On the 7th anniversary of the first London tube bombings, references to Enoch Powell’s speech seem appropriate. However, these pictures are of the pitch black Poudre River, which is full of black carbon from the High Park fire.
Video quality sucks – new phone – haven’t figured out how to use it yet.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm0JKAY1yCI]
Jason Samenow of the Washington Post is my choice to head up the Department of Stupid Statistics. Here are some suggestions.
Statistics that must never be used are things like :
Most importantly – pick only very isolated one shot statistics to support the non-existent trend you are trying to prove.
Every once in a while a comment deserves to be highlighted for being exceptionally clueless.
If you build a train track across a strike slip fault, like the San Andreas or Hayward faults, and an earthquake occurs along the fault – the train track will no longer be contiguous. The train will fly off the track at 200 miles an hour, killing everyone within a mile or two.
Look what happened to this fence in the 1906 earthquake.
Lawmakers in California approved billions of dollars Friday in construction financing for the initial segment of the nation’s first dedicated high-speed rail line connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco. The move marked a major political victory for Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown and the Obama administration, which have promoted bullet trains as job generators and clean transportation alternatives. The bill authorizes the state to begin selling $4.5 billion in voter-approved bonds that includes $2.6 billion to build an initial 130-mile stretch of the high-speed rail line in the Central Valley.
California is bankrupt, so they are going to spend billions of dollars building a useless train line. If you want to get from the Bay Area to LA, you hop on a Southwest Airlines flight in San Jose, Oakland or San Francisco and you are in LA an hour later. It is cheap, easy and fast. Why would anyone want to take a high speed train which takes three times as long, goes a couple hundred miles out of the way through the Central Valley, and crosses the Hayward fault and the San Andreas fault?
Laurel is in between Baltimore and Washington, close to where I spent the winter in Columbia. During the 1930s, they averaged 7.8 days per year over 95 degrees. By contrast, since the year 2000 they have only averaged 5.7 days per year over 95 degrees.
U.S. Historical Climatology Network
All but three of their thirty hottest days occurred below 350 ppm CO2.
Jason Samenow at the Washington Post came up with all kinds of meaningless statistics to prove global warming in DC, but he hid the only ones which really matter.
This is what the press corps(e) is hysterical about.
Heavy rains swamp burn area | The Coloradoan | coloradoan.com
A few days ago, Bill McKibben was trying to resurrect the Dust Bowl
Then the eastern half of the US turned cool and wet.
Another sad day for alarmists, who are always hoping for misery and death.
It is all Bush’s fault. It has nothing to do with Obama being incompetent.
I was riding my bike over to Whole Foods down a flooded bike trail earlier, when I had a Eureka moment. (Something about water seems to stimulate those.) I realized that is possible to empirically disprove global warming theory.
Venus has a fixed lapse rate of about 8ºK/km through its troposphere, which is similar to Earth – despite very different atmospheric chemistry. This in itself is strong evidence that temperature is not closely tied to atmospheric composition, but is not the basis of this proof.
Venus Atmosphere Temperature and Pressure Profiles
The atmosphere of Venus is about 95% CO2, and at 1 bar pressure (50km elevation) the greenhouse effect is weak – because there is little water vapor. Note that the absorption bands of CO2 are very narrow compared to H2O, which means that Venus has a weak greenhouse effect at one bar pressure.
Radiative Physics – Yes CO2 Does Create Warming « the Air Vent
However, the pressure at the surface of Venus is almost 100 bars, and that does something to the CO2. The absorption bands broaden and occupy much more of the LW spectrum. What this means is that the greenhouse effect on Venus is much stronger near the surface than it is at 50km.
If the greenhouse effect controlled the temperature profile of the Venusian atmosphere, we would necessarily have to see a greater lapse rate closer to the surface – where the greenhouse effect is stronger. This is because the increased resistance to radiative heat transfer closer to the surface, would create a larger temperature gradient. But we don’t see that – the lapse rate is fixed throughout Venus’ troposphere . This means that the temperature profile of Venus troposphere is not controlled by the greenhouse effect. There is no way to get around this argument.
Conclusion : Even a huge increase in the greenhouse effect as we approach the surface of Venus, has no impact on the lapse rate. Observations on Venus demonstrate that increasing the greenhouse effect even by a large amount, has little impact on the temperature profile of a convective atmosphere. i.e. greenhouse gas driven global warming theory simply does not work in a convective atmosphere.
David Appell told me that I would get a Nobel Prize if I could disprove global warming. I expect him to nominate me.
BTW – here are some pixs I took on my flooded bike ride in Fort Collins this evening. The air here smells like drowned campfire.
