NOAA chief scientist was happy to go either way.
WARMING OF ALASKAN ARTIC SEEN AS EVIDENCE OF GREENHOUSE EFFECT – NYTimes.com
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
Recent Comments
- dm on “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- D. Boss on The Clock Is Ticking
- William on The Clock Is Ticking
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
- Gordon Vigurs on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Francis Barnett on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
Steven,
Science is unfolding to reveal truth and welcome the New Year!
http://junkscience.com/2013/12/27/aids-research-fraud-at-iowa-state/
The warmers are saying the sun is not responsible for climate change because it only varies .01% in either direction from max to min solar output. But what does that mean? The sun heats the earth by 300 degrees from absolute 0 to 300 Kelvin. But 0.01% of 300 is .3 and because it’s .3 degrees in either direction it’s .6 degrees of difference in centigrade or kelvin. So the solar output accounts for .6 degrees which is almost all of the global warming. But if you account for other variables, I would wager that solar output accounts for all climate change. All of it. Every–single–bit of it.
.1%
Sorry, my bad.
Excuse me for noticing, but we were told the greenhouse effect is greatest at the equator in the upper atmosphere (troposphere). Arctic warming is just an aftereffect. Since the ubiquitous “hot spot” is missing at the equator, evidence for the “enhanced” greenhouse effect at the Arctic is bullshit.
Morgan Wright says:
December 31, 2013 at 12:17 am
“The warmers are saying the sun is not responsible for climate change because it only varies .01% in either direction from max to min solar output. But what does that mean?…”
>>>>>
The Sun’s output (% change) does not relate directly to temps (% change), but you are on the right track in your thinking.
Yes it does because temperature is linear. You double the heat you double the temperature. Yes, dude, believe me. It’s not logarithmic, it’s not exponential, it’s not parabolic or hyperbolic or a conic section or differential or any of those weird things. It’s linear. This is something unexpected but to prove it to yourself, do the following experiment:
Take a gallon of water of 40 degrees. Take a gallon of water at 180 degrees. Mix them together. You get 2 gallons of water at 110 degrees.
Why?
tick tick tick
why?
Because…big surprise…it’s linear. OK?
Reblogged this on CACA.
Maurice Newman is definitely straight when it comes to the CAGW religion. This is why the Guardian stunt team are in the Antarctic. The carbon tax will be repealed no matter what the evangelicals do. Even if they crucified Jim Hansen to make him the new messiah, the tax is dead.
http://m.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbotts-business-adviser-says-australia-taken-hostage-by-climate-change-madness-20131231-303qw.html
Morgan Wright says:
December 31, 2013 at 1:14 am
Yes it does because temperature is linear. You double the heat you double the temperature. Yes, dude, believe me. It’s not logarithmic, it’s not exponential
>>>>>>
Check out the Stefan-Boltzmann Law.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/stefan.html
That’s nice. The stephan-boltzman law. That’s great. Since we are not talking about the temperature of the sun, and all other factors remain constant, and since the global warming fruitcakes gave us the number of 0.1% + or – from the sun, I’m going to run with earth receiving + or – 0.1% energy from the sun. That means the earth goes from an average of 300K to a variability of 299.7K to 300.3K. I’m going to run with that. The 0.6K is the gum in my mouth, teacher. Just try and tell me to spit it out.
You must convert the solar irradiance to temp using SB Law. It is non-linear.
(Sorry, I don’t make the Laws.)
If an infinite number of monkeys conduct an infinite number of global-climate-change model simulations, you can rest assured that the IPCC and the lap-dog press will be able to find a few that “show conclusively” that MAN IS AT FAULT FOR THE SIN OF USING ENERGY.
That’s all there is to it.
Now, neuter yourself and go sit in your cave
Whatever the temperature has done most recently is what it will keep doing until we all die! Panic!
This commercial-free comment brought to you by: Science! Science is doing things like sponser commercial-free comments.
NOAA’s got the Jack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3fP18gIoAY
And Big Balls.
http://youtu.be/nQSk0CYPvwE
Because Money Talks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmyzFsYEdco