Heads and Tails: Still thinking about Spring 2012

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 5:45 AM GMT en Junio 02, 2012

Share this Blog
13
+

Heads and Tails: Still thinking about Spring 2012

In March 2012 I planted potatoes in Colorado and it was 85 degrees F. A couple of weeks ago I put out some basil, and it frosted. As I said in the last blog, following the March heat wave I watched with interest the caster that has weather events and earthquakes on the WU homepage. There was a period of time when there were record highs and, a couple of hundred miles away, record lows.

In my blog Just Temperature, I highlighted several measures and displays of temperature information that made a consistent picture of a warming planet. If I count correctly, we are now at the 327th consecutive month that has been above the 20th century average. That average includes the 1930s, a notoriously warm decade, and it includes all of those warm months since 1985. So that average is by its definition, a high number compared with say, the 1800s. This march of warmer that average months is, by itself, pretty compelling.

In that blog, I also revisited the nice plot adapted from a 2009 paper by Jerry Meehl and a host of other authors. (Original Paper, Paper Discussion from NCAR ) It is reproduced here. This figure shows, for the U.S., the number of new record highs divided by the number of record lows – the ratio of highs to lows. In a simplistic, intuitive way, if the average temperature where staying the same, then one would expect the number of new record highs and the number of new record lows to be about the same. What is seen in the figure is as we go from the 1980s to the 1990s to the 2000s, there is trend of record highs out numbering record lows by a factor of 2 to 1.



Figure 1: Adapted from Meehl et al. (2009) the ratio of U.S. record highs and record lows by decade.

So let’s return to that WU caster information. I wondered about what sort of message I was getting from these little nuggets of information. If I picked a few days from the caster, I counted about as many highs and lows. The folks at Climate Central have developed and published a record temperature tracker. It packs in a lot of information. If you look at the daily maps, then you see the waves of warm records and cold records moving across the continent. I can see the hot days in March when I planted potatoes and the cold days in May when I planted basil. But if you take May as a whole, there were 3,188 daily high records compared with 421 daily lows. If I calculate my ratio, that is more than 7 times as many highs as lows. And that was for May, a month when my impression from the WU caster information and my basil it was relatively cool.

So what about March, when everyone knew it was hot? There were 7,755 records highs and 287 record lows, a ratio of more than 27. The temperature tracker also pulls together information about warm nights and cool days. For a variety of reasons warm nights are of special interest. From a climate scientist’s point of view, warm nights are often associated with the greenhouse effect, primarily due to water vapor and clouds. It doesn’t take a very thick cirrus cloud to maintain warm nighttime temperatures. Or, if it is simply high humidity, then it stays warm. So if the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is increasing because it is getting warmer, then the nighttime temperature should remain high. Therefore, we might expect a trend in increasing nighttime temperatures to be a robust measure of warming. This gets confusing, because it is the daily lows getting higher. If we look at the number of warmest nighttime low records in March 2012, the number was 7,517. There were only 603 records set for coolest daily high. (What does the extra water do about the daytime highs?)

We see here a very warm spring. It’s also been very dry, but I will leave that until a later. (I know I should write shorter, more frequent articles to maintain the excitement amongst my readers.)

The Climate Central record temperature tracker is based on data at the National Climatic Data Center. They keep a nice records table, which also has easy comparisons to last year. If you look at the ratio of January through May of records maximum to record minimums for 2011 and 2012, it shows what an extraordinary year we have had so far. This year the ratio of highs to lows is nearly 12 compared with 1.7 in 2011. The 2011 number is far more similar than 2012 to the information in Figure 1 - still a pretty strong imbalance between highs and lows.


So I want to end this blog with a party trick. We have had 327 months in a row above the average temperature of the 20th century. If we played the game that there was a 50% chance of each month being above (heads) or below (tails) average, we have now rolled heads 327 times in a row. How likely is that? I think that is one half raised to 327th power, which is about 1 chance in a number that is 1 with 98 zeros after it. That makes buying a mega lotto ticket look like a solid investment. We live in a extraordinary spring in an extraordinary times. After a rocky start, my potatoes look pretty good.

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 236 - 186

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5Blog Index

236. Neapolitan
9:50 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
As one of the forum's denialist types has been saying over and over; it's worse than we thought.

1) Scientists find huge hole in Chinese emissions data; China's carbon emissions could be nearly 20 per cent higher than previously thought according to a new report.

Fresh analysis of China's official data shows carbon emission figures for the nation and figures for the provinces between 1997 and 2010 do not match up... A team of scientists from China, the UK and the US studied both sets of data and found a gap of 1.4 billion tonnes, which is slightly more than Japan's annual emissions.

2) Scientists Uncover Evidence Of Impending Tipping Point For Earth

A prestigious group of scientists from around the world is warning that population growth, widespread destruction of natural ecosystems, and climate change may be driving Earth toward an irreversible change in the biosphere, a planet-wide tipping point that would have destructive consequences absent adequate preparation and mitigation.

“It really will be a new world, biologically, at that point,” warns Anthony Barnosky, professor of integrative biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and lead author of a review paper appearing in the June 7 issue of the journal Nature. “The data suggests that there will be a reduction in biodiversity and severe impacts on much of what we depend on to sustain our quality of life, including, for example, fisheries, agriculture, forest products and clean water. This could happen within just a few generations.”

The Nature paper, in which the scientists compare the biological impact of past incidences of global change with processes under way today and assess evidence for what the future holds, appears in an issue devoted to the environment in advance of the June 20-22 United Nations Rio+20 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.


3) Romney Energy Plan Includes Drilling ‘Virtually Every Part’ Of U.S., No Protections For National Parks

[Romney] talks about building nuclear plants, opening up virtually every part of U.S. land and waters to oil and gas drilling, exploiting coal and stripping the EPA of much of its authority, especially when it comes to regulating greenhouse gases... Asked whether any place would be off limits for oil drilling, campaign spokesman Andrea Saul said, “Governor Romney will permit drilling wherever it can be done safely, taking into account local concerns.”

