By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
Dec 4th 2004, 3:57 am
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
in article BDD7A7A7.2A0AB%[email protected], Earl Evleth at
[email protected] wrote on 4/12/04 17:43:
Here is a Le Monde article published today which covers much
of the same subject, in French.
Earl
**
Des étés de plus en plus chauds en France et en Europe
LE MONDE | 04.12.04 | 13h25
La canicule de 2003 sur la France et une partie de l'Europe fut l'une des
plus importantes et des plus meurtrières de ces cent cinquante dernières
années. Provoquée par un immense "chapeau" d'air chaud, qui est resté bloqué
au-dessus de cette région pendant plusieurs jours, elle a entraîné la mort
de 22 000 à 35 000 personnes dans les pays concernés, dont 15 000 en France.
En raison de la sécheresse, les dommages causés aux récoltes ont été évalués
à 12,3 milliards de dollars (9,4 milliards d'euros) par les sociétés de
réassurance, et les gigantesques feux de forêt, qui ont ravagé notamment le
Portugal, Ã 1,6 milliard de dollars (1,2 milliard d'euros).
Depuis, à l'aide de modèles et de simulations numériques, les scientifiques
tentent de comprendre quelle est la part de l'homme dans cette catastrophe
climatique, et de prévoir la recrudescence de tels événements pendant le XXI
esiècle.
Une étude réalisée par Peter Stott, du Hadley Center for Climate Prediction
and Research (université de Reading, Grande-Bretagne), et deux autres
chercheurs, pointe le rôle de l'homme. Selon ces scientifiques, qui publient
une étude dans la revue Nature du 2 décembre, l'espèce humaine, par ses
émissions de gaz à effet de serre dans l'atmosphère entre 1851 et 2003 "a au
moins doublé le risque d'occurrence d'étés aussi chauds que celui de 2003 en
Europe" .
Pour réaliser cette rétrospective, les chercheurs ont utilisé le modèle
climatique HadCM3, qu'ils ont alimenté avec les températures estivales
mesurées entre juin et août sur l'Europe ces cent cinquante dernières
années. Ils ont ensuite effectué deux simulations. L'une a permis d'évaluer
l'évolution climatique en tenant compte des événements naturels et de
l'influence humaine. Ce qui inclut les émissions de gaz à effet de serre.
L'autre a simulé un climat naturel sans intervention humaine.
"Notre analyse sur cent cinquante ans montre que les étés européens se
réchauffent, en raison du changement climatique provoqué par l'homme",
concluent-ils. Réalisant une projection jusqu'à la fin du siècle, ils
estiment aussi que "la probabilité d'étés dotés de températures moyennes
supérieures à celles de 2003 augmente rapidement, de l'ordre d'un été sur
deux jusqu'en 2040. A la fin du XXI esiècle, 2003 pourrait être classé comme
un été anormalement froid en fonction des nouvelles conditions climatiques".
Un commentaire de Christoph Schãr (Zurich, Suisse) et Gerd Jendritzky
(Fribourg, Allemagne), publié dans le même numéro de Nature , tempère ces
affirmations. Ces climatologues reconnaissent que l'étude de Peter Stott
"est la première tentative réussie de détecter l'infuence humaine sur un
événement climatique extrême spécifique". Mais ils estiment aussi que des
études détaillées sont nécessaires pour corroborer ces conclusions. Car
Peter Stott et ses confrères ont travaillé sur tout l'été 2003 - et non pas
sur la période de la canicule -, et sur l'ensemble de l'Europe. Par
ailleurs, l'analyse d'une canicule comme celle de 2003 "exige des moyens
informatiques très importants et doit prendre en compte la complexité des
processus de la surface du sol" .
Serge Planton, responsable de la recherche climatique à Météo France, juge
également l'étude de Nature très intéressante. Ses auteurs "ont réalisé une
simulation à basse résolution, avec une grille aux mailles très larges (300
km), qui prend en compte une évolution sur une période de temps très longue.
Mais ils se sont focalisés sur la période estivale et prennent en compte une
région européenne, alors qu'on étudie habituellement le problème pour toute
la planète ou pour la France" .
Une simulation réalisée pour la France par Michel Déqué (Météo France) et
Laurent Di (Laboratoire de météorologie dynamique) montre ainsi que la
probabilité de voir la température dépasser 35 °C en été pourrait augmenter
d'un facteur cinq à dix d'ici à la fin du siècle, jusqu'en 2070-2100. Ces
travaux ont été réalisés dans le cadre du projet Imfrex (Impact des
changements anthropiques sur la fréquence des phénomènes extrêmes, des
vents, des températures et des précipitations). Un projet soutenu par le
ministère de l'écologie et du développement durable, et qui s'intègre dans
le programme "Gestion et impacts du changement climatique".
[email protected] wrote on 4/12/04 17:43:
Here is a Le Monde article published today which covers much
of the same subject, in French.
Earl
**
Des étés de plus en plus chauds en France et en Europe
LE MONDE | 04.12.04 | 13h25
La canicule de 2003 sur la France et une partie de l'Europe fut l'une des
plus importantes et des plus meurtrières de ces cent cinquante dernières
années. Provoquée par un immense "chapeau" d'air chaud, qui est resté bloqué
au-dessus de cette région pendant plusieurs jours, elle a entraîné la mort
de 22 000 à 35 000 personnes dans les pays concernés, dont 15 000 en France.
En raison de la sécheresse, les dommages causés aux récoltes ont été évalués
à 12,3 milliards de dollars (9,4 milliards d'euros) par les sociétés de
réassurance, et les gigantesques feux de forêt, qui ont ravagé notamment le
Portugal, Ã 1,6 milliard de dollars (1,2 milliard d'euros).
Depuis, à l'aide de modèles et de simulations numériques, les scientifiques
tentent de comprendre quelle est la part de l'homme dans cette catastrophe
climatique, et de prévoir la recrudescence de tels événements pendant le XXI
esiècle.
Une étude réalisée par Peter Stott, du Hadley Center for Climate Prediction
and Research (université de Reading, Grande-Bretagne), et deux autres
chercheurs, pointe le rôle de l'homme. Selon ces scientifiques, qui publient
une étude dans la revue Nature du 2 décembre, l'espèce humaine, par ses
émissions de gaz à effet de serre dans l'atmosphère entre 1851 et 2003 "a au
moins doublé le risque d'occurrence d'étés aussi chauds que celui de 2003 en
Europe" .
