tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post7525428099052577621..comments2024-03-19T03:14:04.172-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: It's a slow weekEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-6966410620469463922011-11-09T13:51:17.948-05:002011-11-09T13:51:17.948-05:00I have now made over 9000 requests for the proof h...I have now made over 9000 requests for the proof humans cause climate change, with a $25,000 reward.<br />There is no proof, only belief.<br />$25,000 reward for the proof humans cause climte change.<br />Bruce A. Kershaw<br />http://co2u.infoBruce A. Kershawhttp://co2u.infonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-74905289931480454092010-09-22T17:01:31.769-04:002010-09-22T17:01:31.769-04:00How does CO2 cause Climate Change?
Bruce A. Kersha...How does CO2 cause Climate Change?<br />Bruce A. KershawBruce A. Kershawhttp://co2u.infonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-21593014227706516742010-04-07T08:01:56.835-04:002010-04-07T08:01:56.835-04:00True, but someone has to pay for it. Even servers...True, but someone has to pay for it. Even servers are not freeEliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-12744010427126304922010-04-07T02:20:44.574-04:002010-04-07T02:20:44.574-04:00Many institutions limit access to their online inf...Many institutions limit access to their online information. Making this information available will be an asset to all.Term Papershttp://www.researchpaperspot.com/term_papers.htmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-62474813686079709592010-02-04T03:07:20.449-05:002010-02-04T03:07:20.449-05:00The SPPI report debunked, quickly and easily:
http...The SPPI report debunked, quickly and easily:<br />http://keithpickering.blogspot.com/2010/02/station-dropout-problem-more-non.htmlKAPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11189506171267750391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-53481425656207035032010-01-31T14:46:16.406-05:002010-01-31T14:46:16.406-05:00No One --- Three comments is stuffing?
Stuff it!No One --- Three comments is stuffing?<br /><br />Stuff it!David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-84458710132960495562010-01-30T21:31:05.385-05:002010-01-30T21:31:05.385-05:00Wow, 52 comments, and only one by Deech. Benson se...Wow, 52 comments, and only one by Deech. Benson seems to be stuffing the ballot box, but as Tamino would say in his elegant prose, he is either "stupid or ignorant" (I guess that is what happens when you are being lied to). <br /><br />It looks like you have subscribed your blog to the equivalent of Enzyte. I congratulate you on your enormous popularity since I last checked in. I further applaud your enhanced popularity since I last checked in. Do keep up the good work.<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />N. O.No Onenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-89646838294722203592010-01-30T20:34:24.610-05:002010-01-30T20:34:24.610-05:00https://secure.locusmag.com/About/CDRomAd.htmlhttps://secure.locusmag.com/About/CDRomAd.htmlHank Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07521410755553979665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-4917422877405639352010-01-30T19:43:48.162-05:002010-01-30T19:43:48.162-05:00The sciences, each straining in its own direction,...<i>The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.</i><br />H.P. LovecraftRon Brobergnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-15605017508059829142010-01-30T18:10:34.562-05:002010-01-30T18:10:34.562-05:00To re-introduce a note of reality, those who are i...To re-introduce a note of reality, those who are ignorant cannot, by definition, be skeptical.<br /><br />They can be, and often are, willfully ignorant.David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-61608376829090059352010-01-30T14:26:34.263-05:002010-01-30T14:26:34.263-05:00OK, it's slightly, well a bit more than that a...OK, it's slightly, well a bit more than that actually..., OT but makes me think if we're talking to some people (well, a lot of people actually...) in the wrong way.<br /><br />Are we talking to people who are sceptics and, in the best sense of the word, ignorant in the most effective way?<br /><br /><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8474611.stm" rel="nofollow">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8474611.stm</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-87541276804618779722010-01-30T09:24:27.969-05:002010-01-30T09:24:27.969-05:00CO2 AND YOU by Bruce Kershaw
Global warming: the S...CO2 AND YOU by Bruce Kershaw<br />Global warming: the Science and the Reality - [Who said irony was dead]<br /><br />http://co2u.info/<br /><br />Pop by for a laugh.<br /><br />A sample of the idiocy:<br />'Carbon base oxygen: The aftermath of depleted energy from the core of this carbon base planet causing all carbon base Life… <br /><br />Our Earth: is a carbon base planet<br /><br />Causing: carbon base oxygen, from thousands of Volcanoes, into the oceans and the air, for the last Four Billion plus Years.<br /><br />Causing: carbon base plant life, in the oceans, absorbing the carbon, made from the carbon base oxygen.<br /><br />Causing: oxygenation of the ocean. Causing: new carbon base life, carbon base sea creatures, to eat the carbon base plant life, and breathe the oxygen, made from carbon base oxygen.<br /><br />Our Atmosphere: comes from the sun’s evaporation of ocean, for the last Four Billion plus Years.'<br /><br />Posts are moderated and the [expletive deleted] blithering idiot doesn't post anything he doesn't like.<br /><br />When I posted that I couln't tell whether it was an example of Poe's Law or genuine idiocy, I got this email from the Kershaw idiot.<br /><br />'I guess your smarter than national geographic, and 32,000 doctors and phd's'<br /><br />Sigh!amoebahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15783694650121687459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-32076454709770319472010-01-30T09:04:19.373-05:002010-01-30T09:04:19.373-05:00Comments to this very fine letter.
