Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (751915)	11/9/2013 12:47:00 PM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB TideGlider Respond to of 1576615

oh my, oh wait liberals live on the coasts, SWEET. think I'll burn a tire today in celebration

To: koan who wrote (751915)	11/9/2013 12:57:39 PM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB TideGlider Respond to of 1576615

Most US Station All-Time Record Maximum Temperatures Were Set Prior To 1940 Posted on November 9, 2013by stevengoddard There are 863 USHCN stations which have been continuously active since at least 1930. The majority of them recorded their all-time record maximum temperature prior to 1940. Index of /pub/data/ghcn/daily/hcn/ Ties get counted for all decades which they occurred in. Since 1999, NASA and NOAA have tried to delete the hot 1930's from the US temperature record, because it doesn’t suit their agenda. The stations are listed below. .... http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/most-us-station-all-time-record-maximum-temperatures-were-set-prior-to-1940/#more-98758

To: koan who wrote (751915)	11/9/2013 12:59:58 PM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB TideGlider Respond to of 1576615

Thomas Jefferson Was The First Global Warming POTUS Posted on November 9, 2013by stevengoddard Thomas Jefferson was worried about global warming, until Noah Webster explained to him that he was observing urban heat island effects. Unlike Obama, Jefferson was capable of listening and understanding – and didn’t force his ignorance on everyone else. “In his 1787 book, Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson launched into a discussion of the climate of both his home state and America as a whole. Near the end of a brief chapter addressing wind currents, rain and temperature, he presented a series of tentative conclusions: “A change in our climate…is taking place very sensibly. Both heats and colds are become much more moderate within the memory of the middle-aged. Snows are less frequent and less deep….The elderly inform me the earth used to be covered with snow about three months in every year. The rivers, which then seldom failed to freeze over in the course of the winter, scarcely ever do so now.” Concerned about the destructive effects of this warming trend, Jefferson noted how “an unfortunate fluctuation between heat and cold” in the spring has been “very fatal to fruits.” Webster concluded by rejecting the crude warming theory of Jefferson and Williams in favor of a more subtle rendering of the data. The conversion of forests to fields, he acknowledged, has led to some microclimatic changes—namely, more windiness and more variation in winter conditions. But while snow doesn’t stay on the ground as long, that doesn’t necessarily mean the country as a whole gets less snowfall each winter: “We have, in the cultivated districts, deep snow today, and none tomorrow; but the same quantity of snow falling in the woods, lies there till spring….This will explain all the appearances of the seasons without resorting to the unphilosophical hypothesis of a general increase in heat.” Webster’s words essentially ended the controversy. While Jefferson continued to compile and crunch temperature data after his retirement from the presidency, he never again made the case for global warming.” Smithsonian Magazine http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/thomas-jefferson-was-the-first-global-warming-potus/

To: koan who wrote (751915)	11/10/2013 4:02:33 AM
From: Bilow	3 Recommendations Recommended By Jorj X Mckie TideGlider TimF Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576615

Hi koan; Re: "First big problem with global warming will be the flooding around the sea shore."; This is a retreat from previous claims that the problem with global warming would be problems with the food supply. You're pushing it because the previous claims fell apart. In fact, the world food supply continues to grow in contradiction to the predictions of the global warming alarmists who threatened us with doom 20 years ago. So let's take a look at what real scientists say about sea level rise. The US uses satellites to estimate sea level. NASA pays the University of Colorado's "Sea Level Research Group" to analyze the satellite data. Here's their website: sealevel.colorado.edu Let's go take a look at some of the articles we find there... Under "Our Publications" we see this gem: Is There a 60-year Oscillation in Global Mean Sea Level? Chambers, Merrifield and Nerem Geophysical Research Letters 39, 18 (2012) sealevel.colorado.edu Reading the article, we find: It is important to point out that even if a 60-year oscillation is occurring in GMSL, it is still a small fluctuation about a highly significant rate of rise. Modeling a 60-year oscillation does not change the estimated trend in any reconstruction time-series of GMSL by more than 0.1 mm /yr (Table 1), which is lower than the uncertainty. Thus, it does not change the overall conclusion that sea level has been rising on average by 1.7 mm /yr over the last 110 years. The 60-year oscillation will, however, change our interpretation of the trends when estimated over periods less than 1-cycle of the oscillation. Although several studies have suggested the recent change in trends of global [e.g., Merrifield et al., 2009] or regional [e.g.,Sallenger et al.,2012] sea level rise reflects an acceleration, this must be re-examined in light of a possible 60-year fluctuation. While technically correct that the sea level is accelerating in the sense that recent rates are higher than the long-term rate, there have been previous periods were the rate was decelerating, and the rates along the Northeast U.S. coast have what appears to be a 60-year period [Sallenger et al. , 2012, Figure 4], which is consistent with our observations of sea level variability at New York City and Baltimore. Until we understand whether the multi decadal variations in sea level reflect distinct inflexion points or a 60-year oscillation and whether there is a GMSL signature, one should be cautious about computations of acceleration in sea level records unless they are longer than two cycles of the oscillation or at least account for the possibility of a 60-year oscillation in their model. This especially applies to interpretation of acceleration in GMSL using only the 20-year record of from satellite altimetry and to evaluations of short records of mean sea level from individual gauges. ... Acknowledgements. ... This research was carried out under grants from the NASA Interdisciplinary Science and Ocean Surface Topography Programs. ... onlinelibrary.wiley.com Let me translate the above. This is official NASA sponsored research. It states that historical records show that the Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) goes up and down every 60 years. The most recent rise is in phase with the expected rise from that 60 year oscillation. So we can't tell that we're seeing true acceleration (due to CO2, for example) on sea level gauges until we watch the sea level rise for "two cycles of the oscillation". The oscillation period is 60 years. So two cycles is 120 years. So sure, you'll eventually know that the sea level rise is accelerating. The bad news is that it will require 120 years of data to be sure we're seeing an acceleration (due to CO2, for example). The good news is that we've already got 20 years of data so all you have to do is to wait until roughly 2100. -- Carl