Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 ... 15, 16, 17 Next
Bill Sloman
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 2:03 pm
On Jan 8, 1:30 am, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 23:55:18 +0000, Raveninghorde
raveninghorde_at_invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:25:25 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
SNIP
.
Cold kills:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/weather/article6979830.ece
I've seen serious estimates that suggest that in the US and Europe,
cool snaps kill about four times as many people as heat waves.
But you can't actually cite any such estimate.
One estimate of winter deaths here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/06/winter-kills-excess-deaths-in-t...
/quote
108,500 Deaths in the US in 2008; 36,700 in England and Wales Last
Winter; 5,600 in Canada (2006); 7,000 in Australia (1997-2006
Average); Thousands in Other Developed Countries
/end quote
SNIP
Sloman apparently doesn't know how to google.
You were putting forward the claim; I was pointing out that you didn't
seem to have been able to google up any decent support for your claim.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
John Larkin
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 4:26 pm
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:02:50 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman_at_ieee.org> wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 8, 1:32 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:25:39 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:53 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:12:35 -0500, Bitrex
bit...@de.lete.earthlink.net> wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
No damn way!
It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder. They are
forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest cold
spells on record with another cold front headed this way.
I made 3 three-point shots while playing basketball today out of the 4 I
attempted. With a three point shot percentage of 75% I am therefore the
greatest basketball player who ever lived.
One should use care in making global conclusions using only local data
points.
Well, the alarmists weren't shy about blaming every storm, beach
erosion, hot spell, change in butterfly population, or the weigh of a
herd of sheep on Global Warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8445613.stm
John
Not to worry, we're still doomed:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9495864
Another Ice Age would be "just a blip in the long-term heating trend."
I think you are letting your over-fertile imagination run away here.
Just keep extending the definition of "weather" and "climate" as suits
your political needs.
The way you do? You and James Arthur do seem enthusiastic about
confusing weather models (which are susceptible to the butterfly
effect) and climate models (which are deliberately onstructed so that
they aren't).
The only way to construct a climate simulation that isn't chaotic is
to get it entirely wrong.
John
John Larkin
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:37 pm
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:28:47 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman_at_ieee.org> wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 8, 4:26 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:02:50 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Jan 8, 1:32 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:25:39 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:53 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:12:35 -0500, Bitrex
bit...@de.lete.earthlink.net> wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
No damn way!
It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder. They are
forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest cold
spells on record with another cold front headed this way.
I made 3 three-point shots while playing basketball today out of the 4 I
attempted. With a three point shot percentage of 75% I am therefore the
greatest basketball player who ever lived.
One should use care in making global conclusions using only local data
points.
Well, the alarmists weren't shy about blaming every storm, beach
erosion, hot spell, change in butterfly population, or the weigh of a
herd of sheep on Global Warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8445613.stm
John
Not to worry, we're still doomed:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9495864
Another Ice Age would be "just a blip in the long-term heating trend."
I think you are letting your over-fertile imagination run away here.
Just keep extending the definition of "weather" and "climate" as suits
your political needs.
The way you do? You and James Arthur do seem enthusiastic about
confusing weather models (which are susceptible to the butterfly
effect) and climate models (which are deliberately onstructed so that
they aren't).
The only way to construct a climate simulation that isn't chaotic is
to get it entirely wrong.
In your ever-so-expert opinion.
I simulate and design dynamic systems for a living, and sometimes for
fun too. You don't earn a living, and apparently don't have fun.
John
Bill Sloman
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:19 pm
On Jan 8, 1:13 pm, Hammy <s...@spam.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:15:32 +0800, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:
There are a LOT of intellignet thinking peiople who disagree with that
view. You may have made up your mind, but the jury really is still
out when it comes to the doom and destruction bit.
though Exxon-Mobil and like-minded
organisations who make money out of digging up fossil carbon and
selling it as fuel do see a financial advantage in persuading gullible
idiots like you that the scientific case is less than robust.
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/exxon_report.pdf
According to the "intelligent people" as you put it we should all be
dead now anyways. Remember how the rain forest was being harvested at
1000's of hectares a day or minute?
Frankly, no. See if you can construct a more convincing strw man.
Quote:
The catastrophe all the geniuses said would happen funny we are all
still here. I guess all these "intelligent people "milked the rain
forest cash cow and are now sucking on the climate change tit.