Pour réaliser cette rétrospective, les chercheurs ont utilisé le modèle
climatique HadCM3, qu'ils ont alimenté avec les températures estivales
mesurées entre juin et août sur l'Europe ces cent cinquante dernières
années. Ils ont ensuite effectué deux simulations. L'une a permis d'évaluer
l'évolution climatique en tenant compte des événements naturels et de
l'influence humaine. Ce qui inclut les émissions de gaz à effet de serre.
L'autre a simulé un climat naturel sans intervention humaine.
"Notre analyse sur cent cinquante ans montre que les étés européens se
réchauffent, en raison du changement climatique provoqué par l'homme",
concluent-ils. Réalisant une projection jusqu'à la fin du siècle, ils
estiment aussi que "la probabilité d'étés dotés de températures moyennes
supérieures à celles de 2003 augmente rapidement, de l'ordre d'un été sur
deux jusqu'en 2040. A la fin du XXI esiècle, 2003 pourrait être classé comme
un été anormalement froid en fonction des nouvelles conditions climatiques".
Un commentaire de Christoph Schãr (Zurich, Suisse) et Gerd Jendritzky
(Fribourg, Allemagne), publié dans le même numéro de Nature , tempère ces
affirmations. Ces climatologues reconnaissent que l'étude de Peter Stott
"est la première tentative réussie de détecter l'infuence humaine sur un
événement climatique extrême spécifique". Mais ils estiment aussi que des
études détaillées sont nécessaires pour corroborer ces conclusions. Car
Peter Stott et ses confrères ont travaillé sur tout l'été 2003 - et non pas
sur la période de la canicule -, et sur l'ensemble de l'Europe. Par
ailleurs, l'analyse d'une canicule comme celle de 2003 "exige des moyens
informatiques très importants et doit prendre en compte la complexité des
processus de la surface du sol" .
Serge Planton, responsable de la recherche climatique à Météo France, juge
également l'étude de Nature très intéressante. Ses auteurs "ont réalisé une
simulation à basse résolution, avec une grille aux mailles très larges (300
km), qui prend en compte une évolution sur une période de temps très longue.
Mais ils se sont focalisés sur la période estivale et prennent en compte une
région européenne, alors qu'on étudie habituellement le problème pour toute
la planète ou pour la France" .
Une simulation réalisée pour la France par Michel Déqué (Météo France) et
Laurent Di (Laboratoire de météorologie dynamique) montre ainsi que la
probabilité de voir la température dépasser 35 °C en été pourrait augmenter
d'un facteur cinq à dix d'ici à la fin du siècle, jusqu'en 2070-2100. Ces
travaux ont été réalisés dans le cadre du projet Imfrex (Impact des
changements anthropiques sur la fréquence des phénomènes extrêmes, des
vents, des températures et des précipitations). Un projet soutenu par le
ministère de l'écologie et du développement durable, et qui s'intègre dans
le programme "Gestion et impacts du changement climatique".
Dec 4th 2004, 4:04 am
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 17:57:41 +0100, Earl Evleth <[email protected]>
wrote:
>in article BDD7A7A7.2A0AB%[email protected], Earl Evleth at
>[email protected] wrote on 4/12/04 17:43:
>Here is a Le Monde article published today which covers much
>of the same subject, in French.
>Earl
>**
>Des étés de plus en plus chauds en France et en Europe
>LE MONDE | 04.12.04 | 13h25
and one from the Scotsman ...
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opin...m?id=540302003
Humanity may not be to blame for global warming after all
SALLIE BALIUNAS
LAST week, the European Environment Agency revealed that the EU was
lagging, quite significantly, in achieving its targets for reducing
emissions of greenhouse gases under the Kyoto Protocol, because of a
particularly cold winter, which required consumers to use more energy.
Based on a sense of dread, Europeans have been led to believe that
drastic measures such as Kyoto are necessary to prevent the risk of
negative outcomes from a changing climate. Unfortunately, it is more
likely that resources are being misallocated to a problem which is not
vetted in scientific facts.
Thermometers across the world have recorded a globally-averaged
surface warming trend of approximately 0.6C during the 20th century,
although much of that trend occurred early in the century, before the
major increase in human-caused emissions.
A drawback of the globally-averaged surface temperature record
obtained from thermometers is its brevity - the record begins in the
mid-19th century. The climate change debate has been fuelled by the
misconception that the 19th century is "normal" and that the late 20th
century warming trend (about 0.1C per decade) is unusually strong.
However, the earth’s climate changes naturally, and this is the
backdrop against which the influence of human beings must be judged.
The UK has one of the longest-running instrumental measurements of
temperature: the Central England Temperature Record, which started in
1659 and encompasses roughly the area of London, Bristol and Preston.
That shows a gradual and natural warming trend of 0.8C over the past
300 years, 200 years before the increase in greenhouse gases.
To go back further, teams of researchers have mined ecological
reservoirs that hold information on past climate change. These include
glaciers, tree growth, coral growth, sea floor sediment, boreholes,
ice sheet cores, insects, pollen, stalactites and stalagmites, as well
as documentary records. Nearly all yield historical information on
local climate.
A recent review of more than 240 scientific articles using this proxy
data by a team from Harvard University shows that the climate in most
locations was not extreme or unusual during the 20th century. The
warmest, or most extreme, climate occurred in the Medieval Warm
Period, between the 9th and 14th centuries.
HH Lamb, the founder of the climatic research unit at East Anglia
University, studied how climate influenced human affairs. He found
that during the 12th and 13th centuries, England's climate was warm
enough to support more than 50 vineyards, signifying that May frosts
were rare. More than ten vineyards flourished for more than 100 years.
About 1150 AD, William of Malmesbury noted in De Pontificibus: "No
county in England has so many or so good vineyards as this
Gloucester."
But this was short-lived. A cooling period known as the Little Ice Age
began by 1300, and it persisted in some regions until 1900. Western
Europe experienced more frequent acute winters, early frosts and more
climate variability from year to year. The Little Ice Age intensified
from about 1550 to 1700. All seasons experienced low temperatures on
average, accompanied by high variability from year to year. Extreme
storms occurred in the North Sea and central Europe, with the 1690s
being perhaps the most severe decade. During 1693- 1700, Scotland
suffered its worst famine when crops failed for seven out of eight
years.
By the 19th century, the Little Ice Age had largely abated. To some
extent, early 20th century warmth can be seen as a natural recovery
from the harsh cold of previous centuries, and the 20th century is
neither extreme nor unusual compared to the last 1,000 years. Little
firm knowledge exists to explain the broad climate extremes of the
last millennium, making forecasts of future climate highly uncertain.
