Actually, I’m in Madison right now, at least until the storms start rolling in. This is a new kind of hot, Rand. It appears to me that global warming is creating an entirely novel