1. What is the second derivative of all of these trends?
A. Zero
B. It’s complicated
2. If the West Antarctic Ice Sheet collapsed and raised sea level 5 meters, the 5 meter rise would be seen at how many ocean tide gauges?
A. All of them
B. It’s complicated
3. If sea level rise was affected by the hockey stick as climate experts claim, the graph for Manhattan would look like :
A. The blue line below
B. The red line below
C. It’s complicated
It’s complicated…because they can’t come up with enough excuses.
Let me help them .. Hint: It’s complicated.
.
.
/sarc (some need this, I’m telling ya …)
.
If I get the answers right, does that mean I am a dummy?
1A, 2A, 3B.
I don’t know Steven, but it seems to me the warmista are just fine if they don’t try to explain anything or predict anything, because they don’t seem to understand anything. In other words, if they would just keep their weird little fetish about Man-Made CO2 to themselves, they might do ok.
Sea level rise? Just something else they have no clue about.
Ding ding ding …. we have a winner
IMO Not without
peerpier review.You guys laugh, but can you imagine navigating through a left-leaning life, where common sense was abolished, and science, was just an opinion? Scary! No wonder they are afraid of everything!
1) A
2) A
3) B
What is the second order derivative of GISS or USHCN temperature adjustments vs. time?
A) zero
B) a positive nonzero number
C) Whatever the hell feels good at the moment.
Tell me again who’s paying.
The answer to 3 is broken cue stick. You take a cue stick, break it, and glue it back together crooked at 1992 as they did in National Pseudographic
http://www.hyzercreek.com/NatGeoSeaLevel.jpg.jpeg
Broken cue stick, worse than a hockey stick.
Morgan Wright said at 6:20 am
http://www.hyzercreek.com/NatGeoSeaLevel.jpg.jpeg
I hadn’t realized that National Geographic was that ridiculous.
Here it is on line:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/09/rising-seas/sea-level-chart
The answer to the first question is…….
http://youtu.be/BKorP55Aqvg
Looks and sounds like a typical leftie government political meeting.
^^ This ^^ ; what drives engineers crazy … marketing types and ‘product managers’ who don’t see or understand reality …
AMEN!
This is why I <3 Dilbert. Nevertheless, as bad as 'marketing types' and 'product managers' are, the absolute worst in my opinion are leftist lawyer politicians, followed by leftist trial lawyers.
What’s a second derivative????
The rate of change of the slope = d2x/dx2
A positive value tells you that sea level rise is accelerating. A negative value tells you that sea level rise is decelerating. Zero means no change.
Velocity is the first derivative of distance with respect to time, acceleration is the second derivative, or how velocity changes over time. It is calculus so a lot of people would say “it’s complicated.”
It gets more amusing once you get past the second derivative of position with respect to time. The third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth derivatives are named (respectively) — jerk, snap, crackle, pop, lock, and drop. (The fourth derivative is sometimes called “jounce” instead of “snap”.)
Conversely, the negative derivatives (i.e., the time integrals of position) for first, second, third, fourth and fifth integrals are named — absition, absity, abseleration, abserk, and absounce.
I am guessing that these terms will not be coming up in any trivia games…
🙂
Jason,
Cool – I had heard of jerk especially with regard to machinery design and kinematics but the others are new to me. See, always learning something new at Real Science!
Want to bet on the trivia game? 😉
Thanks. I just did the math. I never learned the names.
I also learned the math, though 3rd order derivatives and integration were as ‘deep’ as we got. Did the engineers do the naming or the mathematicians?
Democrats especially.