The fact that I updinged Coracle's response to my #74 already indicated that I agree that this is indeed a concern.

But no, I will not stop quoting the most recent climate science for your benefit.

151 Randall Gross  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:09:11pm

re: #140 Coracle

Global fireball is, I think, rather hyperbolic. Release of methan from the hydrates is currently happening, and if the reservoir is large (as is thought) and the release continues (possible if the oceans continue to warm) then we have another major source of a powerful greenhouse gas.

I agree, but the semi-plausible part is the delicate pressure/temperature curve that the hydrates need to stay frozen. An uplift of a shelf, a large shift in a warm current, or sudden large subsurface magma plume could free a lot of it fast. A tipping point really does exist for the methane hydrates. Sublimation...

152 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:09:13pm

Re: The Sun

Total Solar Irradiance (TSI): Also known as total incoming solar radiation (insolation). The amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth can change as solar activity changes. This is a known factor influencing global temperatures and thus climate. Sometimes people will reference sunspots, which correlate fairly well with TSI (more sunspots generally means more incoming solar radiation), but solar irradiance is the specific factor impacting the Earth's climate.

Since 1978 we've had satellites measuring TSI directly, and prior to that scientists use "proxies". A proxy variable is something that is probably not in itself of any great interest, but from which a variable of interest can be obtained. For example, climate scientists use tree rings and ice core layers as proxies to determine past global temperatures. In the case of TSI, one such proxy is beryllium-10 concentrations.

So the question again arises - could changes in TSI be responsible for the recent global warming? Since we've had satellites measuring TSI directly since 1978, and this is the period of the greatest warming in recent history (0.5 degrees Celsius over the past 30 years), all we have to do is look at the satellite data to determine if solar irradiance has similarly increased over that period.

Again, the answer is no. On average, TSI has remained essentially unchanged since 1978. According to the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, it hasn't increased (on average) in about 70 years.

[Link: greenhome.huddler.com...]

153 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:09:22pm

EL NIÑO AND CLIMATE


The link between these climatic effects in distant parts of the globe and El Niño is now well established. Yet it has taken some time for scientists to understand how the various pieces of the puzzle, from ocean currents to winds and heavy rains, fit together. Decades ago, the British scientist Sir Gilbert Walker provided the first clue.

During the 1920s, while scientists in South America were busy documenting the local effects of El Niño, Walker was on assignment in India, trying to find a way to predict the Asian monsoon. As he sorted through world weather records, he discovered a remarkable connection between barometer readings at stations on the eastern and western sides of the Pacific. He noticed that when pressure rises in the east, it usually falls in the west, and vice versa. Walker coined the term Southern Oscillation to dramatize the ups and downs in this east-west seesaw in Southern Pacific barometers.

(Continues)

154 norman1905  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:09:30pm

This would all go away if Gore would debate the skeptics. What is he afraid of?

155 MittDoesNotCompute  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:09:36pm

re: #64 Gus 802

That's a keeper!

If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bus.


I like Scotty's version from one of the Star Trek movies better:

"If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wheelbarrow!"

156 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:10:01pm

re: #125 Coracle

Look at it again. The zero point is near the bottom of the plots. The first plot has positive numbers even in the midlatitudes except for around ~55S and ~35N.

I read it correctly. The bottom two plots show change over the last decade and half-decade respectively. The top plot is comparing this year to the mean of the years between 1951 and 1980.

157 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:10:18pm

re: #142 ted

So, the cite you bring says it is not, in fact the sun. One or two other hypothetical pathways could be significant, but there is currently no evidence for either.

That is convincing./

158 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:10:42pm

re: #155 talon_262

I like Scotty's version from one of the Star Trek movies better:

"If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wheelbarrow!"

So, Scotty's grandma had a fat ass?

159 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:10:44pm

re: #140 Coracle

Global fireball is, I think, rather hyperbolic. Release of methan from the hydrates is currently happening, and if the reservoir is large (as is thought) and the release continues (possible if the oceans continue to warm) then we have another major source of a powerful greenhouse gas.

The evidence for this being a very major problem from the Canadian and Siberian bogs is quite vast.

Methane bubbling from Siberian thaw lakes as a positive feedback to climate warming
[Link: www.nature.com...]

Amplified carbon release from vast West Siberian peatlands by 2100
[Link: adsabs.harvard.edu...]

There are dozens of papers on this. The effects are severe. How severe is still open to debate, but there is no happy "on the other hand" to this story.

160 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:12:12pm

re: #143 Van Helsing

Dumping large quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere is very likely A Bad Thing.

Our beloved elected class needs to address the energy issue with something more than wind and solar.

Unicorn farts won't work either.

Start building nukes. Start now.
Or we will be screwed when the costs of 'carbon sequestration' start showing up on our electrical bills.

DOE

Yes. People slam me for being a lib, but we must increase our electricity generation capacity with 3rd and 4th generation nuclear power plants. Waste disposal? Yes, a major problem, but not as big a problem of exceeding 450 ppb of CO2 in the atmosphere. We'll deal with the waste disposal issue later on. That cannot be a cause for delay.

161 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:12:40pm

re: #159 LudwigVanQuixote

There are dozens of papers on this. The effects are severe. How severe is still open to debate, but there is no happy "on the other hand" to this story.

If Cap and Trade passes, this'll get pinned on us somehow. Bet ya a buck.

162 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:13:12pm

Changing Sun, Changing Climate?

Since it is the Sun's energy that drives the weather system, scientists naturally wondered whether they might connect climate changes with solar variations. Yet the Sun seemed to be stable over the timescale of human lifetimes. Attempts to discover cyclic variations in weather and connect them with the 11-year sunspot cycle, or other possible solar cycles ranging up to a few centuries long, gave results that were ambiguous at best. These attempts got a well-deserved bad reputation. Jack Eddy overcame this with a 1976 study that demonstrated that irregular variations in solar surface activity, a few centuries long, were connected with major climate shifts. The mechanism remained uncertain, but plausible candidates emerged. The next crucial question was whether a rise in the Sun's activity could explain the global warming seen in the 20th century? By the 1990s, there was a tentative answer: minor solar variations could indeed have been partly responsible for some past fluctuations... but future warming from the rise in greenhouse gases would far outweigh any solar effects.

163 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:13:27pm

re: #141 Reginald Perrin

What university did you receive your graduate degree in climatology?
Would it be Limbaugh University or Glenn Beck College?

Bachelor of Science - Earth Science/Hydrogeology - Penn State University - 1993

Thanks for asking.

164 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:13:42pm

Ludwig - by the time I got this video up on the science music thread, you had left, so here it is again. The science isn't correct ("the atoms bouncing round"), but I appreciate the effort and like the song anyway.
Note the video starts with an ad.
Tribe - Supercollider

165 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:13:57pm

Ash - Girl from Mars

Youtube Video
166 fizzlogic  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:14:00pm

re: #160 austin_blue

I propose we bury it deep under a mountain in the middle of the desert.

167 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:14:41pm

re: #156 NukeAtomrod

Look at the zonal mean plots. Only two narrow lat bands show net average cooling over the last 10 years. 3 such broader bands in the last 5 years, with the warming in the north both broader and hotter.

168 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:15:39pm

re: #108 Locker

Personally I like to think they are reincarnated flat earthers.

To be fair, there are deniers, and there are sceptics ( and note that I've never accepted the term "deniers" previously on this issue.)

The Deniers: are essentially biased and ignorant, they dispute the science based upon false arguments, in the US, they are also partisan political affiliations in play. They are why I no longer enjoy taking the sceptic position, they have created new problems and taken the sceptic side into the gutter.

The sceptics: they accept that the current state of climate science is in favour of the AGW theory. They accept the measured global warming and the properties of CO2 as demonstrable in laboratory. They are sceptical as to the actual extent of the anthropogenic factor, how much of it is CO2 and how much other man made factors, and some of the ideas about feedback, and the accuracy of models going forward, but they have no problem with the underlying science. In some cases there are also concerns about the accuracy of some of the measurements.

In addition there are those who have observed the Global Warming Hoax, this is nothing to do with the underlying science, it is an observation that there has been slanted media coverage, and slanted political action by those with the Hoax agenda, it includes the advancement of ineffective "solutions" that are in fact not solutions but rather suit a different agenda, and a protest against a minority of scientists and politicians who have misused their position in favour of advocacy of this distorted agenda.

There is much more to the Hoax, and much more to the sceptic and denier category, but they all appear real and worthy of discussion. Lumping all of those not on the AGW bandwagon as deniers is unfair to the sceptics, and giving unearned credibility to the deniers is unfair to both the sceptics and those who accept the current science based consensus.

169 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:15:42pm

re: #154 norman1905

This would all go away if Gore would debate the skeptics. What is he afraid of?

This would not go away if Gore debated skeptics. For one thing, Gore's a popularizer, not a scientist. For another, nothing he said could possible lay to rest the 'concerns' of people determined to disbelieve him.

Obama released his birth certificate. It hasn't helped.

170 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:15:50pm

re: #165 Jimmah

Ash - Girl from Mars


[Video]

Goddamn what is it with these clips that only show half a song? Full version here (better quality video too):

Youtube Video
171 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:16:25pm

re: #150 Salamantis

The fact that I updinged Coracle's response to my #74 already indicated that I agree that this is indeed a concern.

But no, I will not stop quoting the most recent climate science for your benefit.

Science? Do you think that exceeding 400 ppm of CO2 has an affect on the climate when all of the last interglacial periods have capped out between 280-300 ppm?

Do you think that increasing CO2 by 33% is a forcing mechanism?

172 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:17:14pm

re: #164 Kosh's Shadow

Ludwig - by the time I got this video up on the science music thread, you had left, so here it is again. The science isn't correct ("the atoms bouncing round"), but I appreciate the effort and like the song anyway.
Note the video starts with an ad.
Tribe - Supercollider

re: #164 Kosh's Shadow

Ludwig - by the time I got this video up on the science music thread, you had left, so here it is again. The science isn't correct ("the atoms bouncing round"), but I appreciate the effort and like the song anyway.
Note the video starts with an ad.
Tribe - Supercollider

YOU rock!

173 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:17:14pm

re: #166 trendsurfer

I propose we bury it deep under a mountain in the middle of the desert.

Storage and re-processing are really fairly simple problems. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying waste is harmless or even Mostly Harmless. However, once the political roadblocks and the irrational fears are dealt with it pretty simple engineering.

For goodness sake, if the French can do it, why can't we?

174 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:17:57pm

re: #171 austin_blue

Science? Do you think that exceeding 400 ppm of CO2 has an affect on the climate when all of the last interglacial periods have capped out between 280-300 ppm?

Do you think that increasing CO2 by 33% is a forcing mechanism?

Our current CO2 ppmv is already higher than that of the Cretaceous period.