Well, at least...Comments to this very fine <a href="http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/opinion/display_lte.htm?storyid=100412" rel="nofollow">letter</a>.<br /><br />Well, at least my family liked it. .-)Deech56noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-14601496284512976332010-01-29T20:12:05.698-05:002010-01-29T20:12:05.698-05:00Still a slow week?Still a slow week?David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-61235236579752267332010-01-29T00:08:08.896-05:002010-01-29T00:08:08.896-05:00Connor: Christ that is awful. Aside from the anti-...Connor: Christ that is awful. Aside from the anti-climate change section he also claims that kinetic energy is incorrectly defined.<br /><br />anonymouse no. 123Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-87343187547478539722010-01-28T23:49:52.207-05:002010-01-28T23:49:52.207-05:00Shame Judiff couldn't break into the Peer revi...Shame Judiff couldn't break into the Peer reviewed Lit with this. I think it was also written before she started to position herself astride the fence (ouch) in the AGW debate.<br /><br />Still, empirically we can look at the post Katrina years to see how Hurricanes have grown in number and intensity, or not. I think the NOTS have it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-58934934039253237422010-01-28T19:57:00.450-05:002010-01-28T19:57:00.450-05:00Oh, I'll see you and you raise you all.
SCIEN...Oh, I'll see you and you raise you all.<br /><br />SCIENCE IS BROKEN!<br /><br />http://www.nov55.com/Connornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-68710446829070204142010-01-28T19:45:29.593-05:002010-01-28T19:45:29.593-05:00Ah, the Pielke and Landsea paper that was the firs...Ah, the Pielke and Landsea paper that was the first of many from the Jr. posse. Too bad they all rely on flawed methods - <a href="http://www.eas.gatech.edu/files/Pielke_review.pdf" rel="nofollow">pointed out by Judith Curry</a> (note: .pdf file) - that negate whatever conclusions drawn by Jr. and friends in those papers. Alas alack etc. <br /><br />And it's also nice to see Dr. Curry point out how professional jealousy from Jr. can affect his better judgment, especially during <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/01/house-and-senate-committee-hearings/#comment-24499" rel="nofollow">Congressional and Senate hearings</a>. But hey, we all knew that already :-)Former Skepticnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-89230840169404751922010-01-28T14:58:56.278-05:002010-01-28T14:58:56.278-05:00MarkeyMouse says: In reply to the stupid one. Yes,...MarkeyMouse says: In reply to the stupid one. Yes, There is no greenhouse gas signal in the economic or human toll record of disasters.<br /><br />Normalized Hurricane Damages in the United States: 1925–95<br /><br />Roger A. Pielke Jr. Christopher W. Landsea<br /><br />"Only during the early 1990s does damage approach the high level of impact seen back in the 1940s through the 1960s, showing that what has been observed recently is not unprecedented." http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-0434(1998)013%3C0621:NHDITU%3E2.0.CO%3B2&ct=1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-48795948732731897012010-01-28T09:45:42.442-05:002010-01-28T09:45:42.442-05:00@guthrie: the rabett may well have been the first ...@guthrie: the rabett may well have been the first to blog about this one...<br />http://rabett.blogspot.com/2010/01/hedgehog-and-hyena.htmlMarcohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07262670367947223521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-7953989124923342002010-01-28T08:12:13.739-05:002010-01-28T08:12:13.739-05:00Mr. Blob:
The issue of station numbers is compete...Mr. Blob:<br /><br />The issue of station numbers is competently discussed here.<br /><br />http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2010/01/kusi-noaa-nasa/carrot eaternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-34058559187329022482010-01-28T07:51:05.485-05:002010-01-28T07:51:05.485-05:00The blob - checkout the comments at various recent...The blob - checkout the comments at various recent threads at Deltoid, which is linked in the side column of the main page here. The bloke wh runs itis called tim lambert. <br />There was a paper out recently by Menne et al which does the examination the denialists have refused to do, and surprise surprise, the US temperature record is robust. The issue here is that science is getting attacked for political reasons.guthriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17992984293423290387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-9798611445744877612010-01-28T07:42:16.080-05:002010-01-28T07:42:16.080-05:00I recommend the comments section at this link.
