Climate change a different take on what to do about it.
#281
Posted 2011-December-17, 19:19
#283
Posted 2011-December-17, 21:18
cloa513, on 2011-December-17, 20:31, said:
MathWorks periodically does big trainings for our big customers.
I wrote (and sometimes teach) the statistics master class
(Good to keep my hands dirty and fun to talk to the customers)
Started out with some basic stuff about data management (joins, tall to wide conversions)
Moved on to distribution fitting, random number generation, and hypothesis testing
Long section on nonparametric modeling in low and high dimensions.
Moved onto bootstraps and finished up with particle filters.
#284
Posted 2011-December-17, 21:20
Winstonm, on 2011-December-17, 11:59, said:
Al_U_Card spent years pushing conspiracy theories about 911...
Why are in any way surprised that he's moved on to global warming.
We should count our blessings that he isn't also obsessing about fluoridation or the freemasons
#285
Posted 2011-December-17, 22:18
Winstonm, on 2011-December-17, 18:25, said:
Quote
It seems amazingly unbelievable to me that in a climate system that is known to have fluctuations with periods of decades, centuries, millenia and even much much larger that someone would seriously claim that 17 years data is enough but 10 years is not enough.
I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon
#286
Posted 2011-December-17, 22:24
Cascade, on 2011-December-17, 22:18, said:
You are leaving out the critical qualifier "at least"...17 years.
Besides, the article is a response to the "cherry picking" of skeptics who argue that there has not been warming in the last 10-12 years. The article has more details that are interesting unless the goal is to doubt, irrespective of any new information.
But, assuming you are genuinely interested, I'll make it easier. From the linked article:
Quote
In fingerprinting, we analyze longer, multi-decadal temperature records, and we beat down the large year-to-year temperature variability caused by purely natural phenomena (like El Niños and La Niñas). This makes it easier to identify a slowly-emerging signal arising from gradual, human-caused changes in atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases, Santer said.
The research shows that climate models can and do simulate short, 10- to 12-year hiatus periods with minimal warming, even when the models are run with historical increases in greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosol particles. They find that tropospheric temperature records must be at least 17 years long to discriminate between internal climate noise and the signal of human-caused changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere.
#287
Posted 2011-December-18, 00:15
Winstonm, on 2011-December-17, 22:24, said:
Besides, the article is a response to the "cherry picking" of skeptics who argue that there has not been warming in the last 10-12 years. The article has more details that are interesting unless the goal is to doubt, irrespective of any new information.
But, assuming you are genuinely interested, I'll make it easier. From the linked article:
I understand "at least". Nevertheless they are saying that in some cases 17 years is enough.
This type of cherry picking is not the exclusive domain of sceptics. IPCC reports have included graphs with exaggerated multiple trendlines based on 'cherry picked' start times to sub-series of their data. These techniques are bogus, misleading and discredited but look good if you want to make a point.
I don't know where the truth lies however these sorts of graphs and findings do little to impress me of the credibility of the arguments.
I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon
#288
Posted 2011-December-18, 01:19
Willie Smits pointed out that the peat fires which sometimes have raged out of control for months in Borneo put prodigious amounts of Co2 into the atmosphere until they are finally extinguished. Borneo isn't the only place to have wildfires, peat or otherwise.
Living growing biomass has a markedly different effect than the dead stuff and not all growing stuff is the same either; trees generally will have a very different effect than grasses. Someone once said the trees are the lungs of the planet and we are being as casual about destroying forests as a two pack a day chain smoker.
These are things which could be relatively easilly and cheaply attended to, and also are already proven to affect the climate at least regionally. Both statistically and observationally )
It seems to me that we could start out there; planting a mix of trees abundantly; selectively cutting instead of clear cutting and then burning the residue. Even just not burning the residue would help! if something must be done because of fears of bug habitat, then bulldoze a trench, push them in and doze some dirt over them! They will sequester carbon AND water, and provide habitat for new plant growth. It's called hugelculture in gardening terms.
Learning how to recreate natural systems, do something about fuel & fuel efficient cooking stoves for the poor in 3rd world countries ( deforesting the land in any case, but making charcoal is horrifically polluting as it's normally done, and not just C02.) Crack down on the cement industry which is responsible for a huge amount of pollution.
It's too much to hope that anyone would ever consider the amount of pollution being caused daily by war, what with planes and tanks and bombs and so forth, but maybe we could at least tag a rider on the money that we keep handing over to car companies that no more will be forthcoming until fuel efficiencies double. (Without artificially jacking up the sticker prices.) If they can't do it, then the money will have to go to found new car companies who will do better. Whatever happens to those bright young men who win these challenges and get 200 miles per gallon? Admittedly most of them look like they are driving a luge rather than a car but still...
Just doing that would do a whole lot more to resolve the issues we may be causing than howling vague generalities; tossing money at random industries with "green" somewhere prominently in their prospectus, and banning incandescent light bulbs. imo.
#289
Posted 2011-December-20, 15:52
a really inconvenient truth.
Only one of four large regions of the United States showed a significant relationship between carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere and the size of floods over the last 100 years. This was in the southwestern region, where floods have become smaller as CO2 has increased.