Which predicted catastrophe are you referring to? Is it one you just
invented, or can you point out a reference to this "prediction"?
Quote:
Oh lets not forget the latest media fad 1000's dead millions ill with
H1N1 you must get vaccinated take these vitamins etc…… Did this
actually materialise anywhere near what all the hype? What did happen
is a bunch of people got rich by manipulating the press and
politicians so I guess these are the "Intelligent people " your
speaking of.
The last H1N1 virus was the Spanish flu, and this particular example
did kill a few people in exactly the same way - happily not as many as
in 1918 and 1919.
Predicting the virulence of a virus in advance is even trickier than
predicting the speed and severity of anthropogenic global warming;
your failure to grasp the nature of either kind of warning is
depressing.
Quote:
Exxon and other oil giants have the most to gain from the climate
paranoia it drives the price of their product up.
It might drive up the price, but it needs to drive down the turnover.
Exxon-Mobil is lying in the hope of being able to keep on selling huge
quantities of fossil carbon for a few years more.
Quote:
It always comes down
to dollars and cents.
Or euros or renminbi, if you want a currency which can still buy
something.
Quote:
Oh and the climate change hero Al Gore he's not doing to bad
financially either. There is always a lot of sheep to fleece.
And you seem to be one of them.
Quote:
Do you maybe see a pattern developing?
You've been visiting denialist web-sites?
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Bill Sloman
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:27 pm
On Jan 8, 1:04 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde_at_invalid> wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 03:46:22 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Jan 8, 12:55 am, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde_at_invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:25:25 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
SNIP
.
Cold kills:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/weather/article6979830.ece
I've seen serious estimates that suggest that in the US and Europe,
cool snaps kill about four times as many people as heat waves.
But you can't actually cite any such estimate.
One estimate of winter deaths here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/06/winter-kills-excess-deaths-in-t....
/quote
108,500 Deaths in the US in 2008; 36,700 in England and Wales Last
Winter; 5,600 in Canada (2006); 7,000 in Australia (1997-2006
Average); Thousands in Other Developed Countries
/end quote
As you'd expect from a denialist web-site, they don't mention that hot
summers also generate excess deaths, and haven't cited any numbers
from tropical countries where excess deaths peak in summer, rather
than winter - human beings did evolve in tropical Africa, and rarely
run into excessive heat in temperate countries, though it does happen
from time to time
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_European_heat_wave
Once again you are proving yourself an inumerate idiot.
Ravinghorde fails joined up logic again.
Quote:
Since the article is dealing with excess winter deaths normal summers
are accounted for.
Normal summer don't seem to produce excess deaths in temperate
countries. Abnormally warm summers do.
Quote:
As for your wiki article 14802 people died on France due to the summer
heatwave of 2003. The figure in the article for France for excess
winter deaths is 24938 on average. So a simple sum shows that a hot
summer killed 10,000 fewer people than an average winter in France.
In a temperate country.
Quote:
As far as the tropics are concerned this seems to be a red herring
from an alarmist perspective. I thought the normal claim was that
anthropogenic global warming would have much more impact on the non
tropics compared to the tropics. But hey AGW explains everything
including the common cold.
Anthropogenic global warming is expected to have more impact at the
poles than at the equator, but summer in tropical countries will get
warmer and generate even more excess deaths than they do at the
moment, while as you get further from the equator, the winters will
become milder and the summers warmer, decreasing the excess deaths in
winter and making excess deaths in summer more likely.
As I said, you can't do joined-up logic.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Bill Sloman
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:28 pm
On Jan 8, 4:26 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:02:50 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Jan 8, 1:32 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:25:39 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:53 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:12:35 -0500, Bitrex
bit...@de.lete.earthlink.net> wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
No damn way!
It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder. They are
forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest cold
spells on record with another cold front headed this way.
I made 3 three-point shots while playing basketball today out of the 4 I
attempted. With a three point shot percentage of 75% I am therefore the
greatest basketball player who ever lived.
One should use care in making global conclusions using only local data
points.
Well, the alarmists weren't shy about blaming every storm, beach
erosion, hot spell, change in butterfly population, or the weigh of a
herd of sheep on Global Warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8445613.stm
John
Not to worry, we're still doomed:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9495864
Another Ice Age would be "just a blip in the long-term heating trend."