The scientific data from the past millennium suggest a context for the
debate about climate change - namely, that a trend of human-induced
warming does not exist. Politicians and interest groups are keen to
scare the public into believing that they are the cause of a warming
climate, and that costly policies are necessary to mitigate the risks.
The debate needs scientific facts - not psychological instincts - to
inform its course of action.
# Dr Baliunas is an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics.
This article:
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opin...m?id=540302003
Climate change:
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=52
Websites:
Friends of the Earth Scotland
http://www.foe-scotland.org.uk/
UK Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction
http://www.met-office.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
http://www.unfccc.int
US Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/
--
Martin
wrote:
>in article BDD7A7A7.2A0AB%[email protected], Earl Evleth at
>[email protected] wrote on 4/12/04 17:43:
>Here is a Le Monde article published today which covers much
>of the same subject, in French.
>Earl
>**
>Des étés de plus en plus chauds en France et en Europe
>LE MONDE | 04.12.04 | 13h25
and one from the Scotsman ...
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opin...m?id=540302003
Humanity may not be to blame for global warming after all
SALLIE BALIUNAS
LAST week, the European Environment Agency revealed that the EU was
lagging, quite significantly, in achieving its targets for reducing
emissions of greenhouse gases under the Kyoto Protocol, because of a
particularly cold winter, which required consumers to use more energy.
Based on a sense of dread, Europeans have been led to believe that
drastic measures such as Kyoto are necessary to prevent the risk of
negative outcomes from a changing climate. Unfortunately, it is more
likely that resources are being misallocated to a problem which is not
vetted in scientific facts.
Thermometers across the world have recorded a globally-averaged
surface warming trend of approximately 0.6C during the 20th century,
although much of that trend occurred early in the century, before the
major increase in human-caused emissions.
A drawback of the globally-averaged surface temperature record
obtained from thermometers is its brevity - the record begins in the
mid-19th century. The climate change debate has been fuelled by the
misconception that the 19th century is "normal" and that the late 20th
century warming trend (about 0.1C per decade) is unusually strong.
However, the earth’s climate changes naturally, and this is the
backdrop against which the influence of human beings must be judged.
The UK has one of the longest-running instrumental measurements of
temperature: the Central England Temperature Record, which started in
1659 and encompasses roughly the area of London, Bristol and Preston.
That shows a gradual and natural warming trend of 0.8C over the past
300 years, 200 years before the increase in greenhouse gases.
To go back further, teams of researchers have mined ecological
reservoirs that hold information on past climate change. These include
glaciers, tree growth, coral growth, sea floor sediment, boreholes,
ice sheet cores, insects, pollen, stalactites and stalagmites, as well
as documentary records. Nearly all yield historical information on
local climate.
A recent review of more than 240 scientific articles using this proxy
data by a team from Harvard University shows that the climate in most
locations was not extreme or unusual during the 20th century. The
warmest, or most extreme, climate occurred in the Medieval Warm
Period, between the 9th and 14th centuries.
HH Lamb, the founder of the climatic research unit at East Anglia
University, studied how climate influenced human affairs. He found
that during the 12th and 13th centuries, England's climate was warm
enough to support more than 50 vineyards, signifying that May frosts
were rare. More than ten vineyards flourished for more than 100 years.
About 1150 AD, William of Malmesbury noted in De Pontificibus: "No
county in England has so many or so good vineyards as this
Gloucester."
But this was short-lived. A cooling period known as the Little Ice Age
began by 1300, and it persisted in some regions until 1900. Western
Europe experienced more frequent acute winters, early frosts and more
climate variability from year to year. The Little Ice Age intensified
from about 1550 to 1700. All seasons experienced low temperatures on
average, accompanied by high variability from year to year. Extreme
storms occurred in the North Sea and central Europe, with the 1690s
being perhaps the most severe decade. During 1693- 1700, Scotland
suffered its worst famine when crops failed for seven out of eight
years.
By the 19th century, the Little Ice Age had largely abated. To some
extent, early 20th century warmth can be seen as a natural recovery
from the harsh cold of previous centuries, and the 20th century is
neither extreme nor unusual compared to the last 1,000 years. Little
firm knowledge exists to explain the broad climate extremes of the
last millennium, making forecasts of future climate highly uncertain.
The scientific data from the past millennium suggest a context for the
debate about climate change - namely, that a trend of human-induced
warming does not exist. Politicians and interest groups are keen to
scare the public into believing that they are the cause of a warming
climate, and that costly policies are necessary to mitigate the risks.
The debate needs scientific facts - not psychological instincts - to
inform its course of action.
# Dr Baliunas is an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics.
This article:
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opin...m?id=540302003
Climate change:
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=52
Websites:
Friends of the Earth Scotland
http://www.foe-scotland.org.uk/
UK Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction
http://www.met-office.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
http://www.unfccc.int
US Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/
--
Martin
Dec 4th 2004, 4:38 am
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
in article [email protected], [email protected] at
[email protected] wrote on 4/12/04 18:04:
>
>>
>
> and one from the Scotsman ...
> http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opin...m?id=540302003
> Humanity may not be to blame for global warming after all
>
> SALLIE BALIUNAS
Oh, yes, apparently another one of those scientists who have drifted
over to "think tank scholarship ----
Here is some comment on it--
*****
Sallie Baliunas, the Global Warming Debate, and Think Tank Scholarship
Olivia Koski
Public policy makers increasingly rely on the research of think tank
scholars to guide their policy decisions. But who checks the accuracy of
think tank scholar research? Unlike academic journal publishing, which
follows a rigorous system of peer review and editorial oversight, think
tanks publish opinion pieces without regard to the peer review process.
Their policy publications are not based on pure academics, but on a complex
interaction between academic, political, and economic interests. In
Washington, there is no time to focus on the academic details. As Eric
Altermann points out in his book What Liberal Media? ,think tank scholars
³are expected to spend at least as much time networking with reporters and
government staffers as on research.² 1Efficient dissemination of information
is as important as the information itself in the think tank business of
knowledge.