175 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:17:58pm

re: #160 austin_blue

Yes. People slam me for being a lib, but we must increase our electricity generation capacity with 3rd and 4th generation nuclear power plants. Waste disposal? Yes, a major problem, but not as big a problem of exceeding 450 ppb of CO2 in the atmosphere. We'll deal with the waste disposal issue later on. That cannot be a cause for delay.


You want to build nukes?! You're no liberal! You want to poison the earth and had our future over to toxin spewing fat cats. You're a DINO!

/moonbat

176 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:19:49pm

re: #168 Bagua

To be fair, there are deniers, and there are sceptics ( and note that I've never accepted the term "deniers" previously on this issue.)

Your whole post was very well done!

177 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:20:21pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

You want to build nukes?! You're no liberal! You want to poison the earth and had our future over to toxin spewing fat cats. You're a DINO!

/moonbat

Just another area where thee and me can sit down and have a beer. As far as social issues that might might be more lively!

178 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:20:35pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

You want to build nukes?! You're no liberal! You want to poison the earth and had our future over to toxin spewing fat cats. You're a DINO!

/moonbat

I want to max out solar and wind capacity at the same time. Current tech, with no innovations could get us to 60% of our national power needs with solar/wind alone (Cost ~$400billion, time ~30 years including Grid and infrastructure improvements). Give nukes the balance. Keep some of the most modern coal plants on line for baseload emergencies.

179 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:21:29pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

You want to build nukes?! You're no liberal! You want to poison the earth and had our future over to toxin spewing fat cats. You're a DINO!

/moonbat

DINO!

180 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:21:35pm

re: #174 Coracle

Our current CO2 ppmv is already higher than that of the Cretaceous period.

Yeah but the Cretaceous period is around 50,000,000 years ago. You would lose around 68% of your electorate.

//

181 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:21:37pm

re: #168 Bagua

The real difference between a sceptic and a denier is that the sceptic can be persuaded otherwise, can look at and understand evidence, and is genuinely interested in the truth.

A denier is someone who is capable of denying that he's getting wet even when he's standing in the middle of a thunderstorm without an umbrella.

This is true for AGW just as much as it is for evolution/ID, and pretty much every case where science comes into conflict with religion, or any dearly held preexisting ideology.

Hell, we also have sceptics and deniers when it comes to the tea parties' being controlled by wackos, or the assassination rhetoric on the right. Just look at some of the threads here, or take a quick spin around the crankosphere.

182 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:22:11pm

re: #168 Bagua

I agree that in the scientific community there are some very few skeptical parers that still come out. However, those papers are all of the sort that this or that natural effect is a bit bigger than others believe.

Actual skeptical papers that challenged the core of AGW were published in large numbers in the eighties. Their concerns have been knocked down and addressed one by one.

In the nineties, such papers were a trickle.

Right now the community is debating things like how bad and how soon.

There are very very few who think that somehow this all a natural phenomena, and no-one legitimate, who argues that everything is just going to be alright if things continue as they are.

183 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:22:13pm

re: #177 austin_blue

Just another area where thee and me can sit down and have a beer. As far as social issues that might might be more lively!

Beer? Another thing we can agree on!

184 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:22:28pm

[Link: 4.bp.blogspot.com...]

185 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:22:48pm

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

186 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:23:44pm

re: #153 Gus 802

EL NIÑO AND CLIMATE

Climatic effects are localized weather trends, not global climate as pertains to global warming. An example would be that the western side of the Rocky Mountains is very wet because of the typically easterly winds pushing clouds up into the cooler atmosphere, and the lee side being a desert because so little moisture makes it to the other side.

187 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:23:46pm

re: #184 Salamantis

[Link: 4.bp.blogspot.com...]

The link did not work.

188 swamprat  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:24:00pm

The problem is, if there is AGW, and we hit a larger thermal peak and then begin to descend, even if the temperatures are higher than they should be, they will be masked, as it were, by the larger trend.
If, on the other hand, we at the mercy of a runaway thermal upswing fueled by CO2, that exponentially will increase unendingly until the world has dramatically flooded and we live Dante's Humidor;
Well, that is situation that would need desperate attention.
If the information we have been given is true, Global Warming is real.
AGW possibly, also.
This leaves us with the rest.
Will the temps peak out naturally?
Will they skyrocket?
Will they very gradually increase?
Will the changes be detrimental?

As we go forward we will learn more about this. Meanwhile, every fluctuation will be heralded as a proof of each sides preconceived notions.

And as the information accumulates, the gradually losing side will become more and more shrill...

189 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:24:02pm

re: #160 austin_blue

Dude! You're fuckin' up the Broad Brush.

How can I tar liberals with it if you insist on pulling out key bristles?
/

190 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:24:20pm

re: #185 Charles

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

Seeing them in the rear view mirror ain't necessarily a bad thing.

191 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:24:23pm

re: #185 Charles

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

Here's one of them, Charles:

[Link: legalinsurrection.blogspot.com...]

192 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:25:15pm

re: #170 Jimmah

Cracker-- Eurotrash Girl

Youtube Video

Goddamnit what is with these videos that won't embed?

193 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:25:45pm

re: #169 SanFranciscoZionist

Obama released his birth certificate. It hasn't helped.

Yes, but he has not shown us the presidential Johnson.

/what is he hiding?

194 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:26:43pm

re: #185 Charles

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

Amen. It was very disorienting for me to realize that I haven't changed but the rest of the world seems to have gone insane...

195 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:27:41pm

re: #188 swamprat

The problem is, if there is AGW, and we hit a larger thermal peak and then begin to descend, even if the temperatures are higher than they should be, they will be masked, as it were, by the larger trend.
If, on the other hand, we at the mercy of a runaway thermal upswing fueled by CO2, that exponentially will increase unendingly until the world has dramatically flooded and we live Dante's Humidor;
Well, that is situation that would need desperate attention.
If the information we have been given is true, Global Warming is real.
AGW possibly, also.
This leaves us with the rest.
Will the temps peak out naturally?
Will they skyrocket?
Will they very gradually increase?
Will the changes be detrimental?

As we go forward we will learn more about this. Meanwhile, every fluctuation will be heralded as a proof of each sides preconceived notions.

And as the information accumulates, the gradually losing side will become more and more shrill...

All of those questions are answered in this link...
[Link: earthguide.ucsd.edu...]

196 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:28:13pm

The Discovery of Global Warming

There are a number if articles linked to the home page above, including one on Venus and Mars

197 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:28:39pm

re: #185 Charles

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

Too many people are going on the idea "No enemies to the right." It was not a good idea when liberals said the opposite about keeping the far left happy, and it is a not good idea for conservatives now.

198 Randall Gross  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:28:42pm

re: #159 LudwigVanQuixote

You are getting peat and tundra methane confused with frozen methy hydrates. It takes the pressure you get with depths and cold to create frozen methane.

[Link: oceanexplorer.noaa.gov...]

199 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:29:36pm

re: #184 Salamantis

[Link: 4.bp.blogspot.com...]

It's a chart called the 11 Year Temperature Anomaly, which shows that although the global temperature has been rising during that period according to GISS data, it has been dropping according to Hadcrut3, UAH, and RSS data (all linearly averaged).

For some reason, I cannot get the link to post.

200 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:29:39pm

re: #180 Gus 802

Yeah but the Cretaceous period is around 50,000,000 years ago. You would lose around 68% of your electorate.

//

*snort* Heh!

201 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:29:43pm

re: #193 Bagua

Yes, but he has not shown us the presidential Johnson.

/what is he hiding?

I do NOT want to see the Presidential Junk!

202 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:30:37pm

re: #198 Thanos

You are getting peat and tundra methane confused with frozen methy hydrates. It takes the pressure you get with depths and cold to create frozen methane.

[Link: oceanexplorer.noaa.gov...]

You are correct, I misread. Both are issues.

203 shiplord kirel  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:30:45pm

re: #185 Charles

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

The difference comes back to something I said the night Obama was elected: "Let's give the guy a chance." You are willing to do so, they are not.

204 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:30:57pm

re: #174 Coracle

Our current CO2 ppmv is already higher than that of the Cretaceous period.

On, mercy, no. Not even close. Until the more recent quaternary interglacial periods, CO2 was wildly variable in the atmosphere. After the strike at end of the Cretaceous, CO2 levels routinely yo-yo'd above 1000 ppm.

This also resulted in several huge extinction events.

205 Desert Dog  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:31:10pm

Kung-Fu move of the day...

Monkey Steals the Peach

I suggest we all learn the defensive move to counter it

206 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:31:21pm

re: #178 Coracle

I want to max out solar and wind capacity at the same time. Current tech, with no innovations could get us to 60% of our national power needs with solar/wind alone (Cost ~$400billion, time ~30 years including Grid and infrastructure improvements). Give nukes the balance. Keep some of the most modern coal plants on line for baseload emergencies.

Solar currently is 200-300 times the price of power generated by coal.
Wind is less, but still high.
So this would be a very expensive proposition.
Nuclear is only a little more expensive.

207 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:32:28pm

re: #206 Kosh's Shadow

Solar currently is 200-300 times the price of power generated by coal.
Wind is less, but still high.
So this would be a very expensive proposition.
Nuclear is only a little more expensive.

That depends on how you count costs...

Flooding your home out likely costs more.

208 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:33:01pm

re: #190 SteveC

Seeing them in the rear view mirror ain't necessarily a bad thing.

Seriously.
It's especially bizarre that they're choosing to defend RSM though. That guy has always been a crank. Apart from the freakin' white supremacism.

You know you're scraping the bottom of the barrell when your colleagues at the disreputable Washington Times have this to say about you:

I know Stacy McCain, an ill-tempered racist who sat on the other side of my desk for many years and carried on loud telephone conversations almost every day full of racist and ultra-right comments, and often got into loud verbal fights with both reporters and editors in the newsroom.

And here's some of RSM's dating advice: in a post entitled "Equality is for Ugly Losers" (yes, all feminists are ugly losers) he advises:

Frankly, chicks dig a misogynist oppressor.

Snark Central id'd him as the New Wingnut of the Week last year.

209 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:33:04pm

re: #201 SteveC

I do NOT want to see the Presidential Junk!

I quite agree.

210 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:33:14pm

re: #192 iceweasel

Cracker-- Eurotrash Girl


Goddamnit what is with these videos that won't embed?

Hey - Cracker - always like to hear them. Regarding the disabled embedding, it seems that some people really really need everyone to look at their you tube page so we can see their stupid nickname, rate them etc.

211 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:33:17pm

re: #206 Kosh's Shadow

Solar currently is 200-300 times the price of power generated by coal.
Wind is less, but still high.
So this would be a very expensive proposition.
Nuclear is only a little more expensive.

