Posts Made By: K. Michael Malolepszy

Counterpoint to that blog at this blog:

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/the_australians_war_on_science_16.php

KMM

Dave Snope said:

This is a perfect example of how The New Scientific Method is applied by Elite AGW Scientists. In the New Scientific Method being taught at today's most modern universities, it's the results that matter.

When the signature was found to be missing in 2007 (after the latest IPCC report), alarmists objected that maybe the readings of the radiosonde thermometers might not be accurate and maybe the hot spot was there but had gone undetected. Yet hundreds of radiosondes have given the same answer, so statistically it is not possible that they missed the hot spot.

Recently the alarmists have suggested we ignore the radiosonde thermometers, but instead take the radiosonde wind measurements, apply a theory about wind shear, and run the results through their computers to estimate the temperatures. They then say that the results show that we cannot rule out the presence of a hot spot. If you believe that you'd believe anything.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html

Once again, people with real thermometers are the Stupids. Only the Elite understand that wind shear = temperature.

Well, it might not be such a bad idea for us americans to eat less meat - heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US. From the CDC at

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/FASTATS/lcod.htm

Number of deaths for leading causes of death

* Heart disease: 631,636
* Cancer: 559,888
* Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 137,119
* Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 124,583
* Accidents (unintentional injuries): 121,599
* Diabetes: 72,449
* Alzheimer's disease: 72,432
* Influenza and Pneumonia: 56,326
* Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 45,344
* Septicemia: 34,234

In the 2nd article what you describe as "gestapo type tactics" refers to the Bush administrations actions in December '08. Obama wasn't inagaurated until Jan. 20, 2009, right?

KMM

"....federal officials leaned on the bank to seal the acquisition of Merrill Lynch in December..."

..Minutes from a specially called board meeting Dec. 22 report that the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve had said that if the bank were to stop the Merrill Lynch deal, "the Treasury and Fed would remove the board and management of the corporation."

Jim Babcock said:

Here is one about how the socialist used gestapo type tactics as he sent in his jack boot thugs to pressure BofA to buy Merrill Lynch:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090610/pl_mcclatchy/3249811

I'm not sure this helps the AGW skeptics argument. If I'm reading this correctly, contrail induced warming is a regional effect. In that same article you reference it says:

"This result shows the increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975, but it is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect," said Patrick Minnis, senior research scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. The study was published April 15 in the Journal of Climate. [COLOR="Blue"]"During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady,[/COLOR]" he added.

The NASA page on this is at

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/releases/2004/04-140.html


KMM

Hugh Bartlett said:

NASA scientists have found that cirrus clouds, formed by contrails from aircraft engine exhaust, are capable of increasing average surface temperatures enough to account for a warming trend in the United States that occurred between 1975 and 1994.

Patrick Minnis, Senior Research Scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, VA,
determined the observed one percent per decade increase in cirrus cloud cover over the United States is likely due to air-traffic-induced contrails.

Using published results from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (New York) general circulation model, Minnis and his colleagues estimated contrails and their resulting cirrus clouds would increase surface and lower atmospheric temperatures by 0.36 to 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit per decade. Weather service data reveal surface and lower atmospheric temperatures across North America rose by almost 0.5 degree Fahrenheit per decade between 1975 and 1994.

Minnis worked with colleagues Kirk Ayers, Rabi Palinkonda, and Dung Phan from Analytical Services and Materials, Inc., of Hampton, VA. They used 25 years of global surface observations of cirrus clouds, temperature and humidity records from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) reanalysis dataset. They confirmed the cirrus trends with 13 years of satellite data from NASA's International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project.

The study was published in the Journal of Climate.

Here is a link to the article I have quoted announcing the study:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/04/040428061056.htm

Counterpoints at:

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n6/abs/ngeo208.html

Nature Geoscience 1, 399 - 403 (2008)
Published online: 25 May 2008 | doi:10.1038/ngeo208

Subject Category: Climate science

Warming maximum in the tropical upper troposphere deduced from thermal winds

Robert J. Allen & Steven C. Sherwood

Abstract

Climate models and theoretical expectations have predicted that the upper troposphere should be warming faster than the surface. Surprisingly, direct temperature observations from radiosonde and satellite data have often not shown this expected trend. However, non-climatic biases have been found in such measurements. Here we apply the thermal-wind equation to wind measurements from radiosonde data, which seem to be more stable than the temperature data. We derive estimates of temperature trends for the upper troposphere to the lower stratosphere since 1970. Over the period of observations, we find a maximum warming trend of 0.65plusminus0.47 K per decade near the 200 hPa pressure level, below the tropical tropopause. Warming patterns are consistent with model predictions except for small discrepancies close to the tropopause. Our findings are inconsistent with the trends derived from radiosonde temperature datasets and from NCEP reanalyses of temperature and wind fields. The agreement with models increases confidence in current model-based predictions of future climate change.

---------

http://www.ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/troposphere-not-warming

Troposphere Not Warming

This is a common denialist/skeptic meme. The reality is that while there are significant complexities in the tropospheric measurements and models, homogenized analysis indicates that generally the troposphere is doing what is expected of it in accord with the various models and general expectations.
Troposphere Not Warming

Santer et al 2008 Fig. 6

Satellite measurements have had their problems and continued observation and modeling aids in correcting for aberrations, errors, and biases. Reasonably dealing with biases in data, and aberrations, are important to assessing the reasonability of a particular data set. This of course needs to be considered with other data sets and models. This is an inter-dynamic process, and continues to improve as more and more scientists examine the models and observations.