(As if you needed yet another reason not to vote for him.)
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
235. BobWallace
8:47 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Here's something else that might play into "this ain't your daddy's Arctic melt".

Look at where the warmer North Atlantic Current water flows in the Arctic. If the ice is packed down in the Beaufort Gyre area then there might not be as much current-induced melting.





We're starting with a slight bit less volume than last year and we've melted off the late-freeze ice rapidly, but what we're left with is somewhat different than what I've seen before.
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
234. BobWallace
8:42 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting OldLeatherneck:


I agree with your assessment of what the next three years will probably bring. I'd even bet $20 or a few beers on that.

Question: I'm noticing that the 2012 ice data is fluctuating much more than in previous years. I'm assuming that is because the ice is thinner and broken making it more subject to the wind either expanding or contracting the total extent. Is that a correct assumption?


Probably the biggest reason to not get too involved with comparing this year's melt with previous years is how the ice formed this last winter.

Freezing was heavy on the western/North America side and very light on the eastern/Europe-Asia side.

That means, I think, that the ice is going to be differently affected by winds and currents.

For example, if I've got this straight, prevailing winds tend to send ice against northern Greenland and the Canadian Archipelago. This year the ice is already there.
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
233. OldLeatherneck
8:32 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
While I can certainly understand and respect your caution, I don't think it's going out on much of a limb to guess that 2012 will see new record minimums for Arctic sea ice area, extent, and volume.


I agree with your assessment of what the next three years will probably bring. I'd even bet $20 or a few beers on that.

Question: I'm noticing that the 2012 ice data is fluctuating much more than in previous years. I'm assuming that is because the ice is thinner and broken making it more subject to the wind either expanding or contracting the total extent. Is that a correct assumption?
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
232. BobWallace
8:14 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting NeapolitanFan:


In your hasty attempt to rebut my comment, you obviously didn't read it. I didn't write that papers in general didn't have cooling errors. According to your ideology, any paper demonstrating cooling would HAVE to be in error. I wrote that warmists' papers never have cooling errors. It's always exaggerated warming. Actually, if the data showed cooling, it would never see the light of day anyway. When the data show cooling, it is adjusted, manipulated, smoothed or just fabricated to show the opposite. The Australian warmist paper on which I commented showed another fraudulent hockey stick.



My "ideology" is empiricism. I believe that the best way to discover answers is via careful collection of data. Unfortunately that activity is done by humans and humans sometimes make mistakes.


Mistakes are made. Mistakes are corrected. Science goes along.


If temperature mistakes are only made on the "warming side", that's possible. When I've done research if my data was running counter to what was generally reported I checked my results and methodology very carefully, otherwise I might embarrass myself. If my results fit the norm I probably didn't recheck a fourth, fifth and sixth time. (I always double and triple checked.)

Someone in my lab ran a study whose results were so out of phase with current thinking that I reran the complete study myself to confirm her results prior to publication. No one likes to put themselves out on a limb which is easily sawed off.

If someone sends a paper in for publication and the results are out of the ordinary, it's pretty much guaranteed that the draft is going to get a very thorough review before it is printed.

-

It's also possible that there are people with an agenda (disproving climate change, for example) who are investigating studies which they don't like. And investigating them with a magnifying glass.

If that's the case, and there's no other group looking equally hard for "false cooling", then no one should be surprised that only problematic "warming" papers are discovered.

-

It's also very likely that there are almost no "cooling papers". One wouldn't expect any coming from a warming planet. Those that might appear are likely to be faulty and discovered prior to publication.

--

Now, when you make a statement such as " Actually, if the data showed cooling, it would never see the light of day anyway." you demonstrate that you do not know how science is conducted.

That claim is over the top ridiculous. Journals commonly carry articles which run counter to the common opinion. Sometimes those findings hold, sometimes they are shown to be faulty.

One of my publications was a study that proved faulty methodology in a published study which ran counter to common belief. The original study, a very minority holding, was published. Then it was disproved.

The original paper was published. It left others scratching their heads, if true it changed things. I spent a few months running the same study with a couple of tweaks. (Others did the same, got the same outcome as I did, I just beat them to publication.)

That's how science works.

--

Now here's the real problem with people like you.

You're ignorant.

You have no idea how much climate science there is. You think that by finding one faulty paper or a problem within a paper the field collapses.

No scientific consensus is built on a single paper, or even a handful of papers. Scientists are skeptics and it takes a lot of confirming data to form firm opinions.

-

Furthermore, you perpetuate lies. You and your ilk continue to say things like " another fraudulent hockey stick" and "no warming since 1998" when anyone who has paid any attention at all knows that Mann's hockey stick has been carefully investigated and confirmed and that 1998 was a one year temp spike caused by an abnormally hot El Nino, not some peak in global warming.


--

Now, let me ask you a question.

Why is it so important to you to avoid acknowledging that the planet is warming that you grasp for the slightest of straws?

You, and many other deniers, act as if they have made a bet with the devil for their soul. If the planet is warming then they are doomed to eternity in a place hotter than what the Earth will become if we don't turn this mess around.

What drives people like you?





Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
231. Neapolitan
8:12 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting OldLeatherneck:


You are correct, the peak insolation does occur on June 20th/21st. Thanks for the correction.

I will still wait until late July before making any predictions and/or guesses about what September mimimum will be.
While I can certainly understand and respect your caution, I don't think it's going out on much of a limb to guess that 2012 will see new record minimums for Arctic sea ice area, extent, and volume. (And with the impeding El Nino--and absent a major cooling factor such as a megavolcano eruption or an asteroid strike--I believe 2013 will beat 2012's records, and that 2014 will beat 2013's.) A graph of my own:

Click for larger image:

Ice
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
230. OldLeatherneck
7:36 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting LowerCal:
Were you thinking of the period of highest temperatures which would result in the peak calefaction?