I think you are letting your over-fertile imagination run away here.
Just keep extending the definition of "weather" and "climate" as suits
your political needs.
The way you do? You and James Arthur do seem enthusiastic about
confusing weather models (which are susceptible to the butterfly
effect) and climate models (which are deliberately onstructed so that
they aren't).
The only way to construct a climate simulation that isn't chaotic is
to get it entirely wrong.
In your ever-so-expert opinion.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Raveninghorde
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:25 pm
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:27:15 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman_at_ieee.org> wrote:
SNIP
Quote:
Cold kills:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/weather/article6979830.ece
I've seen serious estimates that suggest that in the US and Europe,
cool snaps kill about four times as many people as heat waves.
But you can't actually cite any such estimate.
One estimate of winter deaths here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/06/winter-kills-excess-deaths-in-t...
/quote
108,500 Deaths in the US in 2008; 36,700 in England and Wales Last
Winter; 5,600 in Canada (2006); 7,000 in Australia (1997-2006
Average); Thousands in Other Developed Countries
/end quote
As you'd expect from a denialist web-site, they don't mention that hot
summers also generate excess deaths, and haven't cited any numbers
from tropical countries where excess deaths peak in summer, rather
than winter - human beings did evolve in tropical Africa, and rarely
run into excessive heat in temperate countries, though it does happen
from time to time
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_European_heat_wave
Once again you are proving yourself an inumerate idiot.
Ravinghorde fails joined up logic again.
Since the article is dealing with excess winter deaths normal summers
are accounted for.
Normal summer don't seem to produce excess deaths in temperate
countries. Abnormally warm summers do.
Tilting at windmills here. I didn't disagree with this point.
Quote:
As for your wiki article 14802 people died on France due to the summer
heatwave of 2003. The figure in the article for France for excess
winter deaths is 24938 on average. So a simple sum shows that a hot
summer killed 10,000 fewer people than an average winter in France.
In a temperate country.
You are the one who tried to use France, a temperate country, as a
counter to the proposal that cold kills and as I demonstrated you were
an inumerate idiot and wrong.
Quote:
As far as the tropics are concerned this seems to be a red herring
from an alarmist perspective. I thought the normal claim was that
anthropogenic global warming would have much more impact on the non
tropics compared to the tropics. But hey AGW explains everything
including the common cold.
Anthropogenic global warming is expected to have more impact at the
poles than at the equator, but summer in tropical countries will get
warmer and generate even more excess deaths than they do at the
moment, while as you get further from the equator, the winters will
become milder and the summers warmer, decreasing the excess deaths in
winter and making excess deaths in summer more likely.
Do you have any facts? Or is this the normal there is no evidence so
Bill is wright argument you so love?
Quote:
As I said, you can't do joined-up logic.
Hammy
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 9:08 pm
Bill Sloman said
Quote:
Predicting the virulence of a virus in advance is even trickier than
predicting the speed and severity of anthropogenic global warming;
your failure to grasp the nature of either kind of warning is
depressing.
So you admit that extreme climate change based on human behaviour
could be wrong?
Quote:
Which predicted catastrophe are you referring to? Is it one you just
invented, or can you point out a reference to this "prediction"?
Did you live in a cave in the late 80's early 90's ?
You don't recall being bombarded with massive ad campaigns to stop
deforestation in the Amazon. Western governments putting pressure on
the rain forest governments to curb land development.
There were scientist back then who said this could lead to climate
change.
Quote:
It might drive up the price, but it needs to drive down the turnover.
Exxon-Mobil is lying in the hope of being able to keep on selling huge
quantities of fossil carbon for a few years more.
Are you so naïve to believe we will stop using fossil fuels in a few
years? The world economy would collapse. Exxon and others will be
selling oil long after both of us are dead and gone. The polar ice
caps will still be there as well. It is depressing how you fail to
grasp basic economics.
I think climate change paranoids are mainly people who feel the need
to think they live in times of great significance. Its normal human
behaviour we all want to feel important.
If it makes you feel good to use so called green energy good; me I
would prefer all electricity were generated via nuclear reactors.
If you are truly convinced that the world is coming to an end or major
disruption based on climate change due to human behaviour, then alter
your lifestyle.
