Climate continues to change.

[trysail]

...Do they know that Germany has succeeded in getting electricity production from renewables all the way up to 30% of the total -- but in the process they have also succeeded in roughly tripling residential electricity rates?... ​

-Frances Menton
"Blue States On The Path to Economic Suicide"
​

​

 

[phrodeau]

Oh yes, it costs so much to sit back and let the sun shine on your solar panels.

 

[thør]

Oh yes, it costs so much to sit back and let the sun shine on your solar panels.

My neighbors have to sit back for 14 years (theoretically) to break even on the cost of adding rooftop solar to their houses. Could be longer, depending upon how much snow we get in winter.

 

[Conager]

Oh yes, it costs so much to sit back and let the sun shine on your solar panels.

Why are you so unconcerned about all of the environmental pollution caused and the carbon emitted that happs as a result of manufacturing solar panels?

How about the carbon footprint of all those big diesel powered ships that bring solar panels and windmills from China?

 

[phrodeau]

Why are you so unconcerned about all of the environmental pollution caused and the carbon emitted that happs as a result of manufacturing solar panels?

How about the carbon footprint of all those big diesel powered ships that bring solar panels and windmills from China?

OK, teach me.

While you're at it, breathe into this turbine so I can get something good from it.

http://easterninstruments.com/pics/HBP%20Image.jpg

 

[thør]

OK, teach me.

While you're at it, breathe into this turbine so I can get something good from it.

http://easterninstruments.com/pics/HBP%20Image.jpg

Not a turbine, it's a flow conditioner.

 

[phrodeau]

Not a turbine, it's a flow conditioner.

I'm waiting for Kickstarter to fund the rest of it.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Not a turbine, it's a flow conditioner.

What's the difference?

 

[thør]

I'm waiting for Kickstarter to fund the rest of it.

I didn't think the girls at Eastern Instruments needed assistance.

 

[Conager]

OK, teach me.

While you're at it, breathe into this turbine so I can get something good from it.

http://easterninstruments.com/pics/HBP%20Image.jpg

Not a turbine, it's a flow conditioner.

What's the difference?

SMH.

I wouldn't have known what it was, but at a glance I would have known it wasn't a turbine because there's no pitch to the blades. How would air or liquid turn it?

 

[trysail]

Both are well within historic norms and natural variation.


Stay calm; there's no need for you to panic.


http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png


http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_stddev_timeseries.png




​

 

[bhurry]

Both are well within historic norms and natural variation.


Stay calm; there's no need for you to panic.


http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png


http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_stddev_timeseries.png




​

THANK YOU

 

[phrodeau]

What makes the time from 1981 to 2010 historic?

Arctic sea ice has been declining since the early 1900's. That "average" line is far below the real historic average.

http://research.bpcrc.osu.edu/geo/publications/polyak_etal_seaice_QSR_10.pdf

 

[trysail]

Destroying the Planet? President Trump did the unthinkable for many – he announced that the US will withdraw from the Paris Agreement (Accords). The reaction of the horrified was predictable. How dare he? A bit of history is useful in explaining the reaction...

For decades, Washington, and many in the West, have been inundated by propaganda that human greenhouse gas emissions, namely carbon dioxide (CO2), are the principle cause of dangerous global warming / climate change, without any compelling physical evidence supporting the claim. The Supreme Court even ruled that CO2, vital for life as we generally recognize it, is a pollutant that the EPA can regulate if it deems CO2, and other greenhouse gases, endanger human health and welfare.

The effectiveness of this propaganda can be seen by the reaction to Mr. Trump’s announcement that his administration is pulling out of the Paris Agreement. One is tempted to call it “shock and awe.” The lack of hard evidence that that Paris Agreement will do anything meaningful is scarcely mentioned.

On the website WUWT, Anthony Watts repeated the graph by Bjorn Lomborg projecting the difference by the year 2100 of a) doing nothing, b) completing the promises under Paris by 2030, and c) continuing all the promises under Paris from 2030 to 2100. Completing the promises by 2030 will reduce projected surface temperatures in 2100 by 0.05 degrees C; continuing the promises will reduce projected temperatures in 2100 by 0.17 degrees C.

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/paris-accord-impact.jpg​

Given that the projections are for about 85 years, the results are meaningless. Given that none of the climate models used to make such projections have been validated, the results are absurd. Given that many of the instruments used, such as the ones at US airports, have a specified internal accuracy of plus or minus 1 degree C, the projections are ludicrous. [Note, if repeated measurements are made in the same manner and by using the same instrument, and assuming errors are normally distributed, the error declines by a function of the square root of the number of measurements. But, this logic does not apply for measurements from numerous instruments of the same type, much less for measurements from numerous types of instruments.]

In short, we are witnessing outrage expressed over a political decision by those whose scientific position is ludicrous. They have succumbed to... propaganda...​

-Ken Haapala​

​

 

[trysail]

"How Dependent Are GISTEMP Trends On The Gridding Radius Used?"

by Nic Lewis

Global surface temperature (GMST) changes and trends derived from the standard GISTEMP record over its full 1880-2016 length exceed those per the HadCRUT4.5 and NOAA4.0.1 records, by 4% and 7% respectively. Part of these differences will be due to use of different land and (in the case of HadCRUT4.5) ocean sea-surface temperature (SST) data, and part to methodological differences.