Sallie Baliunas of the Marshall Institute fits Altermann¹s think tank
scholar profile well. Regarding her involvement in the global warming
debate, she has spent less time on the scholarship of global warming and
more time advocating the idea that it is simply a myth. She is a senior
scientist at the Marshall Institute, which supports her writing of articles
against the Kyoto treaty (³Bush right to oppose [Kyoto] treaty²) 2and the
promotion of the idea that global warming is a natural process caused by
increased radiation from the sun (³The Sun Also Warms²). 3Though she has
published relatively little in academic journals on the issue, articles such
as these are numerous in conservative political forums, such as the website
TechCentralStation.com ,³where free markets meet technology.² 4Though she is
not considered a global warming expert by professional climate scientists,
she is oft quoted by the anti-Kyoto folks as the expert voice that proves
global warming is a hoax (see any article by Charli Coon of the Heritage
Foundation 5or by Chris de Freitas 6).Her global warming research has been
funded, in part, by corporate oil interests.
******
I cut the rest but you can get the rest at ----
http://www.colorado.edu/pwr/occasion...iebaliunas.htm
I have read almost everything she talks about somewhere else.
It is not totally false, but the implications are pointed
in a curious direction. Some scientists make their reputations,
and get support, for taking a contrarian point of view.
I noticed from the Marshall web page
http://www.marshall.org/experts.php?id=38
that a lot of "papers" are listed, which you can click up
and see.
If you do so, note where they are published or presented.
She is NOT getting her work published in peer review professional journals.
Some of them are nice appearing, for instance
"The Sun Also Warms"
was presented at the GCMI/CEI Cooler Heads Coalition, Washington, DC.
Some is not quite right. I will take some time and go over some of it.
But I am going out tonight.
Earl
*****
Select Works
"Combatting global warming would be a waste ," Sallie Baliunas, July 25,
2003
"Lessons & Limits of Climate History: Was the 20th Century Climate Unusual?
," Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas, April 17, 2003
"Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years: A
Reappraisal ," Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood B. Idso, Craig Idso
and David R. Legates, April 11, 2003
"Extreme Weather Events: Examining Causes and Responses ," Sallie Baliunas
and Willie Soon, March 25, 2003
"Climate History and the Sun ," Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, June 5,
2001
"First Eurocongress on the Solar Cycle and Terrestrial Climate ," Willie
Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Sherwood B. Idso and Eric S.
Posmentier, September 30, 2000
"Calculating the Climatic Impacts of Increased CO2: The Issue of Model
Validation ," Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Sherwood
B. Idso and Eric S. Posmentier, September 30, 2000
"The Sun Also Warms ," Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, March 24, 2000
"Increasing Carbon Dioxide and Global Climate Change ," Sallie Baliunas and
Willie Soon, January 1, 2000
"Why So Hot? Don't Blame Man, Blame the Sun ," Sallie Baliunas, August 5,
1999
"Hot Times or Hot Air: The Sun in the Science of Global Warming* ," Sallie
Baliunas, August 7, 1998
"A Scientific Discussion of Climate Change - Comments on ," Sallie Baliunas
and Willie Soon, November 1, 1997
"Uncertainties in Climate Modeling: Solar Variability and Other Factors ,"
Sallie Baliunas, September 17, 1996
"Are Human Activities Causing Global Warming? ," Sallie Baliunas, January 1,
1995
[email protected] wrote on 4/12/04 18:04:
>
>>
>
> and one from the Scotsman ...
> http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opin...m?id=540302003
> Humanity may not be to blame for global warming after all
>
> SALLIE BALIUNAS
Oh, yes, apparently another one of those scientists who have drifted
over to "think tank scholarship ----
Here is some comment on it--
*****
Sallie Baliunas, the Global Warming Debate, and Think Tank Scholarship
Olivia Koski
Public policy makers increasingly rely on the research of think tank
scholars to guide their policy decisions. But who checks the accuracy of
think tank scholar research? Unlike academic journal publishing, which
follows a rigorous system of peer review and editorial oversight, think
tanks publish opinion pieces without regard to the peer review process.
Their policy publications are not based on pure academics, but on a complex
interaction between academic, political, and economic interests. In
Washington, there is no time to focus on the academic details. As Eric
Altermann points out in his book What Liberal Media? ,think tank scholars
³are expected to spend at least as much time networking with reporters and
government staffers as on research.² 1Efficient dissemination of information
is as important as the information itself in the think tank business of
knowledge.
Sallie Baliunas of the Marshall Institute fits Altermann¹s think tank
scholar profile well. Regarding her involvement in the global warming
debate, she has spent less time on the scholarship of global warming and
more time advocating the idea that it is simply a myth. She is a senior
scientist at the Marshall Institute, which supports her writing of articles
against the Kyoto treaty (³Bush right to oppose [Kyoto] treaty²) 2and the
promotion of the idea that global warming is a natural process caused by
increased radiation from the sun (³The Sun Also Warms²). 3Though she has
published relatively little in academic journals on the issue, articles such
as these are numerous in conservative political forums, such as the website
TechCentralStation.com ,³where free markets meet technology.² 4Though she is
not considered a global warming expert by professional climate scientists,
she is oft quoted by the anti-Kyoto folks as the expert voice that proves
global warming is a hoax (see any article by Charli Coon of the Heritage
Foundation 5or by Chris de Freitas 6).Her global warming research has been
funded, in part, by corporate oil interests.
******
I cut the rest but you can get the rest at ----
http://www.colorado.edu/pwr/occasion...iebaliunas.htm
I have read almost everything she talks about somewhere else.
It is not totally false, but the implications are pointed
in a curious direction. Some scientists make their reputations,
and get support, for taking a contrarian point of view.
I noticed from the Marshall web page
http://www.marshall.org/experts.php?id=38
that a lot of "papers" are listed, which you can click up
and see.
If you do so, note where they are published or presented.
She is NOT getting her work published in peer review professional journals.
Some of them are nice appearing, for instance
"The Sun Also Warms"
was presented at the GCMI/CEI Cooler Heads Coalition, Washington, DC.
Some is not quite right. I will take some time and go over some of it.
But I am going out tonight.
Earl
*****
Select Works
"Combatting global warming would be a waste ," Sallie Baliunas, July 25,
2003
"Lessons & Limits of Climate History: Was the 20th Century Climate Unusual?
," Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas, April 17, 2003
"Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years: A
Reappraisal ," Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Sherwood B. Idso, Craig Idso
and David R. Legates, April 11, 2003
"Extreme Weather Events: Examining Causes and Responses ," Sallie Baliunas
and Willie Soon, March 25, 2003
"Climate History and the Sun ," Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, June 5,
2001
"First Eurocongress on the Solar Cycle and Terrestrial Climate ," Willie
Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Sherwood B. Idso and Eric S.