This does not mean that no strong relationship between flooding and greenhouse gases will emerge in the future.
An increase in flood magnitudes remains one of the most anticipated impacts of climate change, and land and water resource managers are asking questions about how to estimate future flood risks and develop effective flood mitigation strategies for the future.
A new report published by U.S. Geological Survey scientists in the Hydrologic Sciences Journal looks at this potential linkage using historical records of floods throughout the nation. Scientists studied flood conditions at 200 locations across the United States looking back 127 years through 2008.
"Currently we do not see a clear pattern that enables us to understand how climate change will alter flood conditions in the future, but the USGS will continue to collect new data over time and conduct new analyses as conditions change," said USGS scientist and lead author Robert Hirsch. "Changes in snow packs, frozen ground, soil moisture and storm tracks are all mechanisms that could be altered by greenhouse gas concentrations and possibly change flood behavior. As we continue research, we will consider these and other factors in our analyses."
The decrease of floods in the southwestern region is consistent with other research findings that this region has been getting drier and experienced less precipitation as a likely result of climate change.
Climate change.....we'll have to stop that then....but which way????
#290
Posted 2011-December-20, 16:32
Al_U_Card, on 2011-December-20, 15:52, said:
personally i don't care which way, as long as it costs me plenty of money
#291
Posted 2011-December-20, 18:24
Quote
An increase in flood magnitudes remains one of the most anticipated impacts of climate change, and land and water resource managers are asking questions about how to estimate future flood risks and develop effective flood mitigation strategies for the future.
Brown skinned foreigners must be statistically insignificant...
Quote
#292
Posted 2011-December-20, 20:53
Winstonm, on 2011-December-17, 22:24, said:
Besides, the article is a response to the "cherry picking" of skeptics who argue that there has not been warming in the last 10-12 years. The article has more details that are interesting unless the goal is to doubt, irrespective of any new information.
But, assuming you are genuinely interested, I'll make it easier. From the linked article:
Winstonm, on 2011-December-20, 18:24, said:
Quote
A couple of days ago you argued that 10 years data was not enough.
Now you argue from one data point.
Winstonm, on 2011-December-16, 21:51, said:
And you bring in a narrative argument by playing a race card.
I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon
#293
Posted 2011-December-20, 21:07
#294
Posted 2011-December-20, 21:12
Winstonm, on 2011-December-20, 21:07, said:
Quote
And Pakistanis can tell you where all that water fell.
#295
Posted 2011-December-20, 22:12
Winstonm, on 2011-December-20, 21:12, said:
And the analysis made by NOAA of that and other phenomena (the Russian heat-wave)attributed it to the blocking high set up by the Arctic Oscillation, part of regular weather patterns that have had the same cyclical effect since measurements and records exist.
CO2 and Global Warming attribution was specifically rejected by that scientific body.
#296
Posted 2011-December-23, 14:21
#297
Posted 2011-December-23, 15:26
The contention is that we are in a crisis that requires action of the most drastic and expensive kind (as proposed by the UN's IPCC and the green advocacy groups and related green-industries that stand to benefit the most). If CO2 is not the "culprit" then what can we possibly do to change the weather? So, pull out all the stops to identify it as such and resist and remove any deterrence or debate about the factual proof and observational confirmation of the relationship, as proposed.
Without that proposition, they have nothing to offer but their cries of: "The sky is falling!" based upon model-generated projections that depend upon the putative (and as yet unconfirmed) greenhouse effect of CO2, needingly tripled by increasing water vapor in a warmer world.
The models are unvalidated (they projected global temps that are in excess of their "no increase in emissions" scenario) and the temperature record is suspect but clear enough to see that we are still warming globally after a series of global temperature fluctuations over the last several millenia. Just seeing the "adjustments" conveniently made by Hansen and the GISS gang is enough to question the methodology and refute the "Hottest year evuh!" meme.
#298
Posted 2012-January-02, 11:37
#299
Posted 2012-January-08, 21:39
These observations reveal a continuum of month-long pH variability with standard deviations from 0.004 to 0.277 and ranges spanning 0.024 to 1.430 pH units. The nature of the observed variability was also highly site-dependent, with characteristic diel, semi-diurnal, and stochastic patterns of varying amplitudes. These biome-specific pH signatures disclose current levels of exposure to both high and low dissolved CO2, often demonstrating that resident organisms are already experiencing pH regimes that are not predicted until 2100.
All in all, just another brick out of their wall...
#300
Posted 2012-January-11, 15:26
Some people believe the Mayans predicted the end of time for us in Dec of this year, maybe that's why governments etc. are determined to take us to hell in a handbasket with pollution, spectacular overconsumption which necessitates ripping the guts out of the world without regard for anything but the bottom line, and chest thumping between nations all over the place. Bring it all on. The faster we put ourselves out of the picture the happier and more peaceful the rest of the universe will be.
I once heard a comment that this earth might be a science experiment such as we might do on fruit flies (not sure if that related to the Mayan calendar or not..the date for the experiment to run out maybe?). In any case if it did happen to be so, I imagine some creature is disappointed in the results. And I am gonna stop listening to the news.