Climate and Weather

[Bruddah IZ]

1. 7. At the Ivanpah Solar Plant in California, federal biologists estimate that this number of birds are killed every year in what are called daily fireworks displays of "streamers."
   Scored 1 of the 1 point
   
   1. 6,000Your answer
   2. 3,000
   3. 500
   4. 1,000

 

[espola]

1. 7. At the Ivanpah Solar Plant in California, federal biologists estimate that this number of birds are killed every year in what are called daily fireworks displays of "streamers."
   Scored 1 of the 1 point
   1. 6,000Your answer
   2. 3,000
   3. 500
   4. 1,000

"We have had zero bird fatalities since we implemented this solution in January, despite being in the standby position as well as flux on the receiver for most days since then,” he said. “This change appears to have fully corrected the problem.”​

https://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/16/one-weird-trick-prevents-bird-deaths-solar-towers/

 

[Wez]

"We have had zero bird fatalities since we implemented this solution in January, despite being in the standby position as well as flux on the receiver for most days since then,” he said. “This change appears to have fully corrected the problem.”​

https://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/16/one-weird-trick-prevents-bird-deaths-solar-towers/

Don't confuse him with facts, he's busy playing imaginary gotcha.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

Don't confuse him with facts, he's busy playing imaginary gotcha.

The authors of the article are paid by the alt energy industry.

 

[Lion Eyes]

Spoken like a true ideologue pretending to know science.

Spoken like a pompous buffoon thinking you know better...
You want to exchange insults Wez?
I'm your Huckleberry....
There is nothing ideologue-ish below.
The earth HAS been warmer and it has been cooler...FACT (Say dinosaurs)
Climate is cyclical...FACT (Say ice age)

 

[Wez]

You want to exchange insults Wez?
I'm your Huckleberry....

That's what you do when cornered Lion, you lash out with Ad Hominem.

I don't pretend to know Science, I listen to people who do know it, unlike the wannabe scientists here who think they know the 1st thing about AGW.

Next we'll get a comment about it's hot in Summer and it's cold in the Winter...

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

Anyone who refers to that link has not done any homework.

Skeptical science (the site) is not bad; the content and commentary contains some real scientific discussion. From the other "side" it is maybe best balanced by WUWT, which also has some valid discussion of real data. Both are infinitely better than "no tricks". But perusing the climate blogosphere is not homework. It is just ACC candy. Homework would be along the lines of-there's about a 10°C annual average temperature difference between Big Bear and J-Tree. That considerably greater than, for example, the estimated 5-6°C increase in global average temperature associated with the superplume events that temporally correlate (give or take several million years) with the Permian-Triassic mass extinction events. Given such extreme regional variability, how does one monitor and compute changes in mean global temperature? Along the way it may start making sense as to why the handle part of the hockey stick started to flatten out compared to the version you posted earlier.

 

[espola]

That's what you do when cornered Lion, you lash out with Ad Hominem.

I don't pretend to know Science, I listen to people who do know it, unlike the wannabe scientists here who think they know the 1st thing about AGW.

Next we'll get a comment about it's hot in Summer and it's cold in the Winter...

That's been done already.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

We are able to control what we release into our Atmosphere.

Yes we can. To Hawaii and back.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

There is no question that there is disagreement, and debate on the theory of AGW.

True, but sites like "no tricks" are antithetical to that debate. Self styled guerillas misrepresenting papers so they can compile bogus lists to impress their online sycophants is intellectually dishonest and gets everybody else nowhere. For example, following the response tracking back to a comment tracking back to a paper and the paper feels the need to specifically state that they are not trying to make claims one way or another about AGW. Why might the authors feel compelled to add a statement like that?

 

[Bruddah IZ]

True, but sites like "no tricks" are antithetical to that debate. Self styled guerillas misrepresenting papers so they can compile bogus lists to impress their online sycophants is intellectually dishonest and gets everybody else nowhere. For example, following the response tracking back to a comment tracking back to a paper and the paper feels the need to specifically state that they are not trying to make claims one way or another about AGW. Why might the authors feel compelled to add a statement like that?

EG21 what do you think the U.S. should be doing that it isn't already doing? And I don't mean the U.S. government, which is funding both unreliable and reliable energy sources.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

That's been done already.

Glad that summer and winter is settled science.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

Correlation is not causation.

Most correlations are empirical and allow one to fish out relationships between variables in a predictive way. They point at trends, not at mechanism. Consider the correlation shown below. Even in light of a current understanding of limited stem cell proliferative potential, telomere erosion, etc., a mechanistic understanding of why more life leads to more death escapes us. Yet the correlation appears inescapably strong. But here's a question for you. Would you consider the modeling methodologies that characterizes climatology today fundamentally reductionist or holistic in approach?

