Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
- Joker And Midnight Toker
- Cheering Crowds
- Understanding Flood Mechanisms
- Extreme Weather
- 70C At Lisbon
- Grok Defending The Climate Scam
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
- Latest Climate News
- “Climate dread is everywhere”
- “The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’”
- Skynet Becomes Self Aware
- “We Have To Vote For It So That You Can See What’s In It”
- Diversity Is Our Strength
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
- The Anti-Greta
- “a persistent concern”
- Deadliest US Tornado Days
Recent Comments
- Mike Haseler (Scottish Sceptic) on Back To The Future
- Tel on Back To The Future
- arn on Back To The Future
- Walter on Joker And Midnight Toker
- Bob G on Back To The Future
- Disillusioned on Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Disillusioned on Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- conrad ziefle on Back To The Future
- Brodirt on Back To The Future
- conrad ziefle on Back To The Future
Reader Quiz : Who Is This Well Known Climate Scientist?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Ah. I think you hit a homer. According to reliable sources (Spencer), this is Willis Eschenbach.
However, I have great respect for both men, and that dispute saddens me. I am tending to favor Willis’s side, as the predecessor papers talked of cirrus cloud shielding rather than thunderstorms as a heat pump, as nearly as I can tell, and Dr. Pielke is not seeming to be as specific as his challenges would call for.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
I have to lean with Willis on this one also. Spencer needs to be very specific about how both ideas are the same. It appears to me that Willis is trying to quantify the energy loss of thunderstorm formation as it moves massive quantities of energy to altitude, where it can easily radiate to space. (Which incidentally in this case makes GHGs a cooling feedback) It appears that the combination of the two would work together towards cooling.
Also Willis has simply asked for this to be shown to him, which I have not seen done.
Homer is my guru.
Neither of them understand basic heat transfer !
Have you seen the BS they both support about things heating themselves up when a radiation shield is put in place despite the whole stupid idea being a completely open thermodynamic system ?
I’m referring to the ridiculous “Steel Greenhouse” concept published by Willis twicw on WUWT.
Complete un-scientific BS – worse than any of the IPCC BS – all to support their precious “Greenhouse Effect”.
To support the proposal presented is absurd beyond belief but the majority of “Greenhouse” acolytes do.
Back radiation from an object initially at minus 18 degrees C heats it to over plus 30 degrees C by simply enclosing it in a radiation shield in a completely open thermodynamic system where the background radiation is ostensibly the CMBR – and people actually believe this is possible ????
Dang Keith, my first houghts were Mikey “broken hockeystick” Mann or James “coal trains of death” Hansen. Then you reminded me of the current kerfluffle over Dr. Spencer’s article.
Well, this is just sad. As a graduate of the Steve Goddard Institute, it’s most definitive ….. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-c2cLRjQP6qQ/T0EAuvhBExI/AAAAAAAAEJw/g2BpMXPpTcM/s320/homer_hansen.png
As far as Spencer/Willis …..
I don’t think much of a person who can’t say these things or understand the concepts.
You can tell by his hand why he always gets it wrong. He is forced to try and reconcile his nonary number system with both the decimal and binary systems.
Of course if his other hand is the same it will be octal.
If his feet are the same he will be limited to counting up to 17.
James Hansen is the guy.
Jimmie “Death Trains”
As his retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist Dr. John S. Theon, the former supervisor of James Hansen, NASA’s vocal man-made global warming fears soothsayer, has now publicly declared himself a skeptic and declared that Hansen “embarrassed NASA” with his alarming climate claims…
“…That’s him, that’s Hansen. I’d recognize him anywhere!” he continued.