Nuke startup costs are currently all up front.

Much solar is incremental, and large scale solar projects are not as unbalanced as you state. Plus, they pay back faster and on a longer term by being inexpendible.

212 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:33:34pm

re: #189 Slumbering Behemoth

Dude! You're fuckin' up the Broad Brush.

How can I tar liberals with it if you insist on pulling out key bristles?
/

Texas liberal. What is my alternative? Have you taken a look at the alternative down here?

213 Killgore Trout  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:34:30pm

re: #197 Dark_Falcon

I think there's a false sense of emergency and panic on the right now. They're willing to accept anyone who will oppose Obama and they aren't going to be picky. They are going to make some very bad friends.

214 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:34:52pm

re: #196 Sharmuta

The Discovery of Global Warming

There are a number if articles linked to the home page above, including one on Venus and Mars

I loved that album en.wikipedia.org...]>

On a more serious note, access to inexpensive and abundant energy is one of the most important things to keeping us from living that 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short' life that Hobbes was writing about.

I'd like to give that opportunity a miss.
Nukes now, please.
The other sources can be used as they develop.
Nukes work now.

G'nite.

215 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:34:57pm

re: #207 LudwigVanQuixote

That depends on how you count costs...

Flooding your home out likely costs more.

As I said, nuclear is a lot cheaper; I'm not saying we stay with high carbon emissions, but that there are cheaper ways to do it.

And, of course, no matter what we do in the US, if China does nothing, we ruin our economy and don't get much in return.

216 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:35:29pm

re: #208 iceweasel

Snark Central id'd him as the New Wingnut of the Week last year.

Geeze, what a jerk. If he ever showed up here, you'd probably give him the "know your place" vid, and he'd deserve it too.

217 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:35:30pm

re: #204 austin_blue

On, mercy, no. Not even close. Until the more recent quaternary interglacial periods, CO2 was wildly variable in the atmosphere. After the strike at end of the Cretaceous, CO2 levels routinely yo-yo'd above 1000 ppm.

This also resulted in several huge extinction events.

Heh. I wasn't talking post K/T catastrophe - I was talking the balmy K itself.

218 Throbert McGee  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:35:37pm

re: #185 Charles

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

Which means they're red-shifted. Heh.

219 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:36:03pm

re: #213 Killgore Trout

I think there's a false sense of emergency and panic on the right now. They're willing to accept anyone who will oppose Obama and they aren't going to be picky. They are going to make some very bad friends.

Yeah, these folks do understand that it's a maximum of eight years, and they can get Congress back if they don't act like lunatics, right?

220 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:36:19pm

re: #211 Coracle

Nuke startup costs are currently all up front.

Much solar is incremental, and large scale solar projects are not as unbalanced as you state. Plus, they pay back faster and on a longer term by being inexpendible.

Actually, ALL solar costs are up front! The operating costs are quite low, but the solar cells or thermal capture equipment is expensive. And yes, all that does wear out.

221 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:37:12pm

re: #214 Van Helsing


Nukes now, please.
The other sources can be used as they develop.
Nukes work now.

And give the US Navy the mission of building and running them. IIRC, the Navy has never had a nuclear "incident".

222 shiplord kirel  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:37:46pm

re: #212 austin_blue

Texas liberal. What is my alternative? Have you taken a look at the alternative down here?

Here in Lubbock, I am a liberal. It doesn't take much: I think the Earth is more than 6000 years old, I don't run away if a black man approaches me on the street, and I can't line dance

223 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:37:57pm

re: #219 SanFranciscoZionist

Yeah, these folks do understand that it's a maximum of eight years, and they can get Congress back if they don't act like lunatics, right?

They don't know much of anything right know. They're so dizzy with overwrought outrage, they aren't paying attention to reality.

224 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:38:09pm

re: #197 Dark_Falcon

Too many people are going on the idea "No enemies to the right." It was not a good idea when liberals said the opposite about keeping the far left happy, and it is a not good idea for conservatives now.

Add to that the distorting affect of human bias and agenda, some (or much) of it sub-conscious, what some of us saw clearly on the left we can not see on the right, because it suits our agenda. It is quite shocking to see it unfold now the the POTUS is from the other side.

Human bias is an amazingly prevalent phenomena, I have observed a great deal of it in otherwise highly intelligent people, many of them scientists of various disciplines (mostly medicine, mathematics and statistics) - not that these particular fields are especially so prone, simply that those are the ones I've had the opportunity to observe.

It can be quite subtle and easily missed with the groups I've mentioned, in politics it appears to be approximately the majority.

225 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:38:30pm

re: #215 Kosh's Shadow

As I said, nuclear is a lot cheaper; I'm not saying we stay with high carbon emissions, but that there are cheaper ways to do it.

And, of course, no matter what we do in the US, if China does nothing, we ruin our economy and don't get much in return.

Yes and no.

First off, getting energy independent would eventually pay for itself and bolster our economy. Billions of dollars would stop flowing out of the nation and into millions of American jobs.

Second off, we are still the largest polluter. Don't think that fixing us, would have a small overall benefit.

Third, we don't have to buy all the crap that is made in sweatshops there. We do have leverage both in terms of carrot and stick to get them more green, but we have to get real about this first.

226 Van Helsing  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:38:30pm

re: #211 Coracle

Nuke startup costs are currently all up front.

Much solar is incremental, and large scale solar projects are not as unbalanced as you state. Plus, they pay back faster and on a longer term by being inexpendible.

If you're talking photo-voltaic, they do have a lifespan.
20 years and you will likely be down 10-15% efficiency.

Not saying they aren't a useful source, but there are factors to consider.

227 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:39:06pm

re: #212 austin_blue

Have you taken a look at the alternative down here?

Look, dude. I ain't interested in seeing Obama's junk, and I ain't interested in seeing yours. Got it?
/

228 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:39:21pm

re: #221 SteveC

And give the US Navy the mission of building and running them. IIRC, the Navy has never had a nuclear "incident".

When Rickover was alive, I would have put him in charge of nuclear power in the US. He was an asshole, but he got great results.

229 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:39:48pm

re: #201 SteveC

I do NOT want to see the Presidential Junk!

Sadly, it seems there are many that do.

230 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:39:56pm

re: #216 Dark_Falcon

Geeze, what a jerk. If he ever showed up here, you'd probably give him the "know your place" vid, and he'd deserve it too.

Hey DF!
Yeah, RSM= freak.

If I recall correctly, he also led the charge to expose the name of (and threaten) an alaskan blogger who reported a recent rumour that Palin was having an affair. A few people were in on that mess.
Now, I'm not saying that the AK blogger was right...but there was no need for him to be outed publicly, have his contact info published, exposed as gay, and have his job threatened (he works as an aide to a kindergarten class) -- all because his tiny blog posted a local rumour. And RSM was encouraging people to send him hatemail and contact his employers, I think. (might be wrong on that, but I know he WAS publishing the guy's info)

Anyway, he's a nasty piece of work.

(i got that enfield video via Jimmah, btw. Glad you like it!)

231 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:40:03pm

re: #220 Kosh's Shadow

Cells can be added incrementally. Large installations do not have to be built all at once. Similar with wind.

Some other things, like solar towers are best done all at once, true.

232 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:40:25pm

re: #222 shiplord kirel

Here in Lubbock, I am a liberal. It doesn't take much: I think the Earth is more than 6000 years old, I don't run away if a black man approaches me on the street, and I can't line dance

Line dancing is conservative?

233 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:40:29pm

re: #167 Coracle

Look at the zonal mean plots. Only two narrow lat bands show net average cooling over the last 10 years. 3 such broader bands in the last 5 years, with the warming in the north both broader and hotter.

I'm still seeing warming at the poles and cooling at all the land masses at the other latitudes. The oceans are showing warmer temperatures, which is to be expected, because water retains heat or cold more efficiently than dry land. Which is why oceans moderate coastal temperatures, by the way.

234 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:40:38pm

re: #185 Charles

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

I think it's best the masks all slip off now rather than later. Now that some on the right have decided to follow this path, I'm eager to part company with the like of these people.

235 Killgore Trout  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:40:43pm

re: #223 Dark_Falcon

At this point I couldn't even venture a guess at what the Republican party is going to look like in 8 years. They're bound to come back into power eventually but I suspect the GOP is going to be unrecognizable from what we have known.

236 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:40:47pm

re: #227 Slumbering Behemoth

Look, dude. I ain't interested in seeing Obama's junk, and I ain't interested in seeing yours. Got it?
/

*Lights up blowtorch* Next one who shows their junk gets it donated to Habitat for Humanity!

237 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:40:49pm

re: #221 SteveC

Absolutely. You need to run it on a model of, if something goes wrong, my shipmates die and we have lost a billion dollar boat. You can't run it on the model of, if we kill half our customers, we'll just double rates.

238 shiplord kirel  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:41:39pm

re: #232 SanFranciscoZionist

Line dancing is conservative?

It is here (YEE_Haw!). I don't know what variations they have in the Bay Area.

239 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:42:00pm

Hey Ice! Green Day at CBGB's performing "Teenage Kicks". Interestingly, the original version of this song (performed by the Undertones) reduced renowned UK alternative music DJ John Peel to a blubbering wreck when he first heard it while driving home one day:

Youtube Video
240 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:42:17pm

re: #225 LudwigVanQuixote

Yes and no.

First off, getting energy independent would eventually pay for itself and bolster our economy. Billions of dollars would stop flowing out of the nation and into millions of American jobs.

Second off, we are still the largest polluter. Don't think that fixing us, would have a small overall benefit.

Third, we don't have to buy all the crap that is made in sweatshops there. We do have leverage both in terms of carrot and stick to get them more green, but we have to get real about this first.

The problem is, all that would drastically reduce our standard of living.
How do we get people to buy in when everything becomes more expensive? Companies would have to pay more, and they'd move jobs offshore instead, hurting our economy more.

It isn't all simple.

241 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:42:36pm

re: #226 Van Helsing

If you're talking photo-voltaic, they do have a lifespan.
20 years and you will likely be down 10-15% efficiency.

Not saying they aren't a useful source, but there are factors to consider.

There are factors. But my home panels are not rated to lose that much efficiency in 20 years.

I stated 60% coverage were possible with today's tech, and no innovation. On the other hand a good half dozen innovations are already in the pipe that could change that number (and/or reduce costs) significantly.

242 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:42:41pm

re: #238 shiplord kirel

It is here (YEE_Haw!). I don't know what variations they have in the Bay Area.

I have no idea, myself, I just never thought of dancing as having any political implications.

243 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:43:26pm

re: #220 Kosh's Shadow

Actually, ALL solar costs are up front! The operating costs are quite low, but the solar cells or thermal capture equipment is expensive. And yes, all that does wear out.