Posmentier, September 30, 2000
"Calculating the Climatic Impacts of Increased CO2: The Issue of Model
Validation ," Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Sherwood
B. Idso and Eric S. Posmentier, September 30, 2000
"The Sun Also Warms ," Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, March 24, 2000
"Increasing Carbon Dioxide and Global Climate Change ," Sallie Baliunas and
Willie Soon, January 1, 2000
"Why So Hot? Don't Blame Man, Blame the Sun ," Sallie Baliunas, August 5,
1999
"Hot Times or Hot Air: The Sun in the Science of Global Warming* ," Sallie
Baliunas, August 7, 1998
"A Scientific Discussion of Climate Change - Comments on ," Sallie Baliunas
and Willie Soon, November 1, 1997
"Uncertainties in Climate Modeling: Solar Variability and Other Factors ,"
Sallie Baliunas, September 17, 1996
"Are Human Activities Causing Global Warming? ," Sallie Baliunas, January 1,
1995
Dec 4th 2004, 5:12 am
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
[email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:42:34 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Perhaps opinions should be limited to those under 35. Personally a
>>problem in 2040 isn't a problem.
>
>
> What an utterly selfish attitude.
> It's just like mine :-)
>
> The question is - has this study made them a UK university class 5
> research faculty or is it the kiss of death?
Now I did say that opinions should be from folks who might be affected.
> On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 03:42:34 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Perhaps opinions should be limited to those under 35. Personally a
>>problem in 2040 isn't a problem.
>
>
> What an utterly selfish attitude.
> It's just like mine :-)
>
> The question is - has this study made them a UK university class 5
> research faculty or is it the kiss of death?
Now I did say that opinions should be from folks who might be affected.
Dec 4th 2004, 10:00 am
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
"Calif Bill" <[email protected]> wrote:
>There are couple of problems with your story.
>The fact that physical scientists disagree over Global warming.
The disagreement is not as widespread as the popular press would have
you believe. The vast majority of climate scientists have formed a
consensus that human-caused global warming already has begun and is
likely to increase. There is a small group of "principled skeptics"
who disagree.
There also is a small but highly vocal group of "professional
naysayers" upon whom lazy reporters regularly call (Michaels,
Baliunas, Singer, a couple of others). Notice I did not apply the
adjective "principled" to the latter group.
--
Ich bin kein Mitglied dieser Konferenz, dennoch möchte ich einen Pinguin.
>There are couple of problems with your story.
>The fact that physical scientists disagree over Global warming.
The disagreement is not as widespread as the popular press would have
you believe. The vast majority of climate scientists have formed a
consensus that human-caused global warming already has begun and is
likely to increase. There is a small group of "principled skeptics"
who disagree.
There also is a small but highly vocal group of "professional
naysayers" upon whom lazy reporters regularly call (Michaels,
Baliunas, Singer, a couple of others). Notice I did not apply the
adjective "principled" to the latter group.
--
Ich bin kein Mitglied dieser Konferenz, dennoch möchte ich einen Pinguin.
Dec 4th 2004, 4:31 pm
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Thermometers across the world have recorded a globally-averaged
> surface warming trend of approximately 0.6C during the 20th century,
> although much of that trend occurred early in the century, before the
> major increase in human-caused emissions.
One crucial factor that's been ignored by many is elemental expansion. As we
know, all things grow over time: trees, American cars, credit card debts.
It's one of the fundamental laws of the universe. In fact, recent advances
in science have shown us that all things grow at precisely the same rate
when corrected for their total lifespan and for the degree to which they
follow this rule.
And as we also know, thermometers work by measuring the volume of mercury in
a sealed tube.
All of the mercury in the world was created at the same time, just before
the thallium and after the gold (and long after, of course, the oldest
elements, such as hydrogen and helium). Therefore it's all been aging, and
expanding, in parallel. Obviously, mercury is very old, but it lasts a long
time, so its expansion takes place at a slow rate compared to, say, an
anthill.
Because most elements are so old and therefore expand at a slow rate
(remember, the rate of expansion is based on their expected lifespan, which
is measured as the interval between their creation and the apocalypse), it
has been difficult or impossible to measure this effect up until recently.
Recent elements, like Californium and Unununium (I kid you not) expand at a
much faster rate but they are too expensive to tie up in long-term
volumetric experiments.
The absence of sufficiently precise measurements of older elements in
recorded history - and the tendency of the measuring tools themselves to
expand - has for many years confined elemental expansion to the realm of
curious hypothesis. However, the recent attention on supposed climate change
data has provided a serendipitous avenue for validating what many brilliant
scientists have long suspected.
It is ironic that what appeared to be evidence of climate change is in fact
simply confirmation of elemental expansion. The world's not getting warmer,
ladies and gentlemen; it's just that the mercury in thermometers is growing
much faster than the glass (made of comparatively geriatric silicon) that
contains it.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
> Thermometers across the world have recorded a globally-averaged
> surface warming trend of approximately 0.6C during the 20th century,
> although much of that trend occurred early in the century, before the
> major increase in human-caused emissions.
One crucial factor that's been ignored by many is elemental expansion. As we
know, all things grow over time: trees, American cars, credit card debts.
It's one of the fundamental laws of the universe. In fact, recent advances
in science have shown us that all things grow at precisely the same rate
when corrected for their total lifespan and for the degree to which they
follow this rule.
And as we also know, thermometers work by measuring the volume of mercury in
a sealed tube.
All of the mercury in the world was created at the same time, just before
the thallium and after the gold (and long after, of course, the oldest
elements, such as hydrogen and helium). Therefore it's all been aging, and
expanding, in parallel. Obviously, mercury is very old, but it lasts a long
time, so its expansion takes place at a slow rate compared to, say, an
anthill.
Because most elements are so old and therefore expand at a slow rate
(remember, the rate of expansion is based on their expected lifespan, which
is measured as the interval between their creation and the apocalypse), it
has been difficult or impossible to measure this effect up until recently.
Recent elements, like Californium and Unununium (I kid you not) expand at a
much faster rate but they are too expensive to tie up in long-term
volumetric experiments.
The absence of sufficiently precise measurements of older elements in
recorded history - and the tendency of the measuring tools themselves to
expand - has for many years confined elemental expansion to the realm of
curious hypothesis. However, the recent attention on supposed climate change
data has provided a serendipitous avenue for validating what many brilliant
scientists have long suspected.