You are correct, the peak insolation does occur on June 20th/21st. Thanks for the correction.

I will still wait until late July before making any predictions and/or guesses about what September mimimum will be.
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
229. LowerCal
7:17 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting OldLeatherneck:

I've taken the IARC-JAXA data for 2007, 2008 & 2011 (the Lowest Ice Extent Years) and plotted them against current ice extent levels for 2012. I've chosen to replot the data in 6 week increments to provide more granularity to the chart.

It would appear the 2012 is about 1 week ahead of 2007 & 2008 and approaching even with 2011.

Since peak insolation occurs between June 20th and July 20th, I won't even venture any predictions for this years ice-melt until after the 20th of July. At that time I will look to see how many days/weeks we are ahead or behind of previous years.



Citation: Pidwirny, M. (2006). "Earth-Sun Relationships and Insolation". Fundamentals of Physical Geography, 2nd Edition. 10 June 2012. http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6i. html

Peak insolation occurs on the June 20/21 solstice anywhere north of the tropics. Were you thinking of the period of highest temperatures which would result in the peak calefaction?
Member Since: Julio 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
228. NeapolitanFan
6:58 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting BobWallace:


If someone found a flaw and the paper was withdrawn, great! That's exactly how science should work.

Now, on what basis do you state that papers never make cooling errors? Did you just pull that statement out of your nether region or do you have some data?


In your hasty attempt to rebut my comment, you obviously didn't read it. I didn't write that papers in general didn't have cooling errors. According to your ideology, any paper demonstrating cooling would HAVE to be in error. I wrote that warmists' papers never have cooling errors. It's always exaggerated warming. Actually, if the data showed cooling, it would never see the light of day anyway. When the data show cooling, it is adjusted, manipulated, smoothed or just fabricated to show the opposite. The Australian warmist paper on which I commented showed another fraudulent hockey stick.
Member Since: Diciembre 10, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 303
227. OldLeatherneck
4:40 PM GMT en Junio 10, 2012


I've taken the IARC-JAXA data for 2007, 2008 & 2011 (the Lowest Ice Extent Years) and plotted them against current ice extent levels for 2012. I've chosen to replot the data in 6 week increments to provide more granularity to the chart.

It would appear the 2012 is about 1 week ahead of 2007 & 2008 and approaching even with 2011.

Since peak insolation occurs between June 20th and July 20th, I won't even venture any predictions for this years ice-melt until after the 20th of July. At that time I will look to see how many days/weeks we are ahead or behind of previous years.

EDIT:Peak Insolation occurs on June 20/21. Thanks to LowerCal for catching my error.
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
226. vanwx
2:49 AM GMT en Junio 10, 2012

Quoting NeapolitanFan:


The paper wasn't retracted until Steve McIntyre demonstrated obvious flaws, but you didn't address that. It's rather interesting that warmists' papers never have mistakes showing cooling, similar to grocery store price scanners never making an error in the favor of the consumer.
Wow! I didn't realise you were a Steve McIntyre fan. I thought he had been deleted. Is he on some untraceable grant from the Kochs now? It's good to see that they keep their zombies 'alive' however useless they are to science.Where is he working, which University did they buy? For all his native wit and excellent training, he does show the pathology of"Lord Muppet'.
Member Since: Febrero 6, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 126
225. BobWallace
2:45 AM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting NeapolitanFan:


The paper wasn't retracted until Steve McIntyre demonstrated obvious flaws, but you didn't address that. It's rather interesting that warmists' papers never have mistakes showing cooling, similar to grocery store price scanners never making an error in the favor of the consumer.


If someone found a flaw and the paper was withdrawn, great! That's exactly how science should work.

Now, on what basis do you state that papers never make cooling errors? Did you just pull that statement out of your nether region or do you have some data?
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
224. NeapolitanFan
12:30 AM GMT en Junio 10, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
Let's see:

1) Further research could have highlighted an error (an error in either direction, mind you);

2) Plagiarism may have been alleged, whether existing or not, and that needs to be cleared up before release;

3) A particular chart or graph may be incomplete, and/or may not accurately represent the data;

4) Incorrect or insufficient permissions for certain research or permissions may have been found;

5) It may be discovered that a referee has a possible undisclosed conflict of interest, and the publisher wants to clear that up before releasing the paper.

And so on.

See, Watts and Bastardi and the other bleating denialist sheep have automatically assumed that a) the paper was retracted and b) it was done so due to "falsehoods". But that's a pretty cynical POV; hundreds of papers are temporarily pulled aside each week for alterations, corrections, addenda, etc. Now, perhaps the paper in question was intentionally misleading. If so, the paper will be retracted in its entirety, and McIntyre won't have to sit around witch-hunting in numerous blog posts; it'll be widely announced just what happened and who was responsible. But since only a few percent of set-aside papers are ultimately retracted, it's sort of silly to jump to the conclusion that there's hanky-panky going on here. Again, I realize that's the default assumption of the conspiracy-minded denialist--but that doesn't make it anywhere near correct.


The paper wasn't retracted until Steve McIntyre demonstrated obvious flaws, but you didn't address that. It's rather interesting that warmists' papers never have mistakes showing cooling, similar to grocery store price scanners never making an error in the favor of the consumer.
Member Since: Diciembre 10, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 303
223. Neapolitan
11:13 PM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
Quoting NeapolitanFan:


If the paper were not without flaws or falsehoods, for what other reason would it be removed?
Let's see:

1) Further research could have highlighted an error (an error in either direction, mind you);

2) Plagiarism may have been alleged, whether existing or not, and that needs to be cleared up before release;

3) A particular chart or graph may be incomplete, and/or may not accurately represent the data;

4) Incorrect or insufficient permissions for certain research or permissions may have been found;

5) It may be discovered that a referee has a possible undisclosed conflict of interest, and the publisher wants to clear that up before releasing the paper.

And so on.

See, Watts and Bastardi and the other bleating denialist sheep have automatically assumed that a) the paper was retracted and b) it was done so due to "falsehoods". But that's a pretty cynical POV; hundreds of papers are temporarily pulled aside each week for alterations, corrections, addenda, etc. Now, perhaps the paper in question was intentionally misleading. If so, the paper will be retracted in its entirety, and McIntyre won't have to sit around witch-hunting in numerous blog posts; it'll be widely announced just what happened and who was responsible. But since only a few percent of set-aside papers are ultimately retracted, it's sort of silly to jump to the conclusion that there's hanky-panky going on here. Again, I realize that's the default assumption of the conspiracy-minded denialist--but that doesn't make it anywhere near correct.
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
222. NeapolitanFan
10:49 PM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
From Skeptical Science's Five Characteristics of Denial:

Conspiracy theories When the overwhelming body of scientific opinion believes something is true, the denialist won't admit scientists have independently studied the evidence to reach the same conclusion. Instead, they claim scientists are engaged in a complex and secretive conspiracy.

Assuming that a paper either retracted for technical purposes or simply moved has been "disappeared" for nefarious purposes falls distinctly into this category. No, rather than ascribe a general scientific and/or editorial reason for the paper's move/removal, McIntyre and the WUWT sheep start bleating, "Conspiracy! Conspiracy! Conspiracy!"

Silly denialists...


If the paper were not without flaws or falsehoods, for what other reason would it be removed? Silly warmists. Ignoring logic as usual.
Member Since: Diciembre 10, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 303
221. Neapolitan
8:38 PM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
Quoting NeapolitanFan:
Wonder why this warmist paper disappeared from the face of the Earth:

Link
From Skeptical Science's Five Characteristics of Denial:

Conspiracy theories When the overwhelming body of scientific opinion believes something is true, the denialist won't admit scientists have independently studied the evidence to reach the same conclusion. Instead, they claim scientists are engaged in a complex and secretive conspiracy.

Assuming that a paper either retracted for technical purposes or simply moved has been "disappeared" for nefarious purposes falls distinctly into this category. No, rather than ascribe a general scientific and/or editorial reason for the paper's move/removal, McIntyre and the WUWT sheep start bleating, "Conspiracy! Conspiracy! Conspiracy!"

Silly denialists...
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
220. BobWallace
7:35 PM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
Quoting NeapolitanFan:
Wonder why this warmist paper disappeared from the face of the Earth:

Link


Could be that it was found to be faulty.

That sort of thing happens in science. When factual errors are found papers are set aside.

Unlike deniers who continue to make the same disproved claims over and over and over.

--

Did you pay any attention to the particles travelling faster than the speed of light? Got retested, found to be an equipment error. Claim pulled back.

Science is self-correcting.

Believers tend to keep on believing even when proved wrong.

Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
219. OldLeatherneck
7:28 PM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
Quoting NeapolitanFan:
Wonder why this warmist paper disappeared from the face of the Earth:

Link


I don't know what happened to it either. I checked in the backyard, the garage, my workshop and under the bed.

I'll keep looking for it. Stop back in a few weeks, I'll let you know if I found it!!
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
218. NeapolitanFan
6:36 PM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
Wonder why this warmist paper disappeared from the face of the Earth:

Link
Member Since: Diciembre 10, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 303
217. BobWallace
3:23 PM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
It's looking interesting/worrisome in the Arctic. After the late freeze season "recovery" the rate of melting is high.

There's now speculation that the Northeast Passage (along northern Europe and Asia) will open early. There are already areas of open water showing.

Over ice flights have found areas of very thin ice.

There is open water in several places above the 80th latitude which could lead to an ice free North Pole.

Not saying that it's going to continue to look this bleak, weather could take things in a different direction. But, if things continue along this route several records are going to be broken 'up there'.

--

The remaining ice in the Bering Sea we were discussing? It's looking like a floating island of slush. There's one very small amount of firmer ice tucked back in a bay, but the rest looks to be toast.

--

We're watching geological history being made at superfast speed.
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
216. cyclonebuster
11:59 AM GMT en Junio 09, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
I'll just say this: it's humorous when a cherry-picker cherry-picks to form the basis of an accusation that someone else is cherry-picking.


No need to worry we have them about about 10:1 in the Cherry Picking category if we want to...........
Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
215. BobWallace
10:51 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting JupiterKen:
179. OldLeatherneck 7:58 PM EDT on June 07, 2012 +6
Quoting JupiterKen:
And then there is this...
Link

Please don't bore us with inconsequential reports where the education and/or affiliation of the authors is not referenced. You're silly article did not include any footnoted references to credible scientific publications, universities, or governmental research organizations. For all I know your article was written by a couple of high school chenistry students who at least had the decency to use spellcheck.
------------------
Gee, Mr. Leatherneck. I guess you didn't read any of the science being discussed in the link but in the off chance that you did, what in particular do you disagree with. Maybe you could add to the post's comments with your ideas on the matter.


Ken, there's a factual error in the discussion you linked. Would you please identify it for us?

Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
214. OldLeatherneck
10:37 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
I'll just say this: it's humorous when a cherry-picker cherry-picks to form the basis of an accusation that someone else is cherry-picking.