Don't forget all those dirty chemical batteries for storing the energy. They need replaced frequently as well. Same problem with windmills.

244 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:43:34pm

re: #222 shiplord kirel

and I can't line dance

Ha! The truth comes out.

/I knew it.

245 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:43:54pm

re: #213 Killgore Trout

I think there's a false sense of emergency and panic on the right now. They're willing to accept anyone who will oppose Obama and they aren't going to be picky. They are going to make some very bad friends.

I did the same during the first part of Clinton's first term. I know what derangement syndrome looks like, I had CDS for a (thankfully) short time there.

I can see the same garbage happening now. I don't know if it's because of the time that has passed, but the ODS crap I am seeing now seems much worse than the CDS of the '90s.

246 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:44:11pm

re: #216 Dark_Falcon

Geeze, what a jerk. If he ever showed up here, you'd probably give him the "know your place" vid, and he'd deserve it too.

Remember this one too, DF - L is for Labour (and the Left generally of course) ;-)

Youtube Video
247 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:44:16pm

re: #231 Coracle

Cells can be added incrementally. Large installations do not have to be built all at once. Similar with wind.

Some other things, like solar towers are best done all at once, true.

But that is still up front, even if the work is spread out, it is an up front expense before producing the power.

248 SteveC  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:44:38pm

re: #226 Van Helsing

If you're talking photo-voltaic, they do have a lifespan.
20 years and you will likely be down 10-15% efficiency.

Not saying they aren't a useful source, but there are factors to consider.

And hopefully technology will advance in the meantime. We already have smaller, lighter, more powerful pacemaker batteries.

249 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:44:48pm

re: #213 Killgore Trout

I think there's a false sense of emergency and panic on the right now. They're willing to accept anyone who will oppose Obama and they aren't going to be picky. They are going to make some very bad friends.

Yes. Which just indicates that the R's are leaderless at this point. To the rest of the polity, it appears that the right is being led by lunatics. Independents are running to the left. Everyone to their right appears to be batshit. The radical R's are saying this will be a replay of '94. They could not be more wrong.

250 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:45:17pm

re: #171 austin_blue

Science? Do you think that exceeding 400 ppm of CO2 has an affect on the climate when all of the last interglacial periods have capped out between 280-300 ppm?

Do you think that increasing CO2 by 33% is a forcing mechanism?

Taking the historical long view, our present level of 387 parts per million CO2 is very low, and there are many other natural fators that are responsible for climate change on a long term scale - just not on the scale with which we are dealing; here is an article on paleoclimates for your perusal.

[Link: www.globalchange.umich.edu...]

But yes, more CO2, which is a greenhouse gas, means that more radiant solar energy is trapped in the earth's atmosphere, resulting in warming. And human activity is definitely responsible for an increase in the amount of CO2 entering our atmosphere, over and above that which would naturally enter it.

251 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:45:26pm

re: #186 NukeAtomrod

El Niño and Climate

The link between these climatic effects in distant parts of the globe and El Niño is now well established. Yet it has taken some time for scientists to understand how the various pieces of the puzzle--from ocean currents to winds and heavy rains--fit together. Decades ago, the British scientist Sir Gilbert Walker provided the first clue.

La Niña impact on the global climate

In the U.S., winter temperatures are warmer than normal in the Southeast, and cooler than normal in the Northwest.

Global climate La Niña impacts tend to be opposite those of El Niño impacts. In the tropics, ocean temperature variations in La Niña tend to be opposite those of El Niño.

At higher latitudes, El Niño and La Niña are among a number of factors that influence climate. However, the impacts of El Niño and La Niña at these latitudes are most clearly seen in wintertime. In the continental US, during El Niño years, temperatures in the winter are warmer than normal in the North Central States, and cooler than normal in the Southeast and the Southwest. During a La Niña year, winter temperatures are warmer than normal in the Southeast and cooler than normal in the Northwest. See U.S. La Niña impacts from the National Weather Service. Also see this graphically in plots of temperature and rainfall anomalies in El Niño and La Niña years from Florida State University. An anomaly is the value observed during El Niño or La Niña subtracted from the value in a normal year.

El Nino and Climate Prediction

What is an El Niño?

El Niño is an oscillation of the ocean-atmosphere system in the tropical Pacific having important consequences for weather around the globe.

Among these consequences are increased rainfall across the southern tier of the US and in Peru, which has caused destructive flooding, and drought in the West Pacific, sometimes associated with devastating brush fires in Australia. Observations of conditions in the tropical Pacific are considered essential for the prediction of short term (a few months to 1 year) climate variations. To provide necessary data, NOAA operates a network of buoys which measure temperature, currents and winds in the equatorial band. These buoys daily transmit data which are available to researchers and forecasters around the world in real time.

252 avanti  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:45:51pm

re: #185 Charles

OT: It's really bizarre how many right wing bloggers are stepping up to defend Robert Stacy McCain, even though his connections to white supremacist and racist groups are undeniable.

The right wing blogosphere is receding away from me at the speed of light, and all I can say is good riddance.

You even have your own, new, daily tread on the stalkers site "The Daily Johnson" You must be so proud. /

253 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:45:59pm

re: #223 Dark_Falcon

re: #219 SanFranciscoZionist

There is a genie out of the bottle that will not easily be put back in. Tooo many are convinced that Obama means loosing their place in America.

Right...

They think that, secular, G-dless, commie, black, possibly Muslim, not born here, Obama, is going to take white Christian America away from them.

The GOP did the greatest act of disservice to this nation by fanning those flames. I fear that they will not be easily soothed. The hysteria is just that, hysteria. It is not about reason or a different take on politics or economics anymore for these folks. It is about keeping what they see as their piece of their pie. They have been convinced that they are loosing it and they are seething.

Forget if the very seething is anathema to actual American values in the first place. These people do not see American values as applying to anyone but themselves.

254 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:46:05pm

re: #245 Slumbering Behemoth

I did the same during the first part of Clinton's first term. I know what derangement syndrome looks like, I had CDS for a (thankfully) short time there.

I can see the same garbage happening now. I don't know if it's because of the time that has passed, but the ODS crap I am seeing now seems much worse than the CDS of the '90s.

I strongly suspect a racial causative factor, both conscious and sub-conscious.

255 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:46:12pm

The story of McCain's departure from the Washington Times:

GEORGE ARCHIBALD: BREAKUP AT THE WASHINGTON TIMES?

FishbowlDC, an Internet Web site of MediaBistro, reported on August 22, 2007, a huge blow-up in the newsroom at The Washington Times involving bad-tempered white supremacist assisatant national editor Robert Stacy McCain and fellow editor Victor Morton, an orthodox Catholic – with McCain angrily resigning and slamming his way out of the building through side-doors where he always went every 20 minutes to smoke a cigarette.

I have confirmed the details of FishbowlDC's account through several Washington Times newsroom sources who I trust and with whom I worked for many years. These sources witnessed the ugly blow-up.

I know Stacy McCain, an ill-tempered racist who sat on the other side of my desk for many years and carried on loud telephone conversations almost every day full of racist and ultra-right comments, and often got into loud verbal fights with both reporters and editors in the newsroom.

I also knew Victor Morton for many years, hard-working night editor whose editorial skills in juggling copy and myriad incoming stories at once on deadline were marvelous and unquestioned.

In more than 21 years as a national news and investigative reporter at The Washington Times, Victor Morton was among the best and most capable editors I ever worked with on deadline –- which is crunch-time as stories are finally coming together and the paper is being made up decisions on page-placement, photos, graphics, and headlines.

Stacy McCain, on the other hand, who has run the Page A2 Culture page for The Washington Times for many years under national editor Kenneth Hanner and Managing Editor Francis B. Coombs Jr., is a friend of neo-Nazis such as William A. White of Roanoke, Virginia, and had the favor of Coombs and his wife Marian Kester Coombs, who in her own right has a long-reported history of white-supremacist writings.

Fran Coombs and Stacy McCain for many years have ridden roughshod over newsroom colleagues of all ethnic and other backgrounds at The Washington Times with their explosive and vitrioloic racist white-supremacist tirades on a frequent basis.

Coombs, the newspaper’s managing editor and presumptive heir-apparent to Wesley Pruden Jr. as editor-in-chief of The Washington Times has always supported McCain –- even when he wrote blog messages on the Internet that were patently racist, anti-black and anti-Jew.

256 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:46:48pm

re: #240 Kosh's Shadow

The problem is, all that would drastically reduce our standard of living.
How do we get people to buy in when everything becomes more expensive? Companies would have to pay more, and they'd move jobs offshore instead, hurting our economy more.

It isn't all simple.

1. Only in the short term.
2. Our standard of living gets much much more drastically reduced with an eco collapse.

257 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:47:04pm

re: #247 Kosh's Shadow

But that is still up front, even if the work is spread out, it is an up front expense before producing the power.

You're missing my point. A Solar plant can produce power as soon as any cells and inverters are set up. Set up 10kw worth and you get 10 kw production. Add 50kw more 10 at a time over 5 months , you'll then get 10 more each month until 60.

258 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:47:19pm

re: #217 Coracle

Heh. I wasn't talking post K/T catastrophe - I was talking the balmy K itself.

The K is a non-sequiter to the present. They didn't even have *grass* in the K.

259 swamprat  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:47:40pm

re: #195 LudwigVanQuixote

Thanks for the link but..
global warming links invariably tell you that some areas will flood;
but apparently none will just receive slightly more rain

some areas will have increased desertification;
but none will experience longer farming seasons

some areas will get both more heat and more rain;
but none will have more biodiversity

some colder areas will be warmer;
but no one will need less fuel for the winter

some places will flood from increased rain;
but no farms will need less water

the ocean will rise
but there will be no increase in shallow hatching areas


Global Warming, as presented, is a very strange phenomena indeed.

260 Charles Johnson  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:48:03pm

McCain is a friend of Bill White!

The neo-Nazi who emailed threats to me and tried to get my home address and the addresses of my family.

261 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:48:09pm

OT: More from the vile RSM, last year:

"Equality" is contrary to human nature. The human spirit naturally desires distinction, and anyone with a scintilla of ambition wishes not to be equal, but rather to be acknowledged in some way as superior. Only a mediocre soul would ever hope merely to be "equal."

So, you know, all those black people, women, and gay people merely reveal their own mediocrity of soul by aspiring to equality under the law, and equality of opportunity. Or something.

What a tool.

262 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:48:24pm

re: #243 NukeAtomrod

Don't forget all those dirty chemical batteries for storing the energy. They need replaced frequently as well. Same problem with windmills.

Not needed. Thermal reservoirs are known tech. Sodium batteries as well (though those also have life spans, at least they're not nasty environmental hazards.

