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: RMF who wrote (788452)	6/8/2014 8:01:46 AM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Recommended By Bilow FJB joseffy Respond to of 1576362

that depends on who is counting the temperatures (as Stalin would say) and where those temps are taken, have you seen some of them, next to air cond. exhaust outlets, in concrete alleys, next to black asphalt runways. In winter time when there is a lot of snow on the ground all around but next to the plowed airport runways with black asphalt do you think the temps would be higher than the surrounded areas ? I remember a few years back when we got 30 inches of snow. My temp. read 26-29 everyday for about 10 days, at National (where noaa keeps their temps) it read 34-36, not one bit of snow melted around my house for 10 days even though NOAA said it was 36 everyday. we all laughed at the gov over that do you really trust the gov. ? Does NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) keep two separate sets of climate books for the USA? wattsupwiththat.com

To: RMF who wrote (788452)	6/8/2014 8:04:13 AM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Recommended By FJB THE WATSONYOUTH TideGlider Respond to of 1576362

Al Gore and Bill Nye FAIL at doing a simple CO2 experiment Replicating Al Gore’s Climate 101 video experiment (from the 24 hour Gore-a-thon) shows that his “high school physics” could never work as advertised Readers may recall my previous essay where I pointed out how Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 Video, used in his “24 hours of climate reality”, had some serious credibility issues with editing things to make it appear as if they had actually performed the experiment, when they clearly did not. It has taken me awhile to replicate the experiment. Delays were a combination of acquisition and shipping problems, combined with my availability since I had to do this on nights and weekends. I worked initially using the original techniques and equipment, and I’ve replicated the Climate 101 experiment in other ways using improved equipment. I’ve compiled several videos. My report follows. First. as a refresher, here’s the Climate 101 video again: [iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/28991442" width="400" height="300" frameborder="0" style="border-width: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 100%; background: transparent;"][/iframe] I direct your attention to the 1 minute mark, lasting through 1:30, where the experiment is presented. And here’s my critique of it: Video analysis and scene replication suggests that Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project fabricated their Climate 101 video “Simple Experiment” The most egregious faked presentation in that video was the scene with the split screen thermometers, edited to appear as if the temperature in the jar of elevated CO2 level was rising faster than the jar without elevated CO2 level. It turns out that the thermometers were never in the jar recording the temperature rise presented in the split screen and the entire presentation was nothing but stagecraft and editing. This was proven beyond a doubt by the photoshop differencing technique used to compare each side of the split screen. With the exception of the moving thermometer fluid, both sides were identical. difference process run at full resolution – click to enlarge Exposing this lie to the viewers didn’t set well with some people, include the supposed “fairness” watchdogs over at Media Matters, who called the analysis a “waste of time”. Of course it’s only a “waste of time” when you prove their man Gore was faking the whole thing, otherwise they wouldn’t care. Personally I consider it a badge of honor for them to take notice because they usually reserve such vitriol for high profile news they don’t like, so apparently I have “arrived”. The reason why I took so much time then to show this chicanery was Mr. Gore’s pronouncement in an interview the day the video aired. His specific claim was: “The deniers claim that it’s some kind of hoax and that the global scientific community is lying to people,” he said. “It’s not a hoax, it’s high school physics.” - Al Gore in an interview with MNN 9/14/2011 So easy a high school kid can do it. Right? Bill Nye, in his narration at 0:48 in the video says: You can replicate this effect yourself in a simple lab experiment, here’s how. …and at 1:10 in the video Nye says: Within minutes you will see the temperature of the bottle with the carbon dioxide in it rising faster and higher. So, I decided to find out if that was true and if anyone could really replicate that claim, or if this was just more stagecraft chicanery. I was betting that nobody on Gore’s production team actually did this experiment, or if they did do it, it wasn’t successful, because otherwise, why would they have to fake the results in post production? The split screen video at 1:17, a screencap of which is a few paragraphs above shows a temperature difference of 2°F. Since Mr. Gore provided no other data, I’ll use that as the standard to meet for a successful experiment. The first task is to get all the exact same equipment. Again, since Mr. Gore doesn’t provide anything other than the video, finding all of that took some significant effort and time. There’s no bill of materials to work with so I had to rely on finding each item from the visuals. While I found the cookie jars and oral thermometers early on, finding the lamp fixtures, the heat lamps for them, the CO2 tank and the CO2 tank valve proved to be more elusive. Surprisingly, the valve turned out to be the hardest of all items to locate, taking about two weeks from the time I started searching to the time I had located it, ordered it and it arrived. The reason? It isn’t called a valve, but rather a “In-Line On/Off Air Adapter”. Finding the terminology was half the battle. Another surprise was finding that the heat lamps and fixtures were for lizards and terrariums and not some general purpose use. Fortunately the fixtures and lamps were sold together by the same company. While the fixtures supported up to 150 watts, Mr. Gore made no specification on bulb type or wattage, so I chose the middle of the road 100 watt bulbs from the 50, 100, and 150 watt choices available. I believe that I have done due diligence (as much as possible given no instructions from Gore) and located all the original equipment to accurately replicate the experiment as it was presented. Here’s the bill of materials and links to suppliers needed to replicate Al Gore’s experiment as it is shown in the Climate 101 video: =============================