It's hard enough to sort through the credible data, from credible scientific sources, and decide which ones are the ones to read, digest and share. Like you, I don't have the time or patience to read every document recommended by posers unless I believe they are serious about learning the facts. I look at dealing with fools on the blogs like I felt about dealing with young recruits in the Marine Corps. Some juvenile behavior is expected and can be tolerated on a limited basis. However, once a certain line is crossed......it's over. I'll bend over backwards to educate and inform the unaware. I'll briefly tolerate the ignorant that show some willingness to learn. For the rest I choose to bless and let them go, rather than treat them the way I would have 40 years ago, in a another time and another place.
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
213. Neapolitan
9:31 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting JupiterKen:
Oh noes...

Link

it really is worse than y'all thought.
I'll just say this: it's humorous when a cherry-picker cherry-picks to form the basis of an accusation that someone else is cherry-picking.
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
212. Neapolitan
9:28 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting JupiterKen:

Gee, Mr. Leatherneck. I guess you didn't read any of the science being discussed in the link but in the off chance that you did, what in particular do you disagree with. Maybe you could add to the post's comments with your ideas on the matter.
I'll answer in part, Ken. Here's the one single sentence that caught my eye that is all it took for me to realize that the article was just more rewarmed denialist blather:

Basically, the IPCC has got it completely wrong in that they fail to realise that...

Statements of such arrogance really have no place in science--and that's if they were true. This one certainly isn't that. See, IPCC reports aren't drawn up by a couple of crackpot scientists sitting around making stuff up; they're based on the distilled findings of hundreds of earth scientists who've published thousands of peer-reviewed papers drawn from hundreds of thousands of hours of painstaking research. It's beyond ludicrous for one non-published crank to announce on an obscure website, "Those other scientists are all idiots, I tell you! It is I alone who possesses the One True Answer!"

Seriously: reading it's a waste of time.
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
211. JupiterKen
9:24 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Oh noes...

Link

it really is worse than y'all thought.
Member Since: Mayo 3, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 306
210. JupiterKen
9:19 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
179. OldLeatherneck 7:58 PM EDT on June 07, 2012 +6
Quoting JupiterKen:
And then there is this...
Link

Please don't bore us with inconsequential reports where the education and/or affiliation of the authors is not referenced. You're silly article did not include any footnoted references to credible scientific publications, universities, or governmental research organizations. For all I know your article was written by a couple of high school chenistry students who at least had the decency to use spellcheck.
------------------
Gee, Mr. Leatherneck. I guess you didn't read any of the science being discussed in the link but in the off chance that you did, what in particular do you disagree with. Maybe you could add to the post's comments with your ideas on the matter.
Member Since: Mayo 3, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 306
209. OldLeatherneck
7:45 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Drought Worries Beginning To Mount

Some early indications show that despite improvements in areas hit by drought last year in the U.S., there is plenty of room for worry. Starting in May, USDA issues a weekly report that evaluates pasture and range conditions on a five-point scale: excellent, to good, fair, poor and very poor. The report is published as part of the crop conditions report for other crops. The latest update showed that, for the week ending June 3, 46% of pastureland and ranges in the U.S. were in good or excellent condition. This compares to 53% good/excellent conditions last year. The 10-year average condition for this time of year also is around 53%.




Americans typically don't worry about things until they begin to hit home. If this summer results in a drought as bad or worse than in 2011, then maybe they will begin to link their financial losses to AGW.....Just maybe.

Link
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
208. Neapolitan
7:37 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
We've talked a few times of the coming El Nino. Among their many other effects, El Ninos, of course, generally mean more nasty winter-type weather for the US East Coast--the "Snowmageddon" kinds of things that really make people sit up and take notice.

Adding to those El Nino-inspired events, however, we'll likely also see some major extreme winter weather brought on by the increasingly open Arctic Sea. An article on Science Daily discusses a paper published in Oceanography:

A warmer Earth increases the melting of sea ice during summer, exposing darker ocean water to incoming sunlight. This causes increased absorption of solar radiation and excess summertime heating of the ocean -- further accelerating the ice melt. The excess heat is released to the atmosphere, especially during the autumn, decreasing the temperature and atmospheric pressure gradients between the Arctic and middle latitudes.

A diminished latitudinal pressure gradient is associated with a weakening of the winds associated with the polar vortex and jet stream. Since the polar vortex normally retains the cold Arctic air masses up above the Arctic Circle, its weakening allows the cold air to invade lower latitudes.

The recent observations present a new twist to the Arctic Oscillation -- a natural pattern of climate variability in the Northern Hemisphere. Before humans began warming the planet, the Arctic's climate system naturally oscillated between conditions favorable and those unfavorable for invasions of cold Arctic air.

"What's happening now is that we are changing the climate system, especially in the Arctic, and that's increasing the odds for the negative AO conditions that favor cold air invasions and severe winter weather outbreaks," Greene said. "It's something to think about given our recent history."

This past winter, an extended cold snap descended on central and Eastern Europe in mid-January, with temperatures approaching minus 22 degrees Fahrenheit and snowdrifts reaching rooftops. And there were the record snowstorms fresh in the memories of residents from several eastern U.S. cities, such as Washington, New York and Philadelphia, as well as many other parts of the Eastern Seaboard during the previous two years.


IOW, what happened in Europe in February in February will likely happen in many other places with increasing frequency and severity. That means, of course, that braying simpletons such as Bastardi and Monckton and Watts and everyone on Fox will fill the airwaves with ignorance-based shouts of "What global warming?" with every snow storm or record low temperature. Just remember the explanation given here, as you're sure to be asked to repeat it several hundred times...

Sigh...
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
207. biff4ugo
7:11 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Wow Bob and Neo,

Dr. Masters used the same graphs you have been passing around here. Cool!

I am sorry the climate conservatives don't hang around like they used to. I don't think they realize most of us WANT to be proven wrong.

But they have to PROVE it and not just reference discredited sources, hand wringers, and wishful thinking.
Member Since: Diciembre 28, 2006 Posts: 115 Comments: 1579
206. Some1Has2BtheRookie
6:42 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting BobWallace:
Is that not what we are doing here?