Some ways in which you could reduce your carbon footprint is to
dispose of all your assets and live in a cave eating only natural
foods. If you aren't willing to take drastic action how can you expect
to be believed.
This behaviour kind of reminds me of those evangelical priests who
think there flock should live in poverty while he lives in a mansion
with a harem and flys all over the world in his jet. I think this is
what is called a hypocrite or maybe Al Gore.
Bill Sloman
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 9:49 pm
On Jan 8, 5:37 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:28:47 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Jan 8, 4:26 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:02:50 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Jan 8, 1:32 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:25:39 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:53 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:12:35 -0500, Bitrex
bit...@de.lete.earthlink.net> wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
No damn way!
It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder.. They are
forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest cold
spells on record with another cold front headed this way.
I made 3 three-point shots while playing basketball today out of the 4 I
attempted. With a three point shot percentage of 75% I am therefore the
greatest basketball player who ever lived.
One should use care in making global conclusions using only local data
points.
Well, the alarmists weren't shy about blaming every storm, beach
erosion, hot spell, change in butterfly population, or the weigh of a
herd of sheep on Global Warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8445613.stm
John
Not to worry, we're still doomed:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9495864
Another Ice Age would be "just a blip in the long-term heating trend."
I think you are letting your over-fertile imagination run away here.
Just keep extending the definition of "weather" and "climate" as suits
your political needs.
The way you do? You and James Arthur do seem enthusiastic about
confusing weather models (which are susceptible to the butterfly
effect) and climate models (which are deliberately onstructed so that
they aren't).
The only way to construct a climate simulation that isn't chaotic is
to get it entirely wrong.
In your ever-so-expert opinion.
I simulate and design dynamic systems for a living, and sometimes for
fun too. You don't earn a living, and apparently don't have fun.
And you are sufficiently ill-informed to think that simulating simple,
isolated dynamic systems gives you the background knowledge required
to judge climate simulations. This is funny enough to amuse even me.
Thanks for the entertainment.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Bill Sloman
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:10 pm
On Jan 8, 8:25 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde_at_invalid> wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:27:15 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
< SNIP >
Quote:
In a temperate country.
You are the one who tried to use France, a temperate country, as a
counter to the proposal that cold kills and as I demonstrated you were
an inumerate idiot and wrong.
In fact I don't disagree that cold kills. What John Larkin left out
was that heat also kills;
mortality is at a minimum at temperatures around 20C, and starts
climbing as the temperature moves away from this point.
http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnews/press_releases/PR_2002/temperature.html
so the correct formulation is that extreme temperatures kill, and John
Larkin's proposition - which you seem to have espoused - that global
warming, if it were to happen, wouldn't be such a bad thing, is
unfortuately ill-informed.
Quote:
As far as the tropics are concerned this seems to be a red herring
from an alarmist perspective. I thought the normal claim was that
anthropogenic global warming would have much more impact on the non
tropics compared to the tropics. But hey AGW explains everything
including the common cold.
Anthropogenic global warming is expected to have more impact at the
poles than at the equator, but summer in tropical countries will get
warmer and generate even more excess deaths than they do at the
moment, while as you get further from the equator, the winters will
become milder and the summers warmer, decreasing the excess deaths in
winter and making excess deaths in summer more likely.
Do you have any facts? Or is this the normal there is no evidence so
Bill is wright argument you so love?
http://journals.lww.com/epidem/Fulltext/2008/11001/Determinants_Characterizing_Vulnerability_for.1029.aspx
http://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/24/2/190
There's plenty of evidence - so much in fact that I'd assumed any
educated adult would be aware of it. John Larkin isn't really an
educated adult - he seems to have passed through the American
University system acquiring only information relevant to electronic
design.
I would have thought that you'd know better than to bother to ask, but
I don't suppose this is the sort of thing that gets posted on the
denialist web-sites that you browse.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Hammy
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:27 pm
On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:08:09 -0500, Hammy <spam_at_spam.com> wrote:
Quote:
Bill Sloman said
Bill Sloman said
Quote:
Or euros or renminbi, if you want a currency which can still buy
something.
Your exhibiting your lack of understanding of basic economics yet
again.
I'm Canadian and it is in our interest to keep our dollar 10 to 15
cents below the US dollar they are our largest trading partner.
Anytime our dollar approaches parity with the US dollar are government
is pressured from the business sector to act by saying things like
"the rising Canadian dollar is hampering Canada's recovery" or by
buying selling or dollar whatever it takes. Can you understand why
it's desirable to be below the US dollar?
We do minimal trade with the EU so the value of or dollar relative to
Euros is irrelevant.
For the record our banks didn't collapse and or economy was not
severely depressed just a recession not a depression.
Also my Grandfather fought through Europe in WW2 including Holland
and he never mentioned a thing about the Dutch turning there nose up
at his money. I also lived at CFB Baden in Germany for eight years
traveled all through Europe nobody turned my money away.
Raveninghorde
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 11:54 pm
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:10:53 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman_at_ieee.org> wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 8, 8:25 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde_at_invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:27:15 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
SNIP
In a temperate country.
You are the one who tried to use France, a temperate country, as a
counter to the proposal that cold kills and as I demonstrated you were
an inumerate idiot and wrong.
In fact I don't disagree that cold kills. What John Larkin left out
was that heat also kills;
mortality is at a minimum at temperatures around 20C, and starts
climbing as the temperature moves away from this point.
http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnews/press_releases/PR_2002/temperature.html
so the correct formulation is that extreme temperatures kill, and John
Larkin's proposition - which you seem to have espoused - that global
warming, if it were to happen, wouldn't be such a bad thing, is
unfortuately ill-informed.
The highest temperatures normally found in inhabited areas is about
45C. A cold of -40C is not uncommon. It has been seen in the last few
days in Norway and Sweden for example.
So the bias is to extreme cold. You have about 60C below your optimum
temeprature and 25C above.
Quote:
As far as the tropics are concerned this seems to be a red herring
from an alarmist perspective. I thought the normal claim was that
anthropogenic global warming would have much more impact on the non
tropics compared to the tropics. But hey AGW explains everything
including the common cold.
Anthropogenic global warming is expected to have more impact at the
poles than at the equator, but summer in tropical countries will get
warmer and generate even more excess deaths than they do at the
moment, while as you get further from the equator, the winters will
become milder and the summers warmer, decreasing the excess deaths in
winter and making excess deaths in summer more likely.
Do you have any facts? Or is this the normal there is no evidence so
Bill is wright argument you so love?
http://journals.lww.com/epidem/Fulltext/2008/11001/Determinants_Characterizing_Vulnerability_for.1029.aspx
http://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/24/2/190
There's plenty of evidence - so much in fact that I'd assumed any
educated adult would be aware of it. John Larkin isn't really an
educated adult - he seems to have passed through the American
University system acquiring only information relevant to electronic
design.
I would have thought that you'd know better than to bother to ask, but
I don't suppose this is the sort of thing that gets posted on the
denialist web-sites that you browse.
Tilting at windmills again.
The point is extreme cold is much more common than extreme heat. The
UK is currently in an extended period of temperatures below 0C. We had
-18C just 30 miles from here in Southern England. 38C below your 20C
optimum. We will never see temperatures 38C above, 58C.
And with extreme cold in Southern England thousands of homes were
without power. Which of course means no heating. And gas supplies are
now being cut off to industry to protect domestic users.
The UK government has bought into AGW hook, line and sinker. So now
the use of salt and grit to make the roads safe is being cut by 25%. B
all gas reserves. Hey we don't need to plan for cold the planet is
getting warmer. Bloody alarmist socialist idiots. This government
needs to be treated like their idols such as Mussolini or Ceausescu.
Guest
Fri Jan 08, 2010 11:56 pm
On Jan 8, 7:02 am, Bill Sloman <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 8, 1:32 am, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:25:39 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:53 am, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:12:35 -0500, Bitrex wrote:
Quote:
One should use care in making global conclusions using only local data
points.
Well, the alarmists weren't shy about blaming every storm, beach
erosion, hot spell, change in butterfly population, or the weigh of a
herd of sheep on Global Warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8445613.stm
John
Not to worry, we're still doomed:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9495864
Another Ice Age would be "just a blip in the long-term heating trend."
I think you are letting your over-fertile imagination run away here.
Just keep extending the definition of "weather" and "climate" as suits
your political needs.
The way you do? You and James Arthur do seem enthusiastic about
confusing weather models
You're confused--you invented that.
Quote:
(which are susceptible to the butterfly
effect) and climate models (which are deliberately onstructed so that
they aren't).
What construction, and how does it guarantee that? Diagrams, please.
--
Cheers,
James Arthur
John Larkin
Guest
Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:05 am
On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 22:54:49 +0000, Raveninghorde
<raveninghorde_at_invalid> wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:10:53 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman_at_ieee.org> wrote:
On Jan 8, 8:25 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde_at_invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:27:15 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
SNIP
In a temperate country.
You are the one who tried to use France, a temperate country, as a
counter to the proposal that cold kills and as I demonstrated you were
an inumerate idiot and wrong.
In fact I don't disagree that cold kills. What John Larkin left out
was that heat also kills;
mortality is at a minimum at temperatures around 20C, and starts
climbing as the temperature moves away from this point.
http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnews/press_releases/PR_2002/temperature.html
so the correct formulation is that extreme temperatures kill, and John
Larkin's proposition - which you seem to have espoused - that global
warming, if it were to happen, wouldn't be such a bad thing, is
unfortuately ill-informed.
The highest temperatures normally found in inhabited areas is about
45C. A cold of -40C is not uncommon. It has been seen in the last few
days in Norway and Sweden for example.
So the bias is to extreme cold. You have about 60C below your optimum
temeprature and 25C above.
As far as the tropics are concerned this seems to be a red herring
from an alarmist perspective. I thought the normal claim was that
anthropogenic global warming would have much more impact on the non
tropics compared to the tropics. But hey AGW explains everything
including the common cold.
Anthropogenic global warming is expected to have more impact at the
poles than at the equator, but summer in tropical countries will get
warmer and generate even more excess deaths than they do at the
moment, while as you get further from the equator, the winters will
become milder and the summers warmer, decreasing the excess deaths in
winter and making excess deaths in summer more likely.
Do you have any facts? Or is this the normal there is no evidence so
Bill is wright argument you so love?
http://journals.lww.com/epidem/Fulltext/2008/11001/Determinants_Characterizing_Vulnerability_for.1029.aspx
http://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/24/2/190
There's plenty of evidence - so much in fact that I'd assumed any
educated adult would be aware of it. John Larkin isn't really an
educated adult - he seems to have passed through the American
University system acquiring only information relevant to electronic
design.
I would have thought that you'd know better than to bother to ask, but
I don't suppose this is the sort of thing that gets posted on the
denialist web-sites that you browse.
Tilting at windmills again.
The point is extreme cold is much more common than extreme heat. The
UK is currently in an extended period of temperatures below 0C. We had
-18C just 30 miles from here in Southern England. 38C below your 20C
optimum. We will never see temperatures 38C above, 58C.
And with extreme cold in Southern England thousands of homes were
without power. Which of course means no heating. And gas supplies are
now being cut off to industry to protect domestic users.
The UK government has bought into AGW hook, line and sinker. So now
the use of salt and grit to make the roads safe is being cut by 25%. B
all gas reserves. Hey we don't need to plan for cold the planet is
getting warmer. Bloody alarmist socialist idiots. This government
needs to be treated like their idols such as Mussolini or Ceausescu.
Do you think they actually cut back on gas and grit reserves because
they expected warmer winters?
I'd really not like to think that anyone could be that stupid.
John
John Larkin
Guest
Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:30 am
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 16:16:07 -0800 (PST), Mark <makolber_at_yahoo.com>
wrote:
Quote:
And you are sufficiently ill-informed to think that simulating simple,
isolated dynamic systems gives you the background knowledge required
to judge climate simulations. This is funny enough to amuse even me.
Thanks for the entertainment.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Yes, as a matter of fact...
my experience simulating "simple" electronic systems gives me enough
knowledge to know that a simulation of a system as complex as the
global climate cannot be trusted with sufficient confidence that
the results could be used as the basis for major policy decisions.
Mark
Agreed. The planet's climate is a massively complex nonlinear system
whose dynamics and forcings are only guessed at [1]. We know that
"weather" is chaotic over all time scales that it's been observed
over. It's absurd to think that "climate" is predictable. merely
because the time horizon exceeds observability.
Weather does couple into climate. One can't just wave hands and mumble
about lowpass filtering. This ain't a linear system.
Que more ponderous Sloman insults:
John
[1] and mostly guessed at by people with agendas.
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 ... 15, 16, 17 Next