To: RMF who wrote (788452)	6/8/2014 8:35:31 AM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Recommended By joseffy PKRBKR TideGlider Respond to of 1576362

who's taking those temp readings around the world ??? you see last year one small region in siberia had temps like 30% higher than normal, raising world temps. gee you think putin has figured out the game and will now get billions to 'study' why it got hot in a small region in siberia ?? follow the money

To: RMF who wrote (788452)	6/8/2014 1:40:07 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1576362

Satellite data show no recent warming trend worldwide: RSS Satellite Record Shows 200 Month Warming Pauseby Marlo Lewis on September 3, 2013 in Features In case you missed it, I want to call your attention to an important essay by Werner Brozek posted last week on Anthony Watts’s blog, Watts Up with That (WAWT). NASA supports two main satellite-based global temperature monitoring systems: the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) program headed by John Christy and Roy Spencer, and the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) program headed by Frank Wentz. Climate activists have generally been boosterish about RSS and negative about UAH. The RSS found a mid-troposphere warming trend from the start of its satellite record in July 1987 whereas the UAH found a cooling trend from 1979 through 1995. In 1998, Wentz published a study in Nature arguing that uncorrected instrument error associated with satellite orbital decay injected a spurious cooling bias into the UAH dataset. Spencer and Christy accepted the criticism, made the adjustment, and since 1998 their dataset has shown a long-term warming trend. However, at least through 2004, the UAH record showed less warming (0.09°C/decade) than the RSS record (0.12°C). So activists continued to take potshots at Spencer and Christy, implying (or asserting) that their political biases accounted for the discrepancy. Ah, but how quickly the wheel turns! During the 2000s, the divergence began to go the other way as the RSS record showed less warming than the UAH record. Which brings us back to Brozek and his post in WUWT. Brozek shows there has been no warming in the RSS data from Dec. 1996 through July 2013 — a 200 month warming pause. Figure explanation: “The graphic above shows 3 lines. The long line shows that RSS has been flat from December 1996 to July 2013, which is a period of 16 years and 8 months or 200 months. The other slightly higher flat line in the middle is the latest complete decade of 120 months from January 2001 to December 2010. The other slightly downward sloping line is the latest 120 months prior from present. It very clearly shows it has been cooling lately, however this cooling is not statistically significant.“ Brozek examines all the major global temperature datasets and finds various periods during which ”a slope that is at least very slightly negative ranges from 8 years and 7 months to 16 years and 8 months”: For GISS [NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies], the slope is flat since February 2001 or 12 years, 6 months (goes to July). For Hadcrut3 [UK Hadley Meteorological Office Climate Research Unit], the slope is flat since April 1997 or 16 years, 4 months (goes to July). For a combination of GISS, Hadcrut3, UAH and RSS, the slope is flat since December 2000 or 12 years, 8 months (goes to July). For Hadcrut4 [a newer version of the Hadley surface temperature dataset], the slope is flat since December 2000 or 12 years, 8 months (goes to July). For Hadsst2 [Hadley sea surface temperature dataset], the slope is flat since March 1997 or 16 years, 4 months (goes to June). For UAH, the slope is flat since January 2005 or 8 years, 7 months (goes to July using version 5.5). For RSS, the slope is flat since December 1996 or 16 years and 8 months (goes to July).