Climate models run on the world’s largest supercomputers predicted this drought.
http://www.skimusic.com/cams/am4_knob.jpg
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
- CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Deadly Cyclones And Arctic Sea Ice
- What About The Middle Part?
- “filled with racist remarks”
- Defacing Art Can Prevent Floods
- The Worst Disaster Year In History
- Harris Wins Pennsylvania
- “politicians & shills bankrolled by the fossil fuel industry”
- UN : CO2 Killing Babies
- Patriotic Clapper Misspoke
- New York Times Headlines
- Settled Science At The New York Times
- “Teasing Out” Junk Science
- Moving From 0% to 100% In Six Years
- “Only 3.4% of Journalists Are Republican”
- “Something we are doing is clearly not working”
- October 26, 1921
- Hillary To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Ivy league Provost Calls For Assassination
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
Recent Comments
- dm on Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- dm on CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- D. Boss on IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Robertvd on Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- arn on “falsely labeling”
- arn on “falsely labeling”
- spren on “filled with racist remarks”
- Disillusioned on CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- Bob G on “falsely labeling”
- Bill on Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
You don’t understand.
This is dry snow, as predicted.
Also disturbing:
The exodus of small enterprise from California (21%)
http://www.heliogenic.net/2011/03/09/businesses-folding-leaving-california/
Must be from all the competition created by green jobs.
This is clearly a nonsensical survey. Everybody knows businesses enjoy paying extra taxes and energy costs.
They love unions too. Why, look at Detroit.
I see a pine beetle skiing between the trees.
That snow, although sublime, will sublime. Therefore it never existed.
to bad Steve’s name is so long, it could be the next sarc on/off shorthand.
OT
Syun-Ichi Akasofu (a global warming ‘skeptic’) wins 2011 Hannes Alfvén Medal from European Geosciences Union
……for his outstanding achievements in Solar-Terrestrial Physics, establishing the substorm as a fundamental concept of magnetospheric physics.
http://www.egu.eu/awards-medals/awards-and-medals/award/hannes-alfven/syun-ichi-akasofu.html
The alarmists were right, the ski industry is suffering- but not due to drought. It is because the lodges and lifts are buried in snow.
The drywet phenomena is not to be taken lightly! The problem is that unlike climate experts, the man on the street does not comprehend that less means more. You have to have an IQ of 150 or higher to fully appreciate that concept.
http://www.greatdreams.com/near.htm
Budget Estimates for the Near Earth Object Observations
(FY2010 President’s Budget Request)
FY2008 (Actual): $3.3 M
FY2009 (Enacted): $3.7 M
…FY2010: $3.8 M
FY2011: $3.8 M
FY2012: $3.9 M
FY2013: $4.0 M
FY2014: $4.1 M
This is what Obama spends on a real threat!!!
OT
Video of nuclear plume from Fukushima using “a worldwide network of radiation detectors – designed to spot clandestine nuclear bomb tests”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yzd4Y2NG5I8
AAM, it’s a computer model simulation…….
It’s actual measurement, or maybe I am reading this wrong:
…..worldwide network of radiation detectors – designed to spot clandestine nuclear bomb tests…..
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20285-fukushima-radioactive-fallout-nears-chernobyl-levels.html
There are currently 60 certified radionuclide stations in the CTBTO global network. This network has been set up to monitor the compliance with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. These stations measure airborne radioactivity with unprecedented accuracy……As of today, a total of 24 CTBTO stations detected airborne radioactivity from the Fukushima plant……….
http://www.zamg.ac.at/docs/aktuell/Japan2011-03-25_1600_E_2.pdf
It appears they are using the data to make the animation. Am I reading it wrong?
sorta
Measuring stations can not create that animated video.
They plug what they measure and the time into a computer program that generates the movie.
It’s like filling in temp reconstructions where you have no stations…
” Simulations of ZAMG nicely show the spread of radiation
during the past two weeks. In general, the model worked fully satisfactory”
..it’s a computer model, notice that 15 days is a forecast
like a weather forecast
“sorta
Measuring stations can not create that animated video.”
I didn’t think that it did.
I know, I’m eating chocolate…
..ignore me 😉
It looks like it did understand it wrong though, in that it does look like they used data to compare how good their model was.
OT
President acted in Libya while US was not threatened, was un-Constitutional
During his campaign for the Presidency, in December, 2007, Barack Obama told The Boston Globe that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/03/defense-secretary-libya-did-not-pose-threat-to-us-was-not-vital-national-interest-to-intervene.html
Aminoacids, coming from ZAMG, the masters of Temperature time series homogeinization, that map animation must be a model simulation
The source is not ZAMG. It’s actual measurement ZAMG made into a video:
……Austrian researchers have used a worldwide network of radiation detectors – designed to spot clandestine nuclear bomb tests……..
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20285-fukushima-radioactive-fallout-nears-chernobyl-levels.html
graphic of measurement from 3/27/11 of Fukushima plume:
http://www.zamg.ac.at/display.php?imgPath=/pict/aktuell/20110325_Reanalyse-I131-Bild5_gr.jpg&imgTitle=Radioaktivit%26auml%3Bt+von+Fukushima+15+Tage+nach+Beginn+des+Unfalles+%28Prognose%29&imgSource=%26copy%3B+ZAMG&imgWidth=842&imgHeight=596
I thought, if it is ZAMG must be simulated
Check their description here:
http://www.zamg.ac.at/docs/aktuell/Japan2011-03-25_1600_E_2.pdf
“Simulations of ZAMG nicely show the spread of radiation…”
Note that German speakers often have an unusual use of the word ‘nice’
I just read your link. It says this:
There are currently 60 certified radionuclide stations in the CTBTO global network. This network has been set up to monitor the compliance with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. These stations measure airborne radioactivity with unprecedented accuracy……As of today, a total of 24 CTBTO stations detected airborne radioactivity from the Fukushima plant……….
It looks like they use actual measurement.
It appears they are using the data to make the animation. But I may be understanding it wrong.
It seems that the ZAMG uses the CTBTO for verification of their dispersion models.
The zamg says that the CTBTO does not measure rates, so I wonder how the zamg arrives to the precise number of becquerels given by new scientist. I am not saying it is wrong, I am just curios about the methodology and whether their dispersion models are backed by actual data on radiation doses.
It is hard to avoid an analogy with the oversted risk of volcanic ash from Iceland, where half the world’s airliners were grounded on model’s overestimations.
What it’s going to do is take the highest and extrapolate from that.
Just like they do when they have no temp measurements, take the highest, and extrapolate that the Arctic is tropical…..
Can’t help it, it’s just the nature of trying to infill….
“What it’s going to do is take the highest and extrapolate from that”
Where did you see that is what they did?
Amino – Thanks for the radiation fallout graphic. Very interesting.
Looks like there’s some chance to blame this CA snow on that if it turns out to be regular wetsnow and causes wetflooding.
Soothsaying permanent drought doomsday with digital crystal balls is no different than using entrails. It goes to show that predictions in climate science are, ahem, bogus.
Welcome to the real world driven by Nature who is the final arbiter of what is and what isn’t real. Nature voted in a very real way that shows that the digital crystal balls of the doomsday soothsayers are so far off the mark that it’s embarrassingly sad really. As a computer scientist it’s embarrassing that software is being used to support the doomsday forecasts of climate soothsayers of doom. They really should know better from first principles that simple systems in Nature generate internal randomness making their attempts at prediction of climate impossible.
I think Amino Acids in Meteorites is going for the “More posts than anyone else medal”