ht...I recommend the comments section at this link.<br /><br />http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/01/the-ipcc-is-not-infallible-shock/Recovering in the Florida Keyshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913299764512464597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-71059122217410268512010-01-28T05:52:59.770-05:002010-01-28T05:52:59.770-05:00> ...that I have serious doubts of the competen...> ...that I have serious doubts of the competency of the deniers who drew up this report<br /><br />I don't ;-/<br /><br />Blob, try put your stuff on the RC wiki.<br /><br />http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_WikiMartin Vermeerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04537045395760606324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-38045480778004381372010-01-28T00:34:02.559-05:002010-01-28T00:34:02.559-05:001. There is no greenhouse gas signal in the econom...1. There is no greenhouse gas signal in the economic or human toll record of disasters.<br /><br />*If you tried to extract the greenhouse gas signal from something like economic effects, you'd have to check at least<br /> a) the accounts of businessses in the disaster areas before and after the disaster,<br /> b) the IRS (or equivalent) records, and possible subsidies considering the disaster area, before and after the disaster,<br /> c) the effects of the disaster on the stock market, especially concerning the businesses located in the disaster area,<br /> d) the insurance companies record of the paid damages, in relation to paid damages on non-disaster area,<br /> e) the lost income of every person in the disaster area due the destroyed businesses,contacts etc.,<br /> f) the economic effects of rebuilding in the disaster area to the neighbouring areas, <br /> g) the costs of transport of rebuilding materials,<br /> h) the damages paid because of the human casualties and,<br /> i) have contacts to criminal economic activity to do the same with their numbers (do they keep records?)<br /><br />and a most of these numbers are not possible to obtain since the law does not require businesses to keep their records safe for more than 30 years (that is in here). Are you asking that the investigator should have the right to check all the records of the insurance companies, the individual shops and businesses in and conserning the disaster area and the IRS (or equivalent)? How likely it is that some of these have actually been destroyed in the said disaster? <br /><br />If you'd try to relate the greenhouse gas signal (which is there) to human casualties, you'd have to cross-reference the possibly greenhouse gas signal -related deaths, illnesses and injuries with<br /> a) the likelihood of similar injuries, illnesses and death not associated with greenhouse gas induced effects,<br /> b) the likelihood of similar type of catastrophes without the greenhouse gas signal (which itself is hard),<br /> c) the presence of the socio-economical upheavals before, during and after the catastrophe,<br /> d) the psychology of the people conserned with the catastrophe, since it is known that various people react differently to a catastrophe,<br /> e) the potential presence of contemporary, non-greenhouse gas signal-related causes of injuries, illnesses and deaths, and<br /> f) have records of all the people (including the home-born, unchastised and unrecorded (by no-one but their mother) children) in the remotest areas where a disaster has hit, if you think they have value.<br /><br />and this is not possible for there is f.e. such a thing as medical records of individuals, which are not public info for a long time (or were they destroyed after 50 years after the individual has died?, so here, if I remember correctly). Moreover, to check this you should also be able evaluate the competence of the medicinal facilities in the disaster area before and after the disaster, and most likely you would not be doing that if you were a medical doctor (with the competence to do the evaluation) in a disaster area. Are you asking the medical doctors to break their Hippocratic oath?<br /><br />Extracting either of this info would be illegal, so yes, there is no signal, since your claim is based on wrong assumption that this could somehow be accurately calculated.<br /><br />10. Leading scientific assessments have botched major issues (like disasters).<br /><br />*I guess by 'botched', you mean 'omitted', else <br />(fact check, Insert - definition, <br />"botch (bch)<br />tr.v. botched, botch·ing, botch·es <br />1. To ruin through clumsiness.<br />2. To make or perform clumsily; bungle.<br />3. To repair or mend clumsily.)<br /><br />if you refer to the IPCC report, the report that evaluates climate science, and does not conduct research, you're barking at the wrong tree. Instead you should blame the scientists for not doing such research. This, see the answer to #1, is in many cases illegal, and because it is, it cannot be very conclusive. So, they have not botched disasters.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com