263 Killgore Trout  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:48:27pm

re: #245 Slumbering Behemoth

I did the same during the first part of Clinton's first term. I know what derangement syndrome looks like, I had CDS for a (thankfully) short time there.

I can see the same garbage happening now. I don't know if it's because of the time that has passed, but the ODS crap I am seeing now seems much worse than the CDS of the '90s.

I've been politically stupid/ignorant/apathetic at various points in my life but I don't think I've ever been hysterical. It seems to me that things are much worse than the Clinton and Bush years. I can honestly say I've never witnessed anything like this before.

264 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:48:42pm

re: #259 swamprat

Thanks for the link but..
global warming links invariably tell you that some areas will flood;
but apparently none will just receive slightly more rain

some areas will have increased desertification;
but none will experience longer farming seasons

some areas will get both more heat and more rain;
but none will have more biodiversity

some colder areas will be warmer;
but no one will need less fuel for the winter

some places will flood from increased rain;
but no farms will need less water

the ocean will rise
but there will be no increase in shallow hatching areas

Global Warming, as presented, is a very strange phenomena indeed.

So you didn't actually look at the link... How about you try reading it. It is from UCSD, and it will address all of that.

265 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:49:19pm

re: #258 austin_blue

Agreed.

266 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:49:57pm

re: #260 Charles

McCain is a friend of Bill White!

The neo-Nazi who emailed threats to me and tried to get my home address and the addresses of my family.

Bingo! I didn't know he was pals with BW, but it comes as no surprise whatsoever given that he condones harassing and outing bloggers.

267 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:50:31pm

re: #251 Gus 802

Yes. That is all correct, but you're talking about localized climates, like deserts and rainforests. That doesn't have an effect on overall global climate. It's just where different parts of climate are focused. El Nino and La Nina do not add or remove heat from the planet, they just push it around.

268 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:50:32pm

re: #258 austin_blue

re: #265 Coracle

You two are educating me with this.

269 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:51:56pm

re: #250 Salamantis

Taking the historical long view, our present level of 387 parts per million CO2 is very low, and there are many other natural fators that are responsible for climate change on a long term scale - just not on the scale with which we are dealing; here is an article on paleoclimates for your perusal.

[Link: www.globalchange.umich.edu...]

But yes, more CO2, which is a greenhouse gas, means that more radiant solar energy is trapped in the earth's atmosphere, resulting in warming. And human activity is definitely responsible for an increase in the amount of CO2 entering our atmosphere, over and above that which would naturally enter it.

Oh, horseshit. We have ice cores for the past several glacial cycles. The recent glacial cycles have regulated CO2. We are now 33% above the highest levels of recent levels of interglacial cycles. You believe this is significant, or it is not.

270 swamprat  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:52:12pm

re: #264 LudwigVanQuixote

I looked.

271 JHW  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:52:12pm

Small nuke plants, interesting, my local utility is investigating. I'm not qualified to judge, perhaps some of you are.

The idea of modular reactors is catching on. In the past two years, two start-up companies, Hyperion Power Generation and NuScale Power have received venture funding for projects aimed at much different markets and economics than those eyed by the established vendors.

Hyperion’s basic unit is described as 25 MWe with the heat source unit sized so that it can be transported intact on a ship, truck or train. According to the company’s web site, the modules will be approximately the size of a “hot tub” with a diameter of just 1.5 meters. The system uses technology that was originally developed at Los Alamos National Laboratories and licensed by the company for commercial development.

According to the company web site, the heat source has no moving parts and can be delivered from the factory in a sealed unit that does not need any on-site access. The company claims that the waste volume produced during five years of operation is approximately the size of a softball. (Note: I am skeptical about this particular claim. It does not match with my knowledge of nuclear engineering, but I am willing to be corrected.)

NuScale Power has developed a natural circulation light water reactor with a nuclear steam supply system that is in a 60′ by 15′ cylinder. It is designed to be prefabricated and shipped by rail, truck or barge. It is small enough so that NuScale will not have to wait in the Japan Steel Works pressure vessel line - there are plenty of manufacturers in the world that can produce that size of pressure vessel.

The system grew out of a DOE funded effort at Oregon State University (OSU) (corrected from initial post) called MASLWR (Multi-Application Light Water Reactor) that was developed to enable smaller markets to gain access to the benefits of nuclear fission energy - zero emissions, independence from fossil fuels, greater reliability, and increased levels of technical employment.

After the initial federal research grants ended and OSU published its results in 2003, the University continued funding the research and made continued improvements and refinements to the design. Several patents were filed in November 2007 and the company received its initial round of venture funding in January 2008.


Small and Modular Nuclear Power Systems

Also, what may turn out to be problematic for other "green" alternatives.
Decline of Rare Earth Metals

272 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:54:34pm

re: #233 NukeAtomrod

You are basing this on a visual examination of maps on that page.
Those are just a visual representation of data that has been that has been analyzed and then the results have been subjected to mathematical test of significance. .

273 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:54:37pm

Friend of Robert Stacy McCain:

A U.S. magistrate judge in Virginia has ordered the release of an avowed white supremacist, but prosecutors have appealed.

Judge Michael Urbanski on Thursday stayed his ruling allowing William A. White's release on $25,000 bond pending the appeal to U.S. District Court. But he ordered an electronic monitoring system to be installed at White's home.

White is charged with threatening a syndicated newspaper columnist, a New Jersey mayor and several other people by e-mail, telephone or online.

He has been in jail since last October, when he was charged with encouraging violence against the foreman of a Chicago jury that convicted a fellow white supremacist. A judge dismissed that charge in July.

White is the self-styled leader of a Roanoke-based neo-Nazi group.

274 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:54:54pm

re: #261 iceweasel

OT: More from the vile RSM, last year:

So, you know, all those black people, women, and gay people merely reveal their own mediocrity of soul by aspiring to equality under the law, and equality of opportunity. Or something.

What a tool.

Absolutely. There's something very familiar to me about that pompous self regarding tone he writes with as well.

275 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:55:15pm

re: #262 Coracle

Not needed. Thermal reservoirs are known tech. Sodium batteries as well (though those also have life spans, at least they're not nasty environmental hazards.

Which is cheaper in the short term? And which loses the least stored energy? That's what they'll use.

(I'm not against solar at all, it's just still not a practical solution at this time.)

276 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:55:25pm

re: #259 swamprat

Thanks for the link but..
global warming links invariably tell you that some areas will flood;
but apparently none will just receive slightly more rain

Nothing apparent about that. It will likely be true. But do you want to migrate to those places when your current breadbaskets become dustbowls? Will they be within your national borders?

some areas will have increased desertification;
but none will experience longer farming seasons

Same deal. Will Kansas farmers be allowed on the new Saskatchewan cropland?

some areas will get both more heat and more rain;
but none will have more biodiversity

Do you know how long it takes to build an ecosystem? We're demonstrating how quickly we can destroy them.

some colder areas will be warmer;
but no one will need less fuel for the winter

And electricity for cooling in the summer...

Etc..

All of what you say is probably true. But what kind of upheaval does that mean for our global society? Even just for the US?

277 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:55:49pm

re: #270 swamprat

I looked.

Then you would not have those questions.

278 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:55:53pm

We should carefully consider our alternatives before we rush headlong into economically crippling smorgasbord 'solutions' got global warming. As most here well know, I am in favor of simultaneously moving to nuclear-reactor-generated electricity and electric cars; it does us no good to transition to electric cars if their batteries are recharged from power grids that are dependent upon fossil fuels for power generation. Since China, India and Brazil are major producers of greenhouse gases, I would like to also see us helping them to nuclearize their power supplies, something that Cjhina is already rapidly doing, and India much less so (Brazil, not at all so far).

But here is an article that suggests that cap-and-trade carbon markets and carbon taxes are not our best alternatives, economically speaking:

[Link: reason.com...]

279 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:56:05pm

re: #254 Bagua

I strongly suspect a racial causative factor, both conscious and sub-conscious.

A big part of me wants to deny that there's a significant racial component to all this. But some of these signs this last couple of days--eeek.

I don't like seeing this. We are BETTER than this. Damn it.

280 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:56:15pm

re: #257 Coracle

You're missing my point. A Solar plant can produce power as soon as any cells and inverters are set up. Set up 10kw worth and you get 10 kw production. Add 50kw more 10 at a time over 5 months , you'll then get 10 more each month until 60.

But still, the cost for each increment comes up front. And so does the land. You need to get all the land up front.

281 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:57:05pm

re: #274 Jimmah

Absolutely. There's something very familiar to me about that pompous self regarding tone he writes with as well.

Pompous, self regarding, and sneering.

282 Coracle  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:58:00pm

re: #275 NukeAtomrod

Which is cheaper in the short term? And which loses the least stored energy? That's what they'll use.

(I'm not against solar at all, it's just still not a practical solution at this time.)

One thing I firmly believe is that we need to get a little of the "cheaper" stumbling block out of our way. In the short run, both solar and nuke may be more expensive outlays. Long term payback is better, and environmental dividend is the clincher. We just need investment and payback time horizons measured in decades rather than quarters.

Now I have to go to bed.
Later, All.

283 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:58:04pm

re: #281 Jimmah

Pompous, self regarding, and sneering.

Look, go easy on Ludwig, he's been behaving lately.

/

284 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:58:54pm

re: #254 Bagua

Perhaps. It would be silly to think there isn't that element to some degree. However, this season's DS seems so much larger that it can't just be that alone inflating the crazy. IMO, anyway.

285 danrudy  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:59:24pm

As one of those who is very skeptical of man made global warming (or at least it having any real urgent and imminent threat to our species) I will admit I have always found the shrinking ice caps on Mars a pretty amusing refutation (and frankly, I had not seen arguments about the other planets).
It was something I could see through my telescope (c11 for the astronomers out there), it was real and it needs to be explained. The explanation that made sense to me was that there is cooling and warming as part of a natural cycle. Not that the sun is getting hotter and we will burn to a crisp). Thus, it does not seem so far fetched that there are natural cycles that occur on earth over periods of time.

Frankly, I thought the video's refutation of Pluto's warming (which I had not heard about before) was pretty easy and made sense. Jeez, that planet is so far away anyways. How can anything reliable be gleaned from its surface .

However, I thought the refutation of the Mars argument much weaker. Other than mocking someone on his blog for not reading down 2 paragraphs it would appear that Mr Sinclair really puts much to much weight in the guess that it must be some dust clouds accounting for global warming on mars because there are dark spots now on a photograph where there were non-before. (BTW...the paragraph he points out suggests there is a theory as to why global warming on mars is different then on earth but it does not deny that global warming on mars is taking place...So I am not sure why he was mocking his reader) I think looking at the changing size of the ice caps is a simple fact and suggests there are variations in temperature that make it both warmer and colder. I suppose he prefers the dust cloud theory since it can be extractable to a CO2/pollution argument on earth.