Sorry, wasn't aiming that comment at you. Just reflecting on all the mad-max/survivalist stuff one runs into.


LOL, Bob. No problems here. I understand your sense of urgency much more than you realize. I have little reason to doubt that some tipping points have already been reached and other tipping points are fast approaching. The clock's pendulum is still swinging and the time rapidly approaches that the climate's pendulum shifts beyond our control.

You have provided the best method for testing the AGWT! Perfect, as a matter of fact! All we need to do is to significantly lower the atmospheric CO2 levels and watch what happens to the climate afterwards. Should the temps continue to rise after the CO2 levels have drastically dropped, then we will know it is not us causing this warming. Should those that are skeptical or deny the AGWT really want to test the theory, then they should be quick to jump on board with this. Let us test the theory starting today! Excellent!
Member Since: Agosto 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4745
205. Neapolitan
6:40 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting OldLeatherneck:
Drought ravages Brazil's northeast


Da Rocha doesn't have the luxury of simply deliberating the theoretical scenarios of access to water. He is living it. And so are millions of other Brazilians right now: the northeast of this country is suffering through the worst drought in four decades. More than 900 municipalities have declared a state of emergency.

In Piaui, half of the 224 municipalities have declared a drought emergency. Animals are dying. Corn and bean crops wilted away weeks ago, with no hope of coming back this season. Manioc seedlings planted this harvest died before they could even grow.


Link
That's Brazil's third major drought in five years, and the worst one so far. Now we can just sit back and see how accurate are the predictions that see a quickening downward spiral in the Amazon: deforestation and overall warming leads to drought, which kills more trees and leads to more burning, which disrupts climate patterns around the globe, which leads to more warming and more drought...
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558
204. BobWallace
6:02 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Is that not what we are doing here?

Sorry, wasn't aiming that comment at you. Just reflecting on all the mad-max/survivalist stuff one runs into.
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
203. BobWallace
6:00 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


As a rookie, I am not sure how to verify any weather related event as being due to a climatic change or not. My way of thinking tells me that we need to look at is the probabilities of any such event occurring. Would a weather event be as probable without also factoring in a climatic change as well for the frequency, intensity and duration of any such weather event? Should the answer be no, then climate change must be considered as a contributing factor to the weather event. Any weather event that would fall within the normal probabilities could be considered as a natural occurrence of weather related events. This would be my simplistic view on this. I hope that someone else will have a more definitive answer for us. ... Knock, knock. Professor Rood? Are you here?


I think the best we can hope for is a demonstration of increased frequency/strength.

We can show, have shown, via basic physics that more heat in the system will increase extreme weather.

Lacking any other explanation (magic weather amplifying unicorn), what is consistent with known facts wins out over "random".

It's the same problem faced with 'greenhouse gases cause global warming'. We can prove it in the lab but until we do the real world experiment and reverse the CO2 variable we can't prove it at an experimental level in the natural world.

--

(Could we please get going with that study? You know, reduce the amount of CO2 we release and see if global temps start coming down and if the weather mellows out?)
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
202. Some1Has2BtheRookie
5:46 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting BobWallace:


We need a international agency creating extreme weather graphs. Was the European heat wave that killed 50,000 just a fluke or part of a pattern?

Our antennas are tuned to the extreme. We need to be careful to not cherry-pick. My inclination is to attribute this drought to climate change, but I want objective verification.



As a rookie, I am not sure how to verify any weather related event as being due to a climatic change or not. My way of thinking tells me that we need to look at is the probabilities of any such event occurring. Would a weather event be as probable without also factoring in a climatic change as well for the frequency, intensity and duration of any such weather event? Should the answer be no, then climate change must be considered as a contributing factor to the weather event. Any weather event that would fall within the normal probabilities could be considered as a natural occurrence of weather related events. This would be my simplistic view on this. I hope that someone else will have a more definitive answer for us. ... Knock, knock. Professor Rood? Are you here?
Member Since: Agosto 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4745
201. BobWallace
5:11 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting OldLeatherneck:
Drought ravages Brazil's northeast


Da Rocha doesn't have the luxury of simply deliberating the theoretical scenarios of access to water. He is living it. And so are millions of other Brazilians right now: the northeast of this country is suffering through the worst drought in four decades. More than 900 municipalities have declared a state of emergency.

In Piaui, half of the 224 municipalities have declared a drought emergency. Animals are dying. Corn and bean crops wilted away weeks ago, with no hope of coming back this season. Manioc seedlings planted this harvest died before they could even grow.


Link


We need a international agency creating extreme weather graphs. Was the European heat wave that killed 50,000 just a fluke or part of a pattern?

Our antennas are tuned to the extreme. We need to be careful to not cherry-pick. My inclination is to attribute this drought to climate change, but I want objective verification.

Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
200. Some1Has2BtheRookie
5:05 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting BobWallace:
The question is, who will draw the lines? The land barons, or all that protect the land barons?

Like any other power structure, who is the smartest, strongest and luckiest. In some enclaves (if we get to that) it will be Bill Gates. In other enclaves it will be one of the security guards Bill Gates hired.

But all of that is meaningless for us. If it gets that bad it's very unlikely we'll get included, so why waste time worrying about Bill/Not Bill?

If we've got energy to burn, how about putting it toward preventing 'the big breakdown'?


Is that not what we are doing here? An example of how even great wealth may not save you from coming events could be viewed as an eye opener to those that would think they can just buy their way out of any bad situation. Sometimes, yes. Sometimes, no. Every time and in every circumstance, definitely a no. Wealth will always be a determining factor in as to how much you can distance yourself from a bad situation. What I question is what will be considered "wealth" in the future? When one considers this question then one may be willing to spend more money now to help assure that they will still have more money in the future. When you also think about it, it is not the poor that are able to finance the changes that need to be made now. The only ones that can do that is the ones with the wealth now. Long term thinking can bring much more wealth to the future than will short term profits for now.
Member Since: Agosto 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4745
199. OldLeatherneck
5:02 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Drought ravages Brazil's northeast


Da Rocha doesn't have the luxury of simply deliberating the theoretical scenarios of access to water. He is living it. And so are millions of other Brazilians right now: the northeast of this country is suffering through the worst drought in four decades. More than 900 municipalities have declared a state of emergency.