GISTEMP and NOAA4.0.1 both use data from the ERSSTv4 infilled SST dataset, while HadCRUT4.5 uses data from the non-infilled HadSST3 dataset. Over the full 1880-2016 GISTEMP record, the global-mean trends in the two SST datasets were almost the same: 0.56 °C/century for ERSSTv4 and 0.57 °C /century for HadSST3. And although HadCRUT4v5 depends (via its use of the CRUTEM4 record) on a different set of land station records from GISTEMP and NOAA4.0.1 (both of which use GHCNv3.3 data), there is a great commonality in the underlying set of stations used.

Accordingly, it seems likely that differences in methodology may largely account for the slightly faster 1880-2016 warming in GISTEMP. Although the excess warming in GISTEMP is not large, I was curious to find out in more detail about the methods it uses and their effects. The primary paper describing the original (land station only based) GISTEMP methodology is Hansen et al. 1987. Ocean temperature data was added in 1996. Hansen et al. 2010 provides an update and sets out changes in the methods.

Steve has written a number of good posts about GISTEMP in the past, locatable using the Search box...​

more...
https://climateaudit.org/2017/05/18/how-dependent-are-gistemp-trends-on-the-gridding-radius-used/

​

 

[Hard_Rom]

Ken Haapla and the SEPP. Same ones who said second hand smoke danger was over rated.

 

[Conager]

Dangerous speech is not protected by the First Amendment. Schenk vs. US said that you don't have the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater when there is none, because it creates a clear and present danger.

You don't have the right to say that a pizza parlor harbors child abusers in their basement when they don't even have a basement.

You don't have the right to tell people that MMR vaccines are dangerous when the real danger lies in the absence of the vaccine.

You don't have the right to tell people who are striving to avoid future catastrophes that the real catastrophes in the past were only made up to get sympathy for their cause.

You don't have the right to claim the climate isn't getting worse and we should change nothing, against all of the evidence that it is and that change needs to happen.

These all create clear and present dangers. People have died from other people simply saying these things.

Who has "died from people simply saying...the climate isn't getting worse and we should change nothing?"

 

[hashtag69]

Who has "died from people simply saying...the climate isn't getting worse and we should change nothing?"

STFU, trannyboi.

 

[trysail]

[Please do not post copyright material without citation, and then limit your excerpts to less than 5 paragraphs, per our forum guidelines.] - Last Warning

 

[Hard_Rom]

Scientists in Canada have been forced to abandon an expedition to the Hudson Bay to research the impact of climate change, after warming temperatures created perilous ice conditions off the coast of Newfoundland.

In late May, 40 scientists from five Canadian universities set off from Quebec City on the icebreaker and Arctic research vessel CCGS Amundsen. The icebreaker was soon diverted. Dense ice – up to 8 metres (25ft) thick – had filled the waters off the northern coast of Newfoundland, trapping fishing boats and ferries.

“It was a really dramatic situation,” said David Barber, the expedition’s chief scientist. “We were getting search and rescue calls from fishing boats that were stranded in the ice and tankers that were stranded trying to get fuel into the communities. Nobody could manage this ice because it was far too heavy to get through.”

Barber, a climate change scientist at the University of Manitoba, and the other scientists did what they could to help the Coast Guard rescue the vessels and carved a path for the tankers. They also took the time to study the ice that surrounded them, discovering that much of it was the multiyear ice typically seen in the high Arctic.

It was an unexpected find, said Barber, given the time of year and how far south they were. “It’s not something you would expect to see there and not something we’ve seen there before,” he said. “In the high Arctic, climate change is causing the ice to get thinner and there to be less of it. What that does is that it increases the mobility of ice.”

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/weath...hange/ar-BBCEH80?li=AAggv0m&OCID=ansmsnnews11

 

[phrodeau]

Oh, that's just the weather. Has nothing to do with the climate.

 

[trysail]

Danish Meteorological Institute

Daily Mean Temperatures in the Arctic 1958 - 2017

Daily mean temperatures for the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel, plotted with daily climate values calculated from the period 1958-2002.

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2017.png





​

 

[phrodeau]

Danish Meteorological Institute

Daily Mean Temperatures in the Arctic 1958 - 2017

Daily mean temperatures for the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel, plotted with daily climate values calculated from the period 1958-2002.

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2017.png

​

Here's the link to your graph: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

I recommend that everyone check it out and look at past years as well. See if you can detect any downward trend in recent years.

 

[phrodeau]

The heat wave in Arizona causes several airplanes to be grounded because they can't handle the temperature. I guess that's one way to reduce CO2 emissions.

 

[thør]

The heat wave in Arizona causes several airplanes to be grounded because they can't handle the temperature. I guess that's one way to reduce CO2 emissions.

They could reduce the payload.