tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post2771502265495023847..comments2024-03-19T07:10:27.303-07:00Comments on Quark Soup by David Appell: Feptic Falsehoods About "Global Warming"David Appellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-29603582806150913462013-03-21T15:40:41.470-07:002013-03-21T15:40:41.470-07:00I like feptics.
How about fceptics or fkeptics (p...I like feptics.<br /><br />How about fceptics or fkeptics (pron. feptics)?. With the old "s" written like "f".<br /><br />fkeptics also has a nice sense of what you really think of them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-90905297172129795822013-03-21T15:29:17.913-07:002013-03-21T15:29:17.913-07:00Mike: Santer's paper isn't a "rule&qu...Mike: Santer's paper isn't a "rule" -- or do you now consider the outputs of climate models to be natural law? (I doubt it.)David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-70260390379793419842013-03-19T12:09:47.745-07:002013-03-19T12:09:47.745-07:00"Skeptical Science has a much longer deconstr..."Skeptical Science has a much longer deconstruction of this interview, which, based on its first sentence, you should not waste your valuable time reading."<br /><br />Tr: "I can't refute anything else so I'll just wave my hand like Dogbert and say 'Bah!' "Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-79864515309675267482013-03-19T07:20:07.788-07:002013-03-19T07:20:07.788-07:00Don't forget that the rate of warming at the s...<i>Don't forget that the rate of warming at the start of the 20th century was the same as at the end of it...</i><br /><br />Over what specific period in what temperature record are you alleging this to be true, Mike? When I compare the trend in HADCRUT4 for the first 20 years of the 20th century and the last 20 years of the 20th century, suffice it to say they don't match your description. Nor do they if I compare the first and last 15 years. Ditto if I compare 1890-1910 with 1990-2010- not only do the trends not match they don't even have the same sign. Switching to GISTEMP doesn't seem to help your case.<br /><br /><i>Natural forces were at work, warming the oceans, melting the glaciers, and making sea level rise. Those forces work long term and are still at work right now. It's an indicator of how detached from reality you people have become that you so readily dismiss the obvious answers to the mild and welcome warming we have experienced over the last 160 years.</i><br /><br />Natural forces? Could you be a little bit more specific? Actually, if they're so obvious, why not be a lot more specific?<br /><br /><i>If nothing else occurs, then this cycle of negative PDO is the perfect test for the AGW hypothesis. If you believe that the oceans are the planet's thermostat then the period of 2007-2030 (roughly speaking) should show a temperature plateau, just like the 1940-1976 period. </i><br /><br />To be clear, you do believe the oceans are the planet's thermostat and that 2007-2030 should show a temperature plateau, right?Jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18246316232020910459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-91677544779523885212013-03-19T07:09:47.224-07:002013-03-19T07:09:47.224-07:00Mike: Average solar irradiance increased signifant...Mike: Average solar irradiance increased signifantly in the first half of the 20th century, by about 0.6 W/m2, but hasn't changed at all since about 1950 (averaged over a solar cycle): <br />http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/tsi_data/TSI_TIM_Reconstruction.txt<br />David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-2373387978628894002013-03-19T05:22:25.616-07:002013-03-19T05:22:25.616-07:00Who knows when a volcanic eruption will occur agai...Who knows when a volcanic eruption will occur again? I just know that it happens often enough. I don't want to see it happen during a La Niña. The Pacific warm water pool is recharged during La Niñas. Volcanic activity can interfere with that process. It contributed greatly to the Little Ice Age. Ask Michael Mann. <br />If nothing else occurs, then this cycle of negative PDO is the perfect test for the AGW hypothesis. If you believe that the oceans are the planet's thermostat then the period of 2007-2030 (roughly speaking) should show a temperature plateau, just like the 1940-1976 period. <br />Don't forget that the rate of warming at the start of the 20th century was the same as at the end of it and could not have been caused by co2. Natural forces were at work, warming the oceans, melting the glaciers, and making sea level rise. Those forces work long term and are still at work right now. It's an indicator of how detached from reality you people have become that you so readily dismiss the obvious answers to the mild and welcome warming we have experienced over the last 160 years.Mike Manganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13416235741182138217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-80674609839794267212013-03-19T04:13:26.119-07:002013-03-19T04:13:26.119-07:00Mike Mangan,
Certainly, the failed models haven&#...Mike Mangan,<br /><br />Certainly, the failed models haven't got any predictions right, but then the clue's in the name really. I know hindsight is 20/20 but I can't help feeling someone really should have stepped in on this trillion dollar failed model development program. That's bureaucracy for you I guess.<br /><br />Luckily, some bright sparks have taken it upon themselves to develop totally successful models (TSMs for short) as a complement to the standard failed models (FMs). Call me a risk-taker but I'm siding with the TSMs on this one.Paul Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15275182941476518621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-92200670452164135162013-03-18T19:34:25.395-07:002013-03-18T19:34:25.395-07:00@Mike Mangan
Since you apparently believe that El...@Mike Mangan<br /><br />Since you apparently believe that El Nino causes higher global atmospheric temperatures (congratulations on being somewhat in touch with reality), some numbers for you:<br /><br />Average ONI 1950-2012 = 0.01<br />Average ONI 1997-2012 = -0.10<br />Average ONI 1997-2004 = 0.02<br />Average ONI 2005-2012 = -0.21<br />Average ONI 2007-2012 = -0.32<br />Average ONI 2010-2012 = -0.37<br /><br />Seems like after close to neutral conditions early in the last 16 years, the years since 2005 have been more and more dominated by negative ONI values. Which do you think is likely to happen first, reversion of ONI to something close to the long run average or your "inevitable stratospheric volcanic eruption"?<br />Jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18246316232020910459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-71932241444715504452013-03-18T13:53:32.759-07:002013-03-18T13:53:32.759-07:00You're entirely dependent at this point on ano...You're entirely dependent at this point on another super El Niño happening before the inevitable stratospheric volcanic eruption. Not an enviable position to be in and certainly not what any of the failed models predicted. You're also about to bump up against Santer's 17 year rule.Mike Manganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13416235741182138217noreply@blogger.com