It is ironic that what appeared to be evidence of climate change is in fact
simply confirmation of elemental expansion. The world's not getting warmer,
ladies and gentlemen; it's just that the mercury in thermometers is growing
much faster than the glass (made of comparatively geriatric silicon) that
contains it.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Dec 4th 2004, 7:56 pm
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
in article [email protected], Charles Hawtrey at
[email protected] wrote on 5/12/04 0:00:
> "Calif Bill" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> There are couple of problems with your story.
>> The fact that physical scientists disagree over Global warming.
>
> The disagreement is not as widespread as the popular press would have
> you believe. The vast majority of climate scientists have formed a
> consensus that human-caused global warming already has begun and is
> likely to increase. There is a small group of "principled skeptics"
> who disagree.
>
> There also is a small but highly vocal group of "professional
> naysayers" upon whom lazy reporters regularly call (Michaels,
> Baliunas, Singer, a couple of others). Notice I did not apply the
> adjective "principled" to the latter group.
The US has a practice of "hired guns", which will taken from the myth
of the cowboy epoch now applies to the judicial system.
If you have the money you can find people ready to say just about anything.
What has grown more and more powerful in the US is growth of the "think
tanks". There has been a tremendous move towards conservative think tanks
in the period after about 1960. It is only in the last 10 years
that academics have begun to study the phenomena. Thank tanks have
long existed, the Fabian Society in England was one of the first. But
their creation has expanded in the 1960 on.
These institutions are better called "policy institutes". One generally
finds a lack of intellectual diversity in them, one is not going to
find a liberal in a conservative think tank. They all tend
to attract some academics, some of whom have dubious academic credentials
but fit into the ideology of a particular tank. Some never do
obtain academic posts, like Charles Murray ("The Bell Curve" is
one example of his work) or John R. Lott Jr ("More Guns, less Crime").
These people get think tank support and positions.
Whatever, they escape the normal controls which academics are submitted
to when they publish. Peer review journals send submitted articles
to referees who judge the contents of the papers. Original research
and not review articles are the goal of these articles. While this
judgement system is far from perfect it is better than none at all.
I have had over 100 professional article published, all peer reviewed
accept for a few book chapters. Books often escape a good review procedure,
but the articles have a higher chance of being raked over. I have never
ran into on unfair referee, if my article was rejected, I took the
comments to heart and reworked the material, did more research etc
One ends up after a period of time prejudging one's own work, playing
the devil's advocate and trying to avoid the obvious faults. Being
self-critical is hard, it is not natural, one is one's own best
friend, why attack yourself? Why? To maximize your chance of
academic survival.
One also does not send a "weak" paper to a good journal. Because of
academic commitments one does at time do work which is not quite
up to one's own standards but one publishes anyway, trying to make
the best of what is not very good. One eventually learns to avoid
those self laid traps. One ends up publishing a spectrum of articles
self-judged from "excellent" to "so-so. Whatever, one learns what
"sells" in a particular journal or to those who approve research grants.
Publishing through a "tank" press is a way of getting around the review
procedure. The main goal of the article is that it is "ideologically"
correct from the point of view of the tank. I saw one think tank
position expressed as "we are looking for intellectual ammunition to support
our positions". The academic research point of view is that one does
research, collects the information and then comes to a conclusion based
on an analysis of the facts. Think tank review articles will often
just gather those facts which support conclusions already reached.
Intellectually that procedure is back ass forward.
Earl
[email protected] wrote on 5/12/04 0:00:
> "Calif Bill" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> There are couple of problems with your story.
>> The fact that physical scientists disagree over Global warming.
>
> The disagreement is not as widespread as the popular press would have
> you believe. The vast majority of climate scientists have formed a
> consensus that human-caused global warming already has begun and is
> likely to increase. There is a small group of "principled skeptics"
> who disagree.
>
> There also is a small but highly vocal group of "professional
> naysayers" upon whom lazy reporters regularly call (Michaels,
> Baliunas, Singer, a couple of others). Notice I did not apply the
> adjective "principled" to the latter group.
The US has a practice of "hired guns", which will taken from the myth
of the cowboy epoch now applies to the judicial system.
If you have the money you can find people ready to say just about anything.
What has grown more and more powerful in the US is growth of the "think
tanks". There has been a tremendous move towards conservative think tanks
in the period after about 1960. It is only in the last 10 years
that academics have begun to study the phenomena. Thank tanks have
long existed, the Fabian Society in England was one of the first. But
their creation has expanded in the 1960 on.
These institutions are better called "policy institutes". One generally
finds a lack of intellectual diversity in them, one is not going to
find a liberal in a conservative think tank. They all tend
to attract some academics, some of whom have dubious academic credentials
but fit into the ideology of a particular tank. Some never do
obtain academic posts, like Charles Murray ("The Bell Curve" is
one example of his work) or John R. Lott Jr ("More Guns, less Crime").
These people get think tank support and positions.
Whatever, they escape the normal controls which academics are submitted
to when they publish. Peer review journals send submitted articles
to referees who judge the contents of the papers. Original research
and not review articles are the goal of these articles. While this
judgement system is far from perfect it is better than none at all.
I have had over 100 professional article published, all peer reviewed
accept for a few book chapters. Books often escape a good review procedure,
but the articles have a higher chance of being raked over. I have never
ran into on unfair referee, if my article was rejected, I took the
comments to heart and reworked the material, did more research etc
One ends up after a period of time prejudging one's own work, playing
the devil's advocate and trying to avoid the obvious faults. Being
self-critical is hard, it is not natural, one is one's own best
friend, why attack yourself? Why? To maximize your chance of
academic survival.
One also does not send a "weak" paper to a good journal. Because of
academic commitments one does at time do work which is not quite
up to one's own standards but one publishes anyway, trying to make
the best of what is not very good. One eventually learns to avoid
those self laid traps. One ends up publishing a spectrum of articles
self-judged from "excellent" to "so-so. Whatever, one learns what
"sells" in a particular journal or to those who approve research grants.
Publishing through a "tank" press is a way of getting around the review
procedure. The main goal of the article is that it is "ideologically"
correct from the point of view of the tank. I saw one think tank
position expressed as "we are looking for intellectual ammunition to support
our positions". The academic research point of view is that one does
research, collects the information and then comes to a conclusion based
on an analysis of the facts. Think tank review articles will often
just gather those facts which support conclusions already reached.
Intellectually that procedure is back ass forward.
Earl
Dec 4th 2004, 8:46 pm
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 23:31:27 -0600, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz)
wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thermometers across the world have recorded a globally-averaged
>> surface warming trend of approximately 0.6C during the 20th century,
>> although much of that trend occurred early in the century, before the
>> major increase in human-caused emissions.
