View Single Post
  #72   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
Jim Wilkins[_2_] Jim Wilkins[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default No Gorbal warming...in...58 yrs....

"Joe Gwinn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ignoramus1161 wrote:

On 2016-03-09, Joseph Gwinn wrote:
On Mar 9, 2016, Ignoramus1161 wrote
(in ):

I have a question.


If global warming is fake, how come those glaciers are
shrinking? And
so does the Arctic ice?

Do you recall when the name went from Global Warming to Climate
Change? The
reason for the new name is that the predicted rise in temperature
is not
happening. Instead, the rate of rise flattened out, and the
deviation from
prediction keeps increasing. There are many articles in the
scientific
press
(here meaning Nature and Science, which I subscribe to) trying to
explain
the
anomaly, without much success so far.

The now common statement that current year is the warmest ever,
while
literally true, is misleading in that it does not address the
fact that the
rate of rise is not following the current models. The google
search term
for
this is ???climate hiatus???.


Here is a graph showing the climate hiatus that people are trying
to
explain.
The East Anglica folk were trying to obscure the toe of this
failure to
follow the models, and said if the hiatus continued for fifteen
years, it
would be a big problem. This was in 2009, but they were referring
to the
start of the divergence in 1995 or so.

.http://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/cl...ersus-climate-
reality/#more-20667

Also lots of comparisons of various models with observation.


Judith Curry is an apostate in that she objected to the APS
becoming an
advocacy organization:

.http://judithcurry.com/2013/03/24/american-physical-society/


Joe Gwinn


Joe, I am far from a believer in global warming. I have not yet
made
up my mind on it. I look for anything that I can find to confirm or
disconfirm it. So far the best evidence for me was melting of
glaciers.


The argument is no longer if the Earth is warming - it is, a bit,
but
it's hard to measure it with great precision, because of natural
variation.

The argument is how much and how fast, and more importantly, if
humans
are the cause, and if humans can do anything about it.

The arguments for taking drastic (expensive) action NOW ultimately
rest
on how good the current models are. Things were going well until
1995
or so, when measured temperature started to diverge from predicted
temperature, and so far the divergence has become greater by the
year.

This failure of the best current models undermines the case for
doing
big things NOW, versus waiting until the various issues are sorted
out.

Nor is it obvious that it's cheaper to eliminate fossil fuels (if
this
is even possible) than to remedy the various consequences directly.
For this issue, Bjorn Lomberg (the Skeptical Environmentalist) is a
good place to start.

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skeptical_Environmentalist


This all reminds me of the kerfuffle decades ago where in the
article
and later book "Currents of Death", Brodeur claimed that the
electric
and magnetic fields from the 60 Hz AC power system in the US caused
cancer.

.http://www.paulbrodeur.net/currents_of_death_119779.htm

He was quite wrong, having confused correlation with causation: Who
lives near high-tension power lines? Not the Rich for sure. It is
well known that the Rich enjoy better health by all measures than
the
Poor. Oops.

But even if Brodeur were correct, replacing the entire US power grid
with a well-shielded power grid (which is technically feasible) is
orders of magnitude more expensive than doubling the health care
system
(which is far more likely to improve health of the Poor than
fiddling
with power wires).


Joe Gwinn


True Believers are welcome to reduce their own fossil fuel dependency
and tell us how they did it. I have a long list of "You can't
expect -me- to do that" methods that work fine, for example the
clothesline that Ed rejected.
"I did that 40 years ago. Then I got a dryer. I'm not going back. g"

https://www.nrdc.org/energy/files/bi...r_r3_final.pdf
"For example, hang-drying clothes in the summer
instead of using a drying machine will save 35 MMtCO2e."

They dry just fine outdoors in the winter too, because the humidity is
very low. Insulated clothing that doesn't dry in a day can then be
hung indoors to dewrinkle and help raise the humidity to healthier
levels.

I switched from 200W desktops to 40W laptops, high-end business
models I bought cheaply second-hand, mainly to cut their power demand
to what my small solar system can handle during a prolonged ice storm
blackout. We suffered an hour-long blackout a few days ago. They are
becoming more common as our infrastructure ages, population grows, and
improvement is fiercely opposed
https://www.eversource.com/NSTAR/outage/OutageMap.aspx
As I type this there are outages in Bellingham and Somerville MA.

What was hot in 2010 is still powerful enough to browse the Internet
or record two TV programs simultaneously, unless you obsessively need
to keep up with the neighbors.

The thicker, heavier older business-class laptops are very versatile.
I can plug in a terabyte second hard drive to keep the primary boot
SSD affordably small, and have USB3 on an ExpressCard adapter, plus
extra serial ports for my datalogging meters on a PCMCIA card, and use
the HDTV to extend the desktop. Batteries are plentiful for some
models, a problem for others.

--jsw