Now, before the down dings begin I hope you will consider I was trying to make a serious point, did not crawl out of the wood work, and am simply offering an opposing point of view. Unfortunately, I am off to sleep shortly but I do hope to read the thoughtful responses later

286 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:59:50pm

re: #269 austin_blue

Oh, horseshit. We have ice cores for the past several glacial cycles. The recent glacial cycles have regulated CO2. We are now 33% above the highest levels of recent levels of interglacial cycles. You believe this is significant, or it is not.

Since I wrote this paragraph, I obviously believe that it is significant:

But yes, more CO2, which is a greenhouse gas, means that more radiant solar energy is trapped in the earth's atmosphere, resulting in warming. And human activity is definitely responsible for an increase in the amount of CO2 entering our atmosphere, over and above that which would naturally enter it.

I just wish that you had read and grasped it before you posted your rude reply.

287 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 9:59:54pm

re: #283 Bagua

Look, go easy on Ludwig, he's been behaving lately.

/

I feel a disturbance in the force... Ahhh. Yess... I sense the need to channel Mandy...

288 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:00:28pm

re: #281 Jimmah

Pompous, self regarding, and sneering.

Does he remind you of Dr Smith?

Youtube Video

heh.

289 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:00:33pm

re: #255 Charles

Here's more on the connection, Charles:

EXCLUSIVE: PITTS HARASSER LINKED TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

290 HelloDare  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:01:09pm

Judge angered by special treatment for Andrew Sullivan

Political commentator, author and writer for The Atlantic magazine Andrew M. Sullivan won’t have to face charges stemming from a recent pot bust at the Cape Cod National Seashore — but a federal judge isn’t happy about it.

U. S. Magistrate Judge Robert B. Collings says in his decision that the case is an example of how sometimes “small cases raise issues of fundamental importance in our system of justice.”

While marijuana possession may have been decriminalized, Sullivan, who owns a home in Provincetown, made the mistake of being caught by a park ranger with a controlled substance on National Park Service lands, a federal misdemeanor.

The ranger issued Sullivan a citation, which required him either to appear in U.S. District Court or, in essence, pay a $125 fine.

But the U.S. Attorney’s Office sought to dismiss the case. Both the federal prosecutor and Sullivan’s attorney said it would have resulted in an “adverse effect” on an unspecified “immigration status” that Sullivan, a British citizen, is applying for.

At the hearing, Collings observed that Sullivan would still have to state on his application that he had been charged with a crime, and he asked both the prosecutor and Sullivan’s attorney, Robert Delahunt Jr. (cousin of U. S. Rep. William D. Delahunt), for more information about why paying the $125 would have “any additional adverse effect.”

When no attorney could fully answer the question beyond citing advice from immigration lawyers, Collings requested that Delahunt submit a brief on the issue. But before Delahunt could reply, Assistant U. S. Attorney James F. Lang jumped in and said that Collings had no power to inquire why the U.S. Attorney had decided to have the charge dismissed.

Collings says he expressed his concern that “a dismissal would result in persons in similar situations being treated unequally before the law. … persons charged with the same offense on the Cape Cod National Seashore were routinely given violation notices, and if they did not agree to [pay the fine] were prosecuted by the United States Attorney … there was no apparent reason for treating Mr. Sullivan differently from other persons charged with the same offense.”

In fact, noted Collings, there were several other defendants appearing in court the same day who were charged with the same offense.

In his opinion, Collings wrote that the U.S. Attorney is “is not being faithful to a cardinal principle of our legal system, i.e., that all persons stand equal before the law and are to be treated equally in a court of justice once judicial processes are invoked. It is quite apparent that Mr. Sullivan is being treated differently from others who have been charged with the same crime in similar circumstances.”

Ultimately, Collings acknowledged that he had no choice other than to allow the case to be dismissed, but “that the Court must so act does not require the Court to believe that the end result is a just one.”

Calls to The Atlantic and Delahunt have not yet been returned.

291 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:01:45pm

re: #278 Salamantis

Umm...'solutions' for global warming.

PIMF

292 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:02:02pm

re: #268 LudwigVanQuixote

re: #265 Coracle

You two are educating me with this.

Dentation in mammals changed when grasses became common 55 million years ago. Many forms went from browsers to grazers to take advantage of the new niche.

This (may) have been connected with an extinction event. There was a large evolutionary expansion of species immediately after this event.

293 swamprat  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:02:40pm

re: #276 Coracle


Your statements are valid.
My point was that Global Warming sites are, (justified or not)
not the unbiased, no holds barred, unvarnished truth.
The weather is now something which is spun, not simply reported.

294 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:03:16pm

re: #267 NukeAtomrod

Yes. That is all correct, but you're talking about localized climates, like deserts and rainforests. That doesn't have an effect on overall global climate. It's just where different parts of climate are focused. El Nino and La Nina do not add or remove heat from the planet, they just push it around.

Negative.

Google Video

By their very nature El Nino and La Nina add and remove heat from the atmosphere.

295 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:04:14pm

Goodnight. I need to be up in about 5 hours.

296 austin_blue  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:04:45pm

re: #286 Salamantis

I just wish that you had read and grasped it before you posted your rude reply.

But you don't believe that has *an affect* do you?

297 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:05:27pm

re: #285 danrudy

Well, Mars does have seasons and we have been observing the changes in its caps since before industrialization and that there has been no indicator whatsoever of an increased global temp on Mars...

So no, there is no argument to be made.

1. There is no "warming" on Mars not explained by it's orbit.

2. The time scales do not match.

3. Mars is not on average getting warmer.

Therefore, there is no argument to be made.

298 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:06:19pm

re: #272 Reginald Perrin

You are basing this on a visual examination of maps on that page.
Those are just a visual representation of data that has been that has been analyzed and then the results have been subjected to mathematical test of significance. .

Why are you still arguing about this? If you don't buy my analysis of the data, so be it. I trust my interpretation of the charts and graphs, which is based on my knowledge of the Earth's systems and thermodynamics. I see a clear, short term cooling trend on the continents. You don't Fine. Okay?

My speculation that this could be a hint at a mechanism for glaciation is extremely speculative. I only mentioned it because I found the possibility interesting.

299 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:06:41pm

Jimmah, you downdinged my #50.

Whassa matter? You don't like me citing the most recent climate science?

300 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:07:16pm

re: #293 swamprat

Your statements are valid.
My point was that Global Warming sites are, (justified or not)
not the unbiased, no holds barred, unvarnished truth.
The weather is now something which is spun, not simply reported.

Climate is not weather.

If you would read the educational materials from the scientists at a major university, and not just decide it is a "global warming site" and hence dismiss it, you might find answers to your questions and stop spinning this yourself.

301 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:07:49pm

re: #296 austin_blue

But you don't believe that has *an affect* do you?

What the fuck do you think that "resulting in warming" means, nimrod?

302 Killgore Trout  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:08:09pm

re: #289 Sharmuta

Very interesting.

303 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:08:48pm

re: #273 Sharmuta

Friend of Robert Stacy McCain:

RSM is certainly hanging out with some nasty people.

I hate Roanoke Nazis!

304 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:08:54pm

More on McCain and White from the SPLC:

After about six months, White left the Pravda job. He was growing closer and closer to the leaders of the radical right, as shown by his attendance at the 2002 conference of American Renaissance, a white supremacist journal. While there, he met a reporter for the far-right Washington Times, Robert Stacy McCain. Before long, White was being quoted in the Times, including in a story on an "alternative currency" issued by extremists. Described as "a Web development consultant for political and corporate clients," White gushed on about the dubious notes.

305 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:09:11pm

re: #301 Salamantis

What the fuck do you think that "resulting in warming" means, nimrod?

Are you going to complain that he is rude to you too now?

Not everyone appreciates it when you attempt to show knowledge you do not posses and then try to play semantics.

306 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:10:28pm

re: #288 iceweasel

Does he remind you of Dr Smith?

heh.

Indeed he does, ice!

Now some (cough) randomly chosen music for you from the Primitives:

Youtube Video
307 Salamantis  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:10:41pm

re: #305 LudwigVanQuixote

Are you going to complain that he is rude to you too now?

Not everyone appreciates it when you attempt to show knowledge you do not posses and then try to play semantics.

So what exactly is there in this statement:

But yes, more CO2, which is a greenhouse gas, means that more radiant solar energy is trapped in the earth's atmosphere, resulting in warming. And human activity is definitely responsible for an increase in the amount of CO2 entering our atmosphere, over and above that which would naturally enter it.

with which you disagree?

308 MittDoesNotCompute  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:11:55pm

re: #260 Charles

McCain is a friend of Bill White!

The neo-Nazi who emailed threats to me and tried to get my home address and the addresses of my family.

Small world, right?

/RSM, White, and their fellow travelers can just all go get f**ked...

309 swamprat  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:11:58pm

re: #277 LudwigVanQuixote

Then you would not have those questions.

Sorry.
What is the percentage of increased farmable land? (missed it)
What areas will need less winter fuel? (couldn't get a link)
Which areas will have a greater bio diversity. Which ones will have less?
What species of fish will suffer due to the decreased salinity of the oceans, and which one will increase due to warmer temps and greater spawning areas?

Missed all of this. I know real scientists are working on these, but all I can find are "everything is going to be uniformly bad" type sites, and "everything is OK, the scientists are all lying" sites.

And no, I haven't looked real hard.

310 Racer X  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:12:00pm

The Hyperion Power Module

Think 'large battery'.

311 Bagua  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:16:50pm

re: #296 austin_blue

But you don't believe that has *an affect* do you?

I firmly believe that the increased atmospheric CO2 has zero affect on the climate,


>
/alternatively, I don't deny it has an effect.

312 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:21:37pm

re: #298 NukeAtomrod

What analysis?

You didn't do any analysis.

What you are doing is stating your own personal opinion based on a brief visual examination of the maps, and now you are talking out of your a$$.

I won't waste any more of Charles' precious bandwidth trying to debate someone who is closed minded, and who probably made up his mind based on talking points from AM radio and Fox News.

313 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:22:11pm

re: #294 Gus 802

I said planet, not atmosphere. The heat stored in the ocean is already in the system. El Nino and La Nina facilitate a transfer between one part of the ocean to the other releasing heat into the atmosphere. No heat is created or destroyed.

Heat is added mainly by radiation from the sun. The only other big source is nuclear activity in the Earth's core. There is some minor direct heating from man's activities like combustion, friction and the like. But that's really all energy stored from the sun, since life itself is a direct result of solar energy.

Heat is only lost by radiating out into space.

314 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:24:11pm

OT RANT:

Could we please somehow order a global moratorium on using Cat Steven's music to hock products? Or anything else?