>One crucial factor that's been ignored by many is elemental expansion. As we
>know, all things grow over time: trees, American cars, credit card debts.
>It's one of the fundamental laws of the universe. In fact, recent advances
>in science have shown us that all things grow at precisely the same rate
>when corrected for their total lifespan and for the degree to which they
>follow this rule.
>And as we also know, thermometers work by measuring the volume of mercury in
>a sealed tube.
>All of the mercury in the world was created at the same time, just before
>the thallium and after the gold (and long after, of course, the oldest
>elements, such as hydrogen and helium). Therefore it's all been aging, and
>expanding, in parallel. Obviously, mercury is very old, but it lasts a long
>time, so its expansion takes place at a slow rate compared to, say, an
>anthill.
>Because most elements are so old and therefore expand at a slow rate
>(remember, the rate of expansion is based on their expected lifespan, which
>is measured as the interval between their creation and the apocalypse), it
>has been difficult or impossible to measure this effect up until recently.
>Recent elements, like Californium and Unununium (I kid you not) expand at a
>much faster rate but they are too expensive to tie up in long-term
>volumetric experiments.
>The absence of sufficiently precise measurements of older elements in
>recorded history - and the tendency of the measuring tools themselves to
>expand - has for many years confined elemental expansion to the realm of
>curious hypothesis. However, the recent attention on supposed climate change
>data has provided a serendipitous avenue for validating what many brilliant
>scientists have long suspected.
>It is ironic that what appeared to be evidence of climate change is in fact
>simply confirmation of elemental expansion. The world's not getting warmer,
>ladies and gentlemen; it's just that the mercury in thermometers is growing
>much faster than the glass (made of comparatively geriatric silicon) that
>contains it.
Very convincing, but has this codswallop been subject to peer review?
:-)
You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
but what the hell, the thermometers used in Upsalla were only accurate
to 10 DegC.
The genetic modification of seaweed casts doubts on historical
humidity measurements.
--
Martin
wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thermometers across the world have recorded a globally-averaged
>> surface warming trend of approximately 0.6C during the 20th century,
>> although much of that trend occurred early in the century, before the
>> major increase in human-caused emissions.
>One crucial factor that's been ignored by many is elemental expansion. As we
>know, all things grow over time: trees, American cars, credit card debts.
>It's one of the fundamental laws of the universe. In fact, recent advances
>in science have shown us that all things grow at precisely the same rate
>when corrected for their total lifespan and for the degree to which they
>follow this rule.
>And as we also know, thermometers work by measuring the volume of mercury in
>a sealed tube.
>All of the mercury in the world was created at the same time, just before
>the thallium and after the gold (and long after, of course, the oldest
>elements, such as hydrogen and helium). Therefore it's all been aging, and
>expanding, in parallel. Obviously, mercury is very old, but it lasts a long
>time, so its expansion takes place at a slow rate compared to, say, an
>anthill.
>Because most elements are so old and therefore expand at a slow rate
>(remember, the rate of expansion is based on their expected lifespan, which
>is measured as the interval between their creation and the apocalypse), it
>has been difficult or impossible to measure this effect up until recently.
>Recent elements, like Californium and Unununium (I kid you not) expand at a
>much faster rate but they are too expensive to tie up in long-term
>volumetric experiments.
>The absence of sufficiently precise measurements of older elements in
>recorded history - and the tendency of the measuring tools themselves to
>expand - has for many years confined elemental expansion to the realm of
>curious hypothesis. However, the recent attention on supposed climate change
>data has provided a serendipitous avenue for validating what many brilliant
>scientists have long suspected.
>It is ironic that what appeared to be evidence of climate change is in fact
>simply confirmation of elemental expansion. The world's not getting warmer,
>ladies and gentlemen; it's just that the mercury in thermometers is growing
>much faster than the glass (made of comparatively geriatric silicon) that
>contains it.
Very convincing, but has this codswallop been subject to peer review?
:-)
You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
but what the hell, the thermometers used in Upsalla were only accurate
to 10 DegC.
The genetic modification of seaweed casts doubts on historical
humidity measurements.
--
Martin
Dec 4th 2004, 9:00 pm
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:46:19 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
same expansion.
Jim.
>You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
same expansion.
Jim.
Dec 4th 2004, 9:53 pm
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
in article [email protected], Jim Ley at
[email protected] wrote on 5/12/04 11:00:
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:46:19 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>> result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>> vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
>
> but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
> glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
> when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
> same expansion.
>
Migquel's posting reminds me of "It`s turtles all the way down"
Earl
***
Stephen Hawking in A Brief History Of Time starts with the anecdote.
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a
public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection
of stars called our galaxy.*
At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at
the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish.
The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."*
The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is
the tortoise standing on?"*
"You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down."
******
[email protected] wrote on 5/12/04 11:00:
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:46:19 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>> result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>> vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
>
> but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
> glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
> when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
> same expansion.
>
Migquel's posting reminds me of "It`s turtles all the way down"
Earl
***
Stephen Hawking in A Brief History Of Time starts with the anecdote.
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a
public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection
of stars called our galaxy.*
At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at
the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish.
The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
tortoise."*
The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is
the tortoise standing on?"*
"You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down."
******
Dec 4th 2004, 9:56 pm
#41
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
Earl Evleth wrote:
> the "ozone hole" . . . atmospheric chemistry, I was so I could
> >inform him of the facts.
The following might interest you:
From: Icono Clast ([email protected])
Subject: Maria Reiche
Newsgroups: rec.travel.usa-canada
Date: 1998/06/09
In July of '93, I wrote "Don't miss Nazca and its lines. The Nazca
culture has particularly colorful pottery and the lines on the pampa
are far more than you've ever imagined. I had the pleasure of
speaking with Maria Reiche during my visit. If you know not whoshe,
you'll find out in Nazca."
Maria Rieche died yesterday, I think, at the age of 95.
My conversation with her was a memorably strange one full of many
delights.
There were three of us drinking coffee at a small table; she, I, and
a young German who commanded little English and not much more
Spanish. Of course he wanted to speak in German (that I understood a
bit but did not speak even as well as he spoke English) but Maria
wanted to speak English for the practice.
The German and I wanted to know about the lines from the world's
prime source. But Maria wanted to know about current events and what
was happening beyond her own small world.
So it was a very strange conversation with short answers to questions
followed by totally unrelated questions. During that conversation,
however, I happened to mention the newly-discovered hole in the ozone
layer over Antarctica. Maria knew nothing about it and probed what
little knowledge I had concluding with an exclamation "That explains
it! This is the first sunburn I've had in 25 years!"
