Dr. Ricky Rood's Climate Change Blog |
|
| Posted by: Dr. Ricky Rood, 7:10 AM GMT en Febrero 21, 2012 | +11 |
| Permalink | A A A |
|
I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles include ideas from the course. And no tuition!
|
Tropical Blogs
Tropical Weather Stickers®
 |
50 ° F
Nublado
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Consiga widgets de meteorología gratuitos Weather Stickers® |
 |
Cargue sus fotos |
 |
Clima API para los desarrolladores NEW! |
 |
Convertirse en miembro del sitio |
 |
Encuéntrenos en Facebook |
 |
Síganos en Twitter |
| Copyright © 2013 Weather Underground, Inc. | Acerca de nosotros - Contacto - Ayuda - Empleo - Comunicados de prensa - Condiciones del servicio - Privacy Statement |
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 — Blog Index
If Soros is funding Heartland, I may have to rethink all that paranoid gibberish about Soros trying to destroy America.
You can get all the responses you want. Some may even respond that CO2 gives Coca-Cola its flavor and others may say that it is not a gas at all. They may say that it is just a clump of molecules. This does not change the Laws of Physics!
Slashdot.org Link
PDF of Notice
"451 degrees Fahrenheit is the temperature at which paper ignites"
I don't brake for trolls !
Perhaps,so!!!
Big Asteroid 2011 AG5 Could Pose Threat to Earth in 2040
Link
Link
One blogger stated the winners are known for their truth, honesty, ethics and even-handed moderation. I see your response is the usual name-calling.
Link
"Honesty"?
"Ethics"?
"Even-handed moderation"?
I'm not sure who this "blogger" was, but I suggest he not use such words, since he clearly has no idea what they mean.
Say, a question for you:
I'm still unhappy with Gleick going about things the way he did. But I think history will smile kindly upon him, and mankind will eventually come around to appreciate the truth he exposed more that they chastise him for the deed he performed.
Your post just made me think of it Clark. I just can't resist :)
It is simply not true that it is equal, I mean that it is not true that both sides are funded equally and out for profit.
There may be exceptions: I am sure that some, at least, of the bloggers on this site really believe that the dangers of global warming have been exagerrated. I don't think they work for big oil, even though they believe a lot fo big oil's publicity, they are doing it with an honest heart.
But more to the point, the people who are against oil pollution may include a few who have a vested interest or just irrationally hate anything corporate/big/etc.. - but most of the people who are fighting global warming are doing so because they care about the earth and see the results of pollution and the problems of a big oil economy and/or are tired of America performing fellatio at the oil pump to countries against us.
Link
I'll check back in when (if) Lindzen comes up with a new line. In the meantime, I award him the seal:
The very first sentence - "I wish to thank the Campaign to Repeal the Climate Change Act for the
opportunity to present my views on the issue of climate change – or as it was once referred to: global warming." - The emphasis is mine.
Read page 4 of the PDF file. Lindzen does not dispute the facts, concerning climate change, but does offer his own views beyond that.
Would you like see my views? I can save them as a PDF file and link to it. I suggest that you and Lindzen take a closer look at Venus for an atmosphere that has run amok due to greenhouse gases.
?!?!?!?
Studies of the how and why Venus is what it is have been published since the mid to late 60s and the effect is shown to fully depend on an entirely adiabatic lapse rate (not moist).
Nothing like Earth, nor is it remotely possible for Earth to get there.
WUWT?! Goddard?!
Show us those peer-reviewed scientific papers that support your "adiabatic lapse rate" theory.
Ok,
http://atmos.nmsu.edu/education_and_outreach/ency clopedia/adiabatic_lapse_rate.htm
or as a pre.......
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520- 0469%281970%290270219%3ATALRIT2.0.CO%3B2
Your point?
Mandated :)
Just in case some can't figure out how to use my posts. Play the tune, click the link, and then read and listen simultaneously... It's all good,,,, Just sayin,>
will prove your statement as true!!! No uncertainty about it!
"In A Formula for Economic Calamity, by David H. Freedman, David Colander of Middlebury College asserts that climate models often have no terms to account for the effects of clouds. This is not true."
I do not understand your 2 one word questions. Rephrase, please?