I didn't care to hear any of his music when he was Folk Singer Cat, I care to hear it less now that he is Theocratic Dictatorship Apologist Yusuf.

315 Gus  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:26:08pm

re: #313 NukeAtomrod

I said planet, not atmosphere. The heat stored in the ocean is already in the system. El Nino and La Nina facilitate a transfer between one part of the ocean to the other releasing heat into the atmosphere. No heat is created or destroyed.

Heat is added mainly by radiation from the sun. The only other big source is nuclear activity in the Earth's core. There is some minor direct heating from man's activities like combustion, friction and the like. But that's really all energy stored from the sun, since life itself is a direct result of solar energy.

Heat is only lost by radiating out into space.

I give up. Your initial comment was this:

La Nina and El Nino are definitely drivers of weather, but not climate. If the sun is actually going into a Dalton or Maunder-like minimum, the overall climate will get colder if solar activity is the culprit, as I believe. If the observations don't match up as time goes on, I'll reconsider, but right now I'm betting on the sun.

I have already referenced several articles by NOAA and reviewed the NASA sites and La Nina and El Nino clearly are seen as driving climate. From your initial statement I assume you are "betting on the sun" which has been refuted.

That's all I have to say.

316 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:28:29pm

re: #315 Gus 802

It looks like we all all wasting time trying to debate honestly with the nuclear one.
I am calling it a night. Good luck.

317 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:31:34pm

re: #312 Reginald Perrin

Visual analysis of the charts presented on the Accuweather site. I am assuming their data is accurate, so I'm drawing conclusions based on it. Isn't that the purpose of linking to a source.

You and I apparently disagree on what we're seeing there, but I haven't found it necessary to suggest that you are a brain-washed puppet of Al Gore or something. I don't think you are. Why is it when you disagree, you have to insult me by suggesting I am uneducated and a parrot of talk radio?

318 BignJames  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:39:20pm

re: #257 Coracle

You're missing my point. A Solar plant can produce power as soon as any cells and inverters are set up. Set up 10kw worth and you get 10 kw production. Add 50kw more 10 at a time over 5 months , you'll then get 10 more each month until 60.


not sure what your point was...but 10kw=less than a popcorn fart...same w/50 or 60 kw...you need to think economy of scale

319 NukeAtomrod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 10:39:57pm

re: #315 Gus 802

Fine, Gus. I've explained this several times already, but I'll try again. I was referring to Global Climate in that first statement, you are talking about Local Climate. Global Climate is determined by the relationship of energy into the Earth vs. energy exiting the Earth. Local Climate is determined by weather patterns, ocean currents, topography and factors internal to the climate system. Global Warming (Climate Change) is a function of Global Climate. Local climate is not.

I've made my case.
I can't make it any clearer.
You may accept it or not.

320 lostlakehiker  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:08:49pm

re: #28 NukeAtomrod

I think climate change is driven by solar activity. Sun spots, solar wind, etc. There's an observable record showing a relationship between sun spots and temperature over the last few thousand years. I'm not certain of the mechanism. There are several theories that have to do with cosmic rays and cloud formation, but it could be something else entirely. If the sun continues to be spot free for the next few years, temperatures should continue dropping like they have this summer if solar activity is the driver. Temperatures should continue upward if CO2 is the driving factor. I'm content, eager actually, to wait and see.

What if CO2 and sunspot activity both affect the temperature? Suppose this sunspot slow spell continues for a decade, and CO2 continues to rise, for instance. We might see temperatures more or less stabilizing. They might rise a bit. They might fall a bit.

But according to what we understand of the role of greenhouse gases in the earth's temperature, when the sunspot dry spell finally ends, and it will end, the CO2 won't go away. And as a result, temperatures will take an upward hop.

That's the difference between natural cycles and our own, single-directional consistent influence on atmospheric CO2 levels.

There's a current news story about how some ships have made it through the "northeast passage", running along the coast of Siberia from Korea to Amsterdam, this summer. The "northwest passage" is sporadically open nowadays. When the term was first coined, the passage was hoped for but eventually recognized to be always icebound. No longer.

The opening of these sea passages is, of itself, good for humanity. But it's a sign of a larger change that has a downside as well. Not Sky Is Falling downside like Gore projects, but still, more trouble than sticking with fossil fuels is worth, perhaps. We can always build enough nuclear power plants that we no longer have any need for coal-fired electricity, for instance. We could replace coal-fired electricity with solar thermal generated power, at reasonable cost. There are technical fixes that don't involve giving up modern civilization.

321 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:21:54pm

re: #239 Jimmah

Hey Ice! Green Day at CBGB's performing "Teenage Kicks". Interestingly, the original version of this song (performed by the Undertones) reduced renowned UK alternative music DJ John Peel to a blubbering wreck when he first heard it while driving home one day:


[Video]

Something appropriate for you, Comrade Jimmah-ski. It also ties into the discussions today, about racism at the tea parties and the racism of RSM:

Have you seen this movie, BTW?

I get no kick from Champagne...

Youtube Video
322 crosspatch  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:26:15pm

Mars' atmosphere is practically 100% CO2. Earth's atmosphere is less than 1/10 of 1% CO2. Mars has practically no water vapor. Earth has loads of water vapor. Water evaporates at the surface absorbing heat. It rises tens of thousands of feed and condenses releasing that heat well above most of the atmospheric CO2.

None of the climate models take water vapor into account yet it is the dominant greenhouse gas and also the coolant in a natural refrigeration system using water as the working fluid.

This year's temperatures in the Arctic are pretty much exactly on the 1958 to 2002 average. The US registered one of the coolest Augusts in a long time. The last 12 months have been 0.5 degrees above the 1901 to 2000 average. The last 10 years has shown a cooling trend in the US of about 0.9 degrees.

Since an anomalous wind event blew a lot of ice out of the Arctic in 2007, ice has recovered in both 2008 and 2009 by about 500,000 square km/year.

Sea temperatures are flat to slightly down since 2004. Sea levels are flat since 2006.

Temperatures have still not recovered to the levels they were before the Little Ice Age or during the Roman Warm Period. The warmest time during this interglacial was about 6000 years ago during the Holocene climate optimum when sea levels were about 2 meters higher than today and global average temperatures were about 2 degrees C higher than today.

Not a single prediction of the models has been observed.

What warming has occurred is most likely due to land use changes such as deforestation, agricultural irrigation, and urbanization. Irrigation, for example, raises low temperatures by raising humidity (water is a very powerful greenhouse gas) as does the creation of huge lakes in the desert Southwest (Powell, Meade, etc.).

Most observed "warming" is urban heat island impact on local monitoring stations. There is no warming that is unprecedented in either magnitude or rate. We have been undergoing a recovery from the LIA until about 1933. After that we had a cool Pacific Decadal Oscillation until about 1976. Then we had a warm PDO until about 2006. The PDO is now negative again. It will cool for another 20 or 30 years.

323 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:31:20pm

re: #322 crosspatch

The weather station talking point has already been debunked.

Cross checking non urban weather stations to the full data doesn't change the trend in any significant way.

324 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:33:22pm

re: #322 crosspatch

One of the dumbest posts on this subject I have seen for a while. Every single point you made has been debunked to death. Ignorant nonsense.

325 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:35:37pm

re: #321 iceweasel

Something appropriate for you, Comrade Jimmah-ski. It also ties into the discussions today, about racism at the tea parties and the racism of RSM:

Have you seen this movie, BTW?

I get no kick from Champagne...


Thanks iceweaselski:) Very apt too! (Really must watch that movie again sometime soon!)

326 Sharmuta  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:38:16pm

re: #322 crosspatch

Sea temperatures are flat to slightly down since 2004. Sea levels are flat since 2006.

Ocean temps are rising!

The average water temperature worldwide was 62.6 degrees, according to the National Climatic Data Center, the branch of the U.S. government that keeps world weather records. That was 1.1 degree higher than the 20th century average, and beat the previous high set in 1998 by a couple hundredths of a degree. The coolest recorded ocean temperature was 59.3 degrees in December 1909.

327 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:45:34pm

re: #322 crosspatch

None of the climate models take water vapor into account yet it is the dominant greenhouse gas and also the coolant in a natural refrigeration system using water as the working fluid.

Climate scientists know that water vapour is in equilibrium with temperature, and is therefore not a forcing agent.

328 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:46:17pm

re: #325 Jimmah

Thanks iceweaselski:) Very apt too! (Really must watch that movie again sometime soon!)

Yes, you must, honey. ;-)

My other favourite:

Youtube Video
329 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:48:18pm
This year's temperatures in the Arctic are pretty much exactly on the 1958 to 2002 average. The US registered one of the coolest Augusts in a long time. The last 12 months have been 0.5 degrees above the 1901 to 2000 average. The last 10 years has shown a cooling trend in the US of about 0.9 degrees.

Cherry picking stats, isolated measurements being compared as though they can be used to refute observed trends, and a distorted read of the trend of the last 10 years. You need to stop reading denialist websites and have the courage to start reading actual climate science sources.

330 The Left  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:48:59pm

re: #329 Jimmah

Cherry picking stats, isolated measurements being compared as though they can be used to refute observed trends, and a distorted read of the trend of the last 10 years. You need to stop reading denialist websites and have the courage to start reading actual climate science sources.

Data-mining. And cherry-picking.

331 Aye Pod  Sun, Sep 13, 2009 11:59:37pm

re: #328 iceweasel

Yes, you must, honey. ;-)

My other favourite:

Heh - she's just ever so slightly jaded ;-)

This scene is one of my favourites:

Youtube Video
332 freetoken  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 4:08:15am

re: #322 crosspatch

It's like you've scoped WUWT or Marc Morano's site for talking points, without really understanding the subject at all.

You still seem to think the AGW as a theory is based upon "models" of the future. Well, guess what, it's not.

Secondly, you really don't know anything about Mars. That it's atmosphere is 95% CO2 has no relevance to Earth's climate as the planets are quite different. Note that Mars' total atmosphere has less that .5% of the mass of the Earth's! Indeed, if you run the numbers, I believe the mass of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere is greater than the mass of CO2 in Mars' atmosphere.

As for water vapor - believe it or not, the Earth can walk and chew gum at the same time (and so can the various models of climate.)

And so on. Your list is just a long list of denier talking points. And I am using "denier" correctly here, for you deny the validity of modern science for the sake of believing in political demagogues (Morano, Watt, etc.)

333 NukeAtomrod  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 6:16:54am

re: #320 lostlakehiker

Yes. Both could be a factor. I think CO2 emissions (and other human activity) are only a minor factor in climate change. If we are heading into an extended solar minimum, I expect a significant cooling trend. If the sun remains inactive and the cooling trend does not occur, then I will agree that some other factor, probably human activity, is the main driver of climate change.