__________________________________________________ __________
Un San Francisqueño en San Francisco
http://geocities.com/dancefest/ http://geocities.com/iconoc/
ICQ: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 IClast at SFbay Net
> the "ozone hole" . . . atmospheric chemistry, I was so I could
> >inform him of the facts.
The following might interest you:
From: Icono Clast ([email protected])
Subject: Maria Reiche
Newsgroups: rec.travel.usa-canada
Date: 1998/06/09
In July of '93, I wrote "Don't miss Nazca and its lines. The Nazca
culture has particularly colorful pottery and the lines on the pampa
are far more than you've ever imagined. I had the pleasure of
speaking with Maria Reiche during my visit. If you know not whoshe,
you'll find out in Nazca."
Maria Rieche died yesterday, I think, at the age of 95.
My conversation with her was a memorably strange one full of many
delights.
There were three of us drinking coffee at a small table; she, I, and
a young German who commanded little English and not much more
Spanish. Of course he wanted to speak in German (that I understood a
bit but did not speak even as well as he spoke English) but Maria
wanted to speak English for the practice.
The German and I wanted to know about the lines from the world's
prime source. But Maria wanted to know about current events and what
was happening beyond her own small world.
So it was a very strange conversation with short answers to questions
followed by totally unrelated questions. During that conversation,
however, I happened to mention the newly-discovered hole in the ozone
layer over Antarctica. Maria knew nothing about it and probed what
little knowledge I had concluding with an exclamation "That explains
it! This is the first sunburn I've had in 25 years!"
__________________________________________________ __________
Un San Francisqueño en San Francisco
http://geocities.com/dancefest/ http://geocities.com/iconoc/
ICQ: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 IClast at SFbay Net
Dec 4th 2004, 10:21 pm
#42
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:00:24 GMT, [email protected] (Jim Ley) wrote:
>On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:46:19 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>>You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>>result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>>vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
>but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
>glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
>when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
>same expansion.
yeah but, subject to peer review, in the limit the whole scale ends up
in the bulb.
--
Martin
>On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:46:19 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>>You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>>result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>>vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
>but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
>glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
>when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
>same expansion.
yeah but, subject to peer review, in the limit the whole scale ends up
in the bulb.
--
Martin
Dec 4th 2004, 10:41 pm
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 11:53:03 +0100, Earl Evleth <[email protected]>
wrote:
>in article [email protected], Jim Ley at
>[email protected] wrote on 5/12/04 11:00:
>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:46:19 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>>> result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>>> vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
>>
>> but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
>> glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
>> when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
>> same expansion.
>>
>Migquel's posting reminds me of "It`s turtles all the way down"
Nah, there are three elephants involved too.
--
Martin
wrote:
>in article [email protected], Jim Ley at
>[email protected] wrote on 5/12/04 11:00:
>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 10:46:19 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> You must also take into account that glass is a fluid, with the
>>> result that over the years the scale of a thermometer stored
>>> vertically gets nearer and nearer to the bulb containing the mercury.
>>
>> but this just increases the effect Miguel is describing. Because the
>> glass sinks to the bottom so the walls are thicker at the bottom than
>> when it was created, the mercury expands further up the tube for the
>> same expansion.
>>
>Migquel's posting reminds me of "It`s turtles all the way down"
Nah, there are three elephants involved too.
--
Martin
Dec 4th 2004, 11:45 pm
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
> Subject: Maria Reiche
> Newsgroups: rec.travel.usa-canada
> Date: 1998/06/09
> In July of '93, I wrote "Don't miss Nazca and its lines. The Nazca
> culture has particularly colorful pottery and the lines on the pampa
> are far more than you've ever imagined. I had the pleasure of
> speaking with Maria Reiche during my visit. If you know not whoshe,
> you'll find out in Nazca."
> Maria Rieche died yesterday, I think, at the age of 95.
There is a nice article about her in Bruce Chatwin's collection
"What Am I Doing Here".
========> Email to "j-c" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce <========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html> food intolerance data & recipes,
Mac logic fonts, Scots traditional music files and CD-ROMs of Scottish music.
> Newsgroups: rec.travel.usa-canada
> Date: 1998/06/09
> In July of '93, I wrote "Don't miss Nazca and its lines. The Nazca
> culture has particularly colorful pottery and the lines on the pampa
> are far more than you've ever imagined. I had the pleasure of
> speaking with Maria Reiche during my visit. If you know not whoshe,
> you'll find out in Nazca."
> Maria Rieche died yesterday, I think, at the age of 95.
There is a nice article about her in Bruce Chatwin's collection
"What Am I Doing Here".
========> Email to "j-c" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce <========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html> food intolerance data & recipes,
Mac logic fonts, Scots traditional music files and CD-ROMs of Scottish music.
Dec 5th 2004, 4:28 am
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: By 2040, Half of Europe's Summers Could Be as Hot as in 2003
[email protected] wrote:
>A friend who went to a climate conference said that there were as many
>different theories and forecasts as there were attendees.
It's called healthy scientific debate. That's how science is done --
one guy (or gal) proposes a hypothesis; another tries to shoot it
down, a third proposes an alternate hypothesis, and they argue it out
in public forums like conferences and journals, referring to
quantitiative data and calculations.
Note also that your comment gives the lie to one of the main
assertions by Michaels and others; that is, climate scientists have
imposed an unquestioned party line that must be followed without
dissent.
You can't have it both ways -- on the one hand bemoaning that diverse
views are not allowed and on the other hand criticizing scientists for
their diverse views.
--
Ich bin kein Mitglied dieser Konferenz, dennoch möchte ich einen Pinguin.
>A friend who went to a climate conference said that there were as many
>different theories and forecasts as there were attendees.
It's called healthy scientific debate. That's how science is done --
one guy (or gal) proposes a hypothesis; another tries to shoot it
down, a third proposes an alternate hypothesis, and they argue it out
in public forums like conferences and journals, referring to
quantitiative data and calculations.
Note also that your comment gives the lie to one of the main
assertions by Michaels and others; that is, climate scientists have
imposed an unquestioned party line that must be followed without
dissent.
You can't have it both ways -- on the one hand bemoaning that diverse
views are not allowed and on the other hand criticizing scientists for
their diverse views.
--
Ich bin kein Mitglied dieser Konferenz, dennoch möchte ich einen Pinguin.