In Piaui, half of the 224 municipalities have declared a drought emergency. Animals are dying. Corn and bean crops wilted away weeks ago, with no hope of coming back this season. Manioc seedlings planted this harvest died before they could even grow.


Link
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
198. cyclonebuster
5:00 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting BobWallace:


Let me post this again. This is the global temperature record once you take out the 'noise' of solar cycles, El Nino/La Nina, and volcanic effects.





Apparent lack of warming is created by a combination of a low solar cycle and a La Nina event. Now the Sun is heating up (which should have only a small effect) and the cooling Nina is being replaced by the warming Nino (which will bring a lot of stored heat to the surface).

If things go along those lines and we don't get cooled off by a volcano, meteorite strike or nuclear war we will experience higher temperatures. It won't be fun, but perhaps those high temperatures and the first summer meltout of the Arctic will motivate people to get to work.


The CURE for the the ROOT CAUSE should motivate them.. Don't you think???

Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
197. BobWallace
4:36 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
The question is, who will draw the lines? The land barons, or all that protect the land barons?

Like any other power structure, who is the smartest, strongest and luckiest. In some enclaves (if we get to that) it will be Bill Gates. In other enclaves it will be one of the security guards Bill Gates hired.

But all of that is meaningless for us. If it gets that bad it's very unlikely we'll get included, so why waste time worrying about Bill/Not Bill?

If we've got energy to burn, how about putting it toward preventing 'the big breakdown'?
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
196. BobWallace
4:30 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Experience tells me that we almost always respond after the disaster has struck.

I think (but can't prove) that the disaster is striking.

Look at the increase in extreme weather events in the US. I think we see the same on a global graph.



I don't think people wait until the boat is sunk before starting to bail. The real danger is that they might not start bailing fast enough once their feet get wet.

Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
195. Some1Has2BtheRookie
4:25 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting OldLeatherneck:


The rich are just "Dancing to the Precipice". Actually, that is a title of a book which was about how the upper-class in France was living in splendor right up until the beginning of the French Revolution. My wife's an amateur historian with extensive knowledge of that period of French history. She has often commented about how the current activities, in the U.S., of the ultra-wealthy are paralleling those of the French elite prior to the revolution. I fear that the future won't be pretty, with resource wars, water wars, agricultural losses and forced migrations due to the impacts of climate change.


Yes, indeed. That was the point I was leading up to. Money will be of little concern when survival is dependent on other means. I admire those that have gained great wealth. I just wonder how that wealth will help them in the future. A good water well may become far more valuable than money itself. ... I will have to read that book. The future will be interesting, if nothing else.
Member Since: Agosto 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4745
194. OldLeatherneck
4:11 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:
On a side topic, there have been discussions of how the wealthy will purchase the best lands, stock pile non perishable food items and secure the best people to protect their lands. When money becomes less important, what stops those that were hired to protect the lands from eliminating the land barons and just keeping the lands for themselves? When you think about it, will the land barons feed and protect the protectors' families as well? The protectors' spouses are not going to allow their side of the family (the dreaded in-laws) to go unprotected while the other side of the family gets protection. And what of the extended family members as well? Sooner or later, a line will have to be drawn. The question is, who will draw the lines? The land barons, or all that protect the land barons?


The rich are just "Dancing to the Precipice". Actually, that is a title of a book which was about how the upper-class in France was living in splendor right up until the beginning of the French Revolution. My wife's an amateur historian with extensive knowledge of that period of French history. She has often commented about how the current activities, in the U.S., of the ultra-wealthy are paralleling those of the French elite prior to the revolution. I fear that the future won't be pretty, with resource wars, water wars, agricultural losses and forced migrations due to the impacts of climate change.
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
193. Some1Has2BtheRookie
3:31 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting BobWallace:


Let me post this again. This is the global temperature record once you take out the 'noise' of solar cycles, El Nino/La Nina, and volcanic effects.





Apparent lack of warming is created by a combination of a low solar cycle and a La Nina event. Now the Sun is heating up (which should have only a small effect) and the cooling Nina is being replaced by the warming Nino (which will bring a lot of stored heat to the surface).

If things go along those lines and we don't get cooled off by a volcano, meteorite strike or nuclear war we will experience higher temperatures. It won't be fun, but perhaps those high temperatures and the first summer meltout of the Arctic will motivate people to get to work.


I hope you are correct, Bob. Experience tells me that we almost always respond after the disaster has struck. We are reactive more than we are proactive. Like the old saying goes, you cannot put the cat back into the bag once you let it out. Still, I do hold strong hope that a brush with near disaster will be the motivation needed to try to correct the problem. I just do not see it happening when politics and the quest for money stand in the way. I have seen surveys were a majority of people say they prefer a shorter life with wealth as opposed to a longer life without wealth. Let us see just how far they are willing to hold on to that line of thought. The sad truth is, being non reactive now only creates more cost later. Ultimately, you end up with a shorter life and with less money. Go figure.