---------

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/tropical-tropopshere-ii/

24 May 2008

Tropical tropospheric trends again

Back in December 2007, we quite heavily criticised the paper of Douglass et al (in press at IJoC) which purported to show that models and data were inconsistent when it came to the trends in the tropical troposphere. There were two strands to our critique: i) that the statistical test they used was not appropriate and ii) that they did not acknowledge the true structural uncertainty in the observations. Most subsequent discussion has been related to the statistical issue, but the second point is perhaps more important.

----------

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/10/tropical-tropopshere-iii/

12 October 2008

Tropical tropospheric trends again (again)

— gavin @ 6:45 PM - (Italian)

Many readers will remember our critique of a paper by Douglass et al on tropical tropospheric temperature trends late last year, and the discussion of the ongoing revisions to the observational datasets. Some will recall that the Douglass et al paper was trumpeted around the blogosphere as the definitive proof that models had it all wrong.

------------

Hugh Bartlett said:

Check this out for June 2009:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

Okay, it is the lower atmosphere, not surface temperature. But this is by satellite data, which is less prone to the vagaries in measurement technology that plague surface meassurements (urban heat island effects, etc.). The baseline is 1979-1998, the period of greatest surface warming, but if there is a greenhouse effect, it is in the atmosphere that it would be manifesting itself. There, the trend is basically flatlined over the last 30 years.

Your claim seems to be contradicted here:

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0907/08icesat/

NASA survey reveals dramatic Arctic sea ice thinning
NASA NEWS RELEASE
Posted: July 8, 2009

WASHINGTON -- Arctic sea ice thinned dramatically between the winters of 2004 and 2008, with thin seasonal ice replacing thick older ice as the dominant type for the first time on record. The new results, based on data from a NASA Earth-orbiting spacecraft, provide further evidence for the rapid, ongoing transformation of the Arctic's ice cover.

Doug Peterson said:

You can click on any year archived and see how cold it was. The earliest, 1958 was a bit warmer than 2009 is shaping up to be. In fact, I clicked thru all 50+ years and this summer so far is colder than all 50+ years of data.

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

In the 1.25" format the long to medium focal length University Optics Abbe Orthoscopics are pretty good but very affordable eyepieces. Not nearly as wide AFOV as Panoptics, naglers or other premium wide fields, but they are a much simpler design that will work well with a SCT. The short focal length ones though (7mm and less) have very short eye relief - way too short in my opinion.

K. Michael M.

John Basham said:

I'm looking at getting a 8" CPC or SE Celestron.

Can someone point me towards some affordable eyepieces and sizes. BTW, I'm in my mid forties (ouch), I've read that can affect pupil size.

I'm guessing it would be better to put the money towards a quality barlow and 2 or 3 eyepieces than the Celestron lens and filter kit? I may get a 6.3 focal reducer also.

I was thinking a Orion Shorty Plus Barlow and have heard UO and TMB have some good, affordable products.

Thanks

Find out where and what hours your local state-owned wildlife areas and refuges have. We use them for observing here in Missouri all the time. Might also want to check national wildlife refuges.

K. Michael M.

Marc Whitsett said:

I have an irregular and somewhat unpredictable schedule; I find myself out of town frequently on short notice and don't have the ability to "call someone" to ask if I can use 40 square feet of real estate to sit in a chair and do star gazing (usually binos) for an hour or two. I've tried "hiding" on farmer's land, sneaking into parks, and even roadside parking only to spend most of my time fearing I'll be run off or hassled. I found a metro park (closed after 8 PM like most parks: they aren't dark friendly) and was star gazing just outside of the gates, but got run off and issued a citation (Perseid observing). Any thoughts about finding a place to star gaze on the run for an hour or two with a chair and binos without feeling paranoid, guilty of something, or otherwise feeling like a pest??

Thanks.

Marc in Cincinnati

Maksutov-Cassegrains are nice - good, flat field. I have a MK66 that does pretty well for a 6". Of course, the 8" is gonna be a lot more expensive than a 6" Mak-Cass. My only complaint is the largish contrast robbing CO and cool down times.

Mike

Brian Coltrane said:

I've had newts & refractors. I still love my apo, but I'm looking for a compact scope with about 8" aperture for a dual mount setup (all visual, no AP). One thing a didn't like about my newts was the coma problem. I'm hoping to find a good deal on Astromart. Any advice as to what I should be going for??

Tracing Graham Hancock’s Shifting Cataclysm

"An examination of a specific portion of Graham Hancock’s book Fingerprints of the Gods, relating to Earth Crustal Displacement, the climates and fauna of Siberia and Alaska, and the deaths of the mammoths, finds it to be critically flawed..."

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/tracing_graham_hancockrsquos_shifting_cataclysm/

Ron Streetenberger said:

Attached here is the opening page of Graham Hancock's excellent book "Fingerprints of the Gods". If you havent read it, you are missing a good read.