Right now, it seems that a cooling trend has already begun since the the peak of solar cycle 23, according to the Accuweather data linked to earlier. It is becoming more significant as the solar minimum continues as shown by the 2005-2009 graphs. (Note: Others have already disagreed with me on this point - stating that I am closed-minded - , even though the caption for those charts says "Here are the same two images, but this time using the July 2005 to July 2009 time period. Note: Many more regions have seen a cooling trend compared to the longer July 2000-2009 period.")

334 Servo Cicero  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 7:46:13am

My climate change-refuting facts opinions, let me show you them!

//

sorry, bad internet meme is bad. =)

335 ckeusa  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 7:56:32am

I have my Ph.D. in climatology, and I am not a global warming skeptic. That being said, the video is misleading. The argument is simply that planets without human influence can also experience climate change. Thus, we cannot be certain if our current global warming is a result of humans or just part of a natural cycle. Of course, most scientists agree that the majority of the warming is due to humans, but nobody can be 100% sure.

336 theuglydougling  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 8:33:42am

In the video Sinclair says that climate "deniers" (nice little allusion to other types of more egregious "deniers" - it is a very charged word) claim that we can't prove the earth is warming but will say that other planets are warming. That is an outright distortion. Even so-called "deniers" will concede that the earth has been warming; what they dispute is that it is primarily human-driven. But hey, distortions for thee but not for me. Yet another example of wanting it both ways in climate science. And of course, his proof for human-caused global warming is to point out the mistaken assertions of some of the commenters on his site. I could point out inconsistencies or mistakes in the comments of Obama drones, but that wouldn't somehow prove that the President is a closet Nazi. This video was a disappointment.

337 libertyvillemike  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 9:39:32am

Had to review Penn & Teller's take on this to bring me back to reality:

Youtube Video

By the way, I don't think Penn & Teller are Truthers, Creationists, etc. and they are just as qualified as Al Gore to analyze the scientific arguments behind CAGW. Also, gotta love the survey they did where environmentalists signed on to ban "di-hydrogen oxide".

338 Charles Johnson  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 10:59:39am

re: #337 libertyvillemike

By the way, I don't think Penn & Teller are Truthers, Creationists, etc.

I like Penn and Teller, but they're not climate scientists either.

and they are just as qualified as Al Gore to analyze the scientific arguments behind CAGW.

Exactly -- they're not climate scientists, and Al Gore is not a climate scientist.

Real climate scientists are in nearly unanimous agreement about the fact that the Earth is warming.

339 Aye Pod  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 11:15:49am

re: #299 Salamantis

Jimmah, you downdinged my #50.

Whassa matter? You don't like me citing the most recent climate science?

Just noticed this comment. The first two links are irrelevant to the issue of the trend in temps beyond the scale of the 11 years cycles discussed in those articles. Those articles have been used/are being used by deniers as though they provide an explanation for the observed warming trend over many decades. Hence the downding.

340 theuglydougling  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 11:15:55am

Darn stealth-dingers!

///silly sarcasm :)

341 Aye Pod  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 11:17:35am

re: #337 libertyvillemike

Had to review Penn & Teller's take on this to bring me back to reality:


By the way, I don't think Penn & Teller are Truthers, Creationists, etc. and they are just as qualified as Al Gore to analyze the scientific arguments behind CAGW. Also, gotta love the survey they did where environmentalists signed on to ban "di-hydrogen oxide".

This really just addresses the kooks, not the science. FAIL.

342 Aye Pod  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 11:23:11am

re: #340 theuglydougling

Darn stealth-dingers!

///silly sarcasm :)

Heh! :) I see I have a stealth down-dinger on this thread myself- "spare o lake". I'm sure I've had severe petty downdinging issues with that character before.

343 theuglydougling  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 11:29:11am

re: #342 Jimmah

I was just taking a smiley, light-hearted jab at our host, but it fit right in with your reply to that other comment. I should take note of this - I've seen enough of your comments to know I rarely agree with you, so this may be the only time you ever up-ding me. LOL

344 The Left  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 11:30:35am

re: #342 Jimmah

Heh! :) I see I have a stealth down-dinger on this thread myself- "spare o lake". I'm sure I've had severe petty downdinging issues with that character before.

I just updinged Jimmah and I liked it.

I'm just his ding machine...

Youtube Video
345 LibertyvilleMike  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 11:39:34am

re: #338 Charles

Whether the climate is warming or not is only the beginning of the argument. Since the climate is always changing, you can show a warming trend, true enough, depending on the dates you pick. So what? If we're talking experts, lets talk experts, if we're talking straw men, lets not waste our time. The policy decisions are being driven by a belief in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, not a barely perceptible change in global temperature that is, depending on the scale, within the margin of error. The applicable maxim here is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof - the deniers don't need to prove anything, and the believers haven't demonstrated their theory by accurately predicting the response of the planet's temperature to an increase in CO2, and eliminating the many other possible (more probable) causes of water vapor changes, solar output, etc. Will someone wake me when there is reliable proof for CAGW? I wish more scientists would express their doubts - when CAGW is proven to be another historical mania, along with witches, alchemy, etc., the popular regard of science will be diminished.

346 Aye Pod  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 12:01:49pm

re: #344 iceweasel

I just updinged Jimmah and I liked it.

I'm just his ding machine...

I just updinged iceweasel and it felt awesome, or should I say, geronimo!:)

Youtube Video
347 Salamantis  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 12:18:53pm

re: #339 Jimmah

Just noticed this comment. The first two links are irrelevant to the issue of the trend in temps beyond the scale of the 11 years cycles discussed in those articles. Those articles have been used/are being used by deniers as though they provide an explanation for the observed warming trend over many decades. Hence the downding.

Actually, I posted them to counter a prior post that erroneously asserted that solar fluctuations had a minimal effect upon climate change. Plus the third link discusses cycles of 11 year cycles, where several 11 year cycles of few subspots are strung together, followed by several 11 year cycles strung together with many more sunspots.

As the third article I linked mentions, this larger pattern in general, and the Maunder Minimum in particular, are possibly responsible for the Little Ice Age that occurred in the Middle Ages (see my #74).

Since the links are of the latest climate science on the subject (in some cases only weeks old), it is difficult to discern how they could have been abused very much by climate change 'deniers' in such a short time.

348 The Left  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 12:23:36pm

re: #346 Jimmah

I just updinged iceweasel and it felt awesome, or should I say, geronimo!:)


[Video]

Baby you ding something to me...something that so mystifies me

Youtube Video
349 Salamantis  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 12:24:59pm

Plus, I find the term 'deniers' to distastefully reverberate with those who question the Holocaust.

You may hasten to add that they both deny something asserted by others, but I know that neither of us would like it if antiabortionists started referring to pro-choicers as fetal personhood/right deniers, or if homophobes started referring to gender orientation egalitarians as heteronormativity deniers.

350 Aye Pod  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 12:48:46pm

Sal, let me know when you are ready to debate this topic honestly. That is something I can't force you to do - and I know from watching your 'debates' with LVQ just how futile the attempt would be. Until then, as far as this topic is concerned, I'm putting you on GAZE.

351 onthow  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 12:54:14pm

Knowledge Denial

"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."
-- André Paul Guillaume Gide

Mr. Sinclair has seen the light. He, a non-scientist (he is a "graphic artist, illustrator, and animator"), has interpreted the incredibly complicated and vastly incomplete climate data and found the truth. A truth so mind-closingly obvious (just watch his videos!) that those who don't see that truth must be in "denial."

Never mind the massive complexity of the climate of the Earth; never mind the fact that actual scientists, who have spent their entire careers attempting understand this complexity, continue to honestly disagree with one another; never mind the fact that the current totality of their knowledge will, 50 years from now, be primitive. No, to Mr. Sinclair and all the other second-hand dealers in generalities of very tiny pieces of that knowledge, they know and those who disagree deny.

This is ignorance of ignorance. It is the most arrogant kind and the most dangerous kind. And it automatically discredits those who possess it.

352 Aye Pod  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 12:58:34pm

re: #348 iceweasel

Baby you ding something to me...something that so mystifies me

I thought I knew this city; thought I knew all about it
Then one night I went to Morningside and you were waitin'

You can ding me indefinitely babe :)

Youtube Video
353 garycooper  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 1:14:53pm

The quality of Sinclair's mental faculties is well-represented in this batty attempt to attack a guy who dares to ask some pretty innocuous questions in this Youtube thread:

You are very, very confused. One of the things life punishes us most severely is not knowing who our friends are.
The "WMD" myth was created by the Cheney-ites, ie the climate denying, war-inciting,fossil fuel lobby that needed an excuse to go after the oil resources of the middle east.
You have somehow confused yourself that Cheney and Exxon are your friends, that people who seek the truth are your enemy, that you cannot get good data from NASA, and so you get it from...Glenn Beck?

Sinclair's credentials as a climate expert? He was "personally trained" by the Goracle himself: [Link: www.theclimateproject.org...]

The Climate Project consists of more than 3,000 dedicated volunteers worldwide who have all been personally trained by Al Gore to educate the public about climate change. TCP has official branches in the United States, Australia, Canada, India, Spain, UK, and Indonesia. TCP presenters have delivered 50,000 presentations and reached a combined global audience of more than 5 million people. Our hope is that by raising the awareness of our fellow citizens about this crisis and informing them about potential solutions, all of us, together, can preserve the climate balance on which humanity and our planet depend.


LOL!

354 Charles Johnson  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 1:16:14pm

re: #353 garycooper

Your comment doesn't become any less pathetic just because you make the whole thing bold.

355 Right Brain  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 5:53:02pm

Once again Mr. Sinclair launches into his name calling, "denier", attempting to link skeptical scientists to the sleeze of "Holocaust Denial," the shared homophony of the slight is undeniable.

I picked up the word "may" six times actually, by Mr. Sinclair in his explanation of the scientific evidence that the polar ice caps of Mars are shrinking and thus the planet is warming.

As in "scientists believe that dust storms may cause the cooling," etc. Mr. Sinclair does not know why Mars is warming, and rather than apply the rule of parsimony, upon which all scientific premises are built, he, well, denies the simple explanation, the sun, duh, and speculates that "dust storms" "may" be causing it.

A classic denier of evidence.

356 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 6:14:35pm

re: #353 garycooper

Sooo, ummm, yeah,,, do you have any science to bring along with your ranting and political screeds?

357 Salamantis  Mon, Sep 14, 2009 6:19:29pm

re: #350 Jimmah

Sal, let me know when you are ready to debate this topic honestly. That is something I can't force you to do - and I know from watching your 'debates' with LVQ just how futile the attempt would be. Until then, as far as this topic is concerned, I'm putting you on GAZE.

If referencing the most recent climate science isn't honest in your estimation, please furnish me with your definition of the term.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
4 hours ago
Views: 52 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 161 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1