As to published works on the subject (not my theory), here are 30 of them:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=venus gree nhouse adiabatic&num=30&btnG=Search Scholar&as_epq =&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_public ation=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdt f=&as_sdts=44&hl=en
No, I'll not re-read some (and read for the first time, right now) for you.
Surprised that some of the other folks in here, regardless of leanings haven't commented by now. They know Venus' atmospheric conditions are unattainable here, no matter what. In spite of other stated opinions to the contrary, I guess they are fine with allowing impossible hand waving as long as it generates alarm. One reason I haven't been here much and probably will not stick around for long.
Also, could you please post some peer-reviewed blog droppings to support otherwise? (Sorry, sarcasm is certainly one of my faults.)
Yep, that J. Atmo Sci. article is one I had in mind. Not a new discovery, published in 1970. I think that was one I read in my physical climatology course. We had a fair bit of baseline climatological work in that class that we tended to use conditions such as insolation, lapse rate, etc. to figure out expected climates on other planets (sans greenhouse effects, was a sophomore course). Was certainly interesting.
Link
i would love to be wrong about global warming. I root for the ice to recover and to find out i am a fool.
But nothing you have shown gives any reason to be happy. A few articles, some of dubious nature, aren't changing my mind.
Look at all the indicators, the big global macrovariables: ice, water temps, etc. then read Dr Roods post again.
If we are all wrong, big deal. If you are wrong, we are all dead.
We're all dead? Give me a break. Another typical alarmist statement. Many scientists believe that a small amount of global temperature increase could be very beneficial for the planet even if it isn't occurring. Cooling temperatures would have have a much greater harmful effect on the planet, and that is probably what's in store for the future with the decrease in solar activity. It's the sun....
Those are the things that are included in those textbooks.
Sensing a little hostility here. Take a deep breath and think pleasant thoughts Mr Wilson.
I knew that if I came in here and started posting relevant info concerning claims as absurd as the notion that Earth's atmosphere could conceivably resemble that of Venus based on CO2, alone, that someone would soon (un?)contribute an attacking, snide response. And that with nothing else to contribute.
I wondered whom would plus a snide response to what was an honest attempt to review some of the science (not even the primary science) of AGW and, thus, be exposed for pretending that they are here for anything but preaching.
Now we know. At least Some1, Neap, and Xandra did. They must favor asininity. True colors? Y'all should be embarrassed, but I know you're not.
Once upon a time, everyone in these blogs would have minussed any post containing such attitude. And, like then, I'll not return the serve, just point and laugh.
Uhh...yes they do
Really? Please do be specific. Which paper do you think best supports Atmo's thesis and why?
Well, I enjoyed reading your comments, atmo. I miss seeing your comments here at wu. Sad to see you treated in this fashion when you came here to comment today.
(Add: Some of) Your back-up singers do bother me, as they have come here before, mostly at Masters' blog, not to make a scientific statement but to deride this entire blogging community - undeservedly. For them I have no sympathy.
Hope life's treating you well, man.
Now this is worth evaluation. Take a peek at the communication. What do you actually see that tends to purvey the root posters alternates? LOL
You people spend too much time on character assassination as opposed to logical persuasion.
Ya know, we are all on the same side in the end!
I guess that is just the way it is.
Sad really.......
Sorry, but this perpetually failed "sales pitch" is just SPAM and does not belong !\
Do you like SPAM?
Gnight>>>>
TED Talk Link
Interesting talk about why our current "consumer economy" is unsustainable.
Simple fact - it would take 1.5 earths to sustain it.
Paul is the author of "The Great Disruption: Why the Climate Crisis Will
Bring On the End of Shopping and the Birth of a New World".
The title of his book is both sobering & optimistic at the same time.
I don't brake for trolls !
What really happened was a respected member of our community made a post and in a show of respect other members plussed his comment. Although this may be a foreign idea, you don't have to agree with, or even like, what someone has to say, it is possible to just like the way it is written.
As far as minusing your comments. Did it ever occur to you that it's not what you say, but how you say it that could be the cause of other's disdain?
And as far as your last statement, you're right. The bunker is the best place for us. A place where you can voice your opinion, ask questions, and learn, while at the same time having fun, without the fear of ridicule or condescension.
Viewing: 151 - 201
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 — Blog Index