A philosophical debate on a hypothetical situation:

On a side topic, there have been discussions of how the wealthy will purchase the best lands, stock pile non perishable food items and secure the best people to protect their lands. When money becomes less important, what stops those that were hired to protect the lands from eliminating the land barons and just keeping the lands for themselves? When you think about it, will the land barons feed and protect the protectors' families as well? The protectors' spouses are not going to allow their side of the family (the dreaded in-laws) to go unprotected while the other side of the family gets protection. And what of the extended family members as well? Sooner or later, a line will have to be drawn. The question is, who will draw the lines? The land barons, or all that protect the land barons?
Member Since: Agosto 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4745
192. BobWallace
2:50 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting Some1Has2BtheRookie:


"We conclude that the [apparent] slowdown of warming is likely to prove illusory, with more rapid warming appearing over the next few years." - This is what I have been suggesting will happen. I am a rookie and even I know that a returning El Nino will only exasperate the warming trend. The stronger the El Nino, the more the warming will become apparent. Couple that with a simultaneous increase in solar activity and you can fry eggs on a Wisconsin sidewalk. My untrained mind senses that more tipping points will be reached sooner rather later. I am beginning to see a race to our finish. My only question is, who will drop the flag? (NASCAR speak)


Let me post this again. This is the global temperature record once you take out the 'noise' of solar cycles, El Nino/La Nina, and volcanic effects.





Apparent lack of warming is created by a combination of a low solar cycle and a La Nina event. Now the Sun is heating up (which should have only a small effect) and the cooling Nina is being replaced by the warming Nino (which will bring a lot of stored heat to the surface).

If things go along those lines and we don't get cooled off by a volcano, meteorite strike or nuclear war we will experience higher temperatures. It won't be fun, but perhaps those high temperatures and the first summer meltout of the Arctic will motivate people to get to work.
Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
191. BobWallace
2:38 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Comment #185 - Annual Global Temperature Anomalies graph


That low 1992 red bar - the one time an El Nino did not produce a "cooker" year...

In June 1991, the second largest volcanic eruption of the twentieth century* took place on the island of Luzon in the Philippines, a mere 90 kilometers (55 miles) northwest of the capital city Manila. Up to 800 people were killed and 100,000 became homeless following the Mount Pinatubo eruption, which climaxed with nine hours of eruption on June 15, 1991. On June 15, millions of tons of sulfur dioxide were discharged into the atmosphere, resulting in a decrease in the temperature worldwide over the next few years.

Link

IIRC that eruption blocked about 10% of the incoming sunlight/heat.

Member Since: Febrero 22, 2011 Posts: 0 Comments: 1344
190. Some1Has2BtheRookie
2:00 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
Yesterday in Masters' forum, I posted that the CPC is now predicting a 50% chance of an El Nino in the second half of this year. What I didn't make note of in that comment was that when we do move into an El Nino, things are going to really start cooking:

Hot

Also, the sun--which has been at a near-record minimum for several years--is now ramping up the wattage, and that's not going to help at all:

Sol

NASA summarizes the situation thusly:

We conclude that the [apparent] slowdown of warming is likely to prove illusory, with more rapid warming appearing over the next few years.

Bottom line: it's going to be very warm over the next few years. 2013 should be a record, and 2014 may top it. And so on. But I can wager good money right now that denialists will claim, "Well, it's just El Nino. And poorly-sited thermometers. And a global socialist conspiracy. And Al Gore. And, besides, it snowed yesterday in Alaska. And when the next La Nina comes in 2015 or whenever, the globe will cool down and that's when the next ice age will start."


"We conclude that the [apparent] slowdown of warming is likely to prove illusory, with more rapid warming appearing over the next few years." - This is what I have been suggesting will happen. I am a rookie and even I know that a returning El Nino will only exasperate the warming trend. The stronger the El Nino, the more the warming will become apparent. Couple that with a simultaneous increase in solar activity and you can fry eggs on a Wisconsin sidewalk. My untrained mind senses that more tipping points will be reached sooner rather later. I am beginning to see a race to our finish. My only question is, who will drop the flag? (NASCAR speak)
Member Since: Agosto 24, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 4745
189. cyclonebuster
12:58 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting biff4ugo:
Look at the Barents Sea, not the Bearing Sea. That is what a trend looks like.

thanks for that link to all the cool regional graphs Bob! It is much easier to see the regional variation that way.


Barents Sea is in worse shape than the Bering Sea..

Take a look. What sticks out to you when viewing the graphs?




Member Since: Enero 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
188. biff4ugo
12:52 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Look at the Barents Sea, not the Bearing Sea. That is what a trend looks like.

thanks for that link to all the cool regional graphs Bob! It is much easier to see the regional variation that way.
Member Since: Diciembre 28, 2006 Posts: 115 Comments: 1579
187. OldLeatherneck
12:42 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting Neapolitan:
Bottom line: it's going to be very warm over the next few years. 2013 should be a record, and 2014 may top it. And so on. But I can wager good money right now that denialists will claim, "Well, it's just El Nino. And poorly-sited thermometers. And a global socialist conspiracy. And Al Gore. And, besides, it snowed yesterday in Alaska. And when the next La Nina comes in 2015 or whenever, the globe will cool down and that's when the next ice age will start."


That is certainly cheering news. 2011 gave us record heatwaves and drought in Texas, Oklahoma and other states. 2012 has seen record high temps outpacing record lows by at least 12:1. Now we are learning that 2013 and 2014 will be even hotter. Yikes!
Member Since: Mayo 2, 2012 Posts: 0 Comments: 180
186. Neapolitan
12:15 PM GMT en Junio 08, 2012
Quoting Xandra:
Very good news!

Dr Peter Gleick has been reinstated as president of the Pacific Institute. Welcome back Dr Gleick!

June 6, 2012

PACIFIC INSTITUTE BOARD OF DIRECTORS STATEMENT
I brought that up in comment #146--and, yes, it's excellent news. And, frankly, to be expected; that purported "fake" memo he leaked was far too close to things the lying manipulators at Heartland say to possibly be anything but genuine.
Member Since: Noviembre 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13558

Viewing: 236 - 186

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.

Local Weather

Mostly Cloudy
52 ° F
Muy nublado