tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post373123253369574906..comments2024-03-08T01:24:09.884-07:00Comments on Matt's Sci/Tech Blog: Some interesting graphs on climate changeMatt Billehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18230930494550861704noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-66091517932985037982013-09-10T09:41:30.955-06:002013-09-10T09:41:30.955-06:00You helped me a lot indeed and reading this your a...You helped me a lot indeed and reading this your article I have found many new and useful information about this subject. <br /><a href="http://www.zinavo.co" rel="nofollow">website designing company</a><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16487606808074132421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-6293178720133314002013-08-17T07:38:14.929-06:002013-08-17T07:38:14.929-06:00Hmmm... the belief that climate scientists don'...Hmmm... the belief that climate scientists don't KNOW the energy of the Earth vs. human-created energy is a reach, don't you think? You don't have to be climatologist to know that any balanced system can be set a little wobbly by a tiny fraction of the energy that the system contains. Matt Billehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18230930494550861704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-71115106199971478982013-08-16T14:52:28.183-06:002013-08-16T14:52:28.183-06:00"When you do a comparison of the heat coming ..."When you do a comparison of the heat coming out of the ocean with the heat going into the ocean, guess what, they are essentially the same as Willis Eschenbach shows"<br />-http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/08/16/agw-lies-hiroshima-and-academics-this-is-a-disgraceful-bit-of-misanthropy-made-nonsensical-by-the-fact-that-the-natural-energy-of-the-system-on-earth-is-a-million-times-greater-than-the-energ/Laurence Clark Crossenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15908708438427333473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-90030870098382425562013-08-13T23:19:56.752-06:002013-08-13T23:19:56.752-06:00Interesting article. Hoping that you will continue...Interesting article. Hoping that you will continue posting an article having a useful information.<br /><br /><b><a href="http://cosicatering.com/" rel="nofollow">Tech Blog</a></b>cosicateringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11084120506632866268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-66941819510536788582013-05-30T09:53:06.962-06:002013-05-30T09:53:06.962-06:00Recently, Obama tweeted saying AGW skeptics are “d...Recently, Obama tweeted saying AGW skeptics are “deniers.” Besides being an ad hominem attack it also shows he and his science advisors are very poorly informed about AGW. One of the most sophisticated and reasonable AGW proponents is Fred Pearce, who publishes often in New Scientist. He says that calling skeptics of AGW “deniers” is “foolish fundamentalism.”<br />a.) "My response to President Obama." Available from: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/my-response-to-president-obama/<br />b.)Pearce, F. Foolish fundamentalism. Available from: http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/10/warmist-fred-pearce-are-many-reasons.html accessed 10/3/2011.Laurence Clark Crossenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15908708438427333473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-17714467395239219872013-05-22T21:59:49.316-06:002013-05-22T21:59:49.316-06:00Good question, and I'm not yet sure of that an...Good question, and I'm not yet sure of that answer. Anyone?Matt Billehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18230930494550861704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-20881631310569190632013-05-15T13:15:40.654-06:002013-05-15T13:15:40.654-06:00If the temperature of the deep oceans is warming d...If the temperature of the deep oceans is warming disproportionately to the surface and warming from the bottom up instead of from the top down, then is there anything that can disconfirm such a theory? How does the warmth find its way to the bottom without going through the top?Laurence Clark Crossenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15908708438427333473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-77962251774329251092013-05-13T09:26:22.152-06:002013-05-13T09:26:22.152-06:00Clark, thanks for the dissent. one thing pointed o...Clark, thanks for the dissent. one thing pointed out in the discussions with the original article is that we have been through much warmer periods in the past, but a collateral effect was that the sea levels were higher - not something we want. Matt Billehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18230930494550861704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-4317114823308178382013-05-09T14:44:58.624-06:002013-05-09T14:44:58.624-06:00Most climatologists accept that there were two war...Most climatologists accept that there were two warm periods during the twentieth century towards its beginning and at its end. Your chart does not show the earlier warm period nor compare it with the later. This is an example of the AGW argument that recent warming is "unprecedented." This claim is not only not true, but proves nothing. It is untrue because the Holocene Climate Optimum is undisputably accepted as warmer than the Current Warm Period. It proves nothing because the present warm period has to be compared with an equal or stronger warming to determine if CO2 is the cause. Similar and greater warming have frequently occurred without anthropogenic CO2.<br /><br />How can warm water sink?<br /><br />I certainly appreciate your acknowledgement that the science is not settled, but just what do you allow has not been settled?<br /><br />If humans only supply 1/40th of the increase in CO2 then, even if we suppose all warming is caused by CO2, then only that fraction is human caused. <br /><br />I appreciate your statement that everyone that disagrees should not be called a denier, but why should a scientist call anyone that when that is an ad hominem attack? This is quite wrong to do. Even in a casual way it is not a good idea to call skeptics deniers as you persist in doing.<br /><br />There are comparable times when the globe warmed more than at present without human caused CO2. The claim that the present warming is unprecedented is an attempt to avoid this comparison.<br /><br />It is unproven that hhuman caused CO2 causes sufficient warming to cause a problem. Bjorn Lomborg is correct that we should not engage in futile attempts to limit CO2 production. We should use our resources to target the real problems.Laurence Clark Crossenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15908708438427333473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-55532496867845842282013-05-07T16:11:16.143-06:002013-05-07T16:11:16.143-06:00Clark, thanks for pointing out that whether someth...Clark, thanks for pointing out that whether something is happening is only part of the story: the net effects, which are widely debated, are the other part. Matt Billehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18230930494550861704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15194226.post-52651485311651405042013-05-07T13:26:08.241-06:002013-05-07T13:26:08.241-06:00The most fundamental assumption about anthropogeni...The most fundamental assumption about anthropogenic global warming is that it is far more harmful than helpful to humans and the environment. In my opinion, the opposite is true. Thomas Gale Moore's books do an excellent job of demonstrating this:<br />Global warming : a boon to humans and other animals. Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace<br />Climate of fear : why we shouldn't worry about global warming. CATO.Laurence Clark Crossenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15908708438427333473noreply@blogger.com