 

[Bruddah IZ]

Most correlations are empirical and allow one to fish out relationships between variables in a predictive way. They point at trends, not at mechanism. Consider the correlation shown below. Even in light of a current understanding of limited stem cell proliferative potential, telomere erosion, etc., a mechanistic understanding of why more life leads to more death escapes us. Yet the correlation appears inescapably strong. But here's a question for you. Would you consider the modeling methodologies that characterizes climatology today fundamentally reductionist or holistic in approach?

View attachment 156

Depends. I'm not a big fan of the binary approach.

 

[Lion Eyes]

That's what you do when cornered Lion, you lash out with Ad Hominem.

I don't pretend to know Science, I listen to people who do know it, unlike the wannabe scientists here who think they know the 1st thing about AGW.

Next we'll get a comment about it's hot in Summer and it's cold in the Winter...

"The earth has been warmer, much warmer and the earth has been cooler.
It will continue to cool and warm as it has for millions of years"... Lion Eyes
Spoken like a true ideologue pretending to know science. Wez

You think that is cornered? Muahahahaha...pinhead. True ideologue? Geezzuss.
I respond in kind to your insults ya poodle dick. Again I'm your Huckleberry Wez.
So you don't know science and apparently history is also a mystery?

Let's get you started so you don't appear so stupidly childlike...
"The idea that Global Warming is a natural cycle is well understood from paleo data covering the past 1 million years. Is there a difference between current climate, and the natural cycle? For the past million years the natural climate has oscillated between warm periods and ice ages. This shifting in and out of warm periods and ice ages is correlated strongly with Milankovitch cycles.
Read up
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/natural-cycle

 

[Wez]

I respond in kind to your insults ya poodle dick. Again I'm your Huckleberry Wez.

The funny thing is you think typing poodle dick gets you over on someone. Should we just start cut and pasting insults? Rise above Lion, stop resorting to Ad Hominem, it's shows weakness.

 

[espola]

"The earth has been warmer, much warmer and the earth has been cooler.
It will continue to cool and warm as it has for millions of years"... Lion Eyes
Spoken like a true ideologue pretending to know science. Wez

You think that is cornered? Muahahahaha...pinhead. True ideologue? Geezzuss.
I respond in kind to your insults ya poodle dick. Again I'm your Huckleberry Wez.
So you don't know science and apparently history is also a mystery?

Let's get you started so you don't appear so stupidly childlike...
"The idea that Global Warming is a natural cycle is well understood from paleo data covering the past 1 million years. Is there a difference between current climate, and the natural cycle? For the past million years the natural climate has oscillated between warm periods and ice ages. This shifting in and out of warm periods and ice ages is correlated strongly with Milankovitch cycles.
Read up
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/natural-cycle

Near the end of your suggested article --

This following image shows the last 800,000 years of temperature and forcing levels. Essentially, we have largely departed the climate forcing from the natural cycle.

 

[Wez]

Let's get you started so you don't appear so stupidly childlike...
"The idea that Global Warming is a natural cycle is well understood from paleo data covering the past 1 million years. Is there a difference between current climate, and the natural cycle? For the past million years the natural climate has oscillated between warm periods and ice ages. This shifting in and out of warm periods and ice ages is correlated strongly with Milankovitch cycles.
Read up
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/natural-cycle

So you're back to rejecting AGW as a possibility and digging your heels in on rejection of what actual scientist are saying?

 

[Wez]

Near the end of your suggested article --

This following image shows the last 800,000 years of temperature and forcing levels. Essentially, we have largely departed the climate forcing from the natural cycle.

That was quick. Tends to happen when an ideologue tries to be a scientist.

 

[Bernie Sanders]

Near the end of your suggested article --

This following image shows the last 800,000 years of temperature and forcing levels. Essentially, we have largely departed the climate forcing from the natural cycle.

Presumptions are made. Some may eventually be proved correct.
Im encouraged at your willingness to look at some climate perspective.
This scale on the left is beautiful, and shows a more representative slice of climate history. The scale on the right is where some educated, but unproven assumptions creep in.
At this point, I look at the left scale as reality, and the right, as unproven hypothesis.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

Near the end of your suggested article --

This following image shows the last 800,000 years of temperature and forcing levels. Essentially, we have largely departed the climate forcing from the natural cycle.

Its interesting the graph tracks back to James Hansen's 2008 "Where should humanity aim for target CO2" article. The ~25X expansion of the X-axis to the right of the 0 point is eye catching. That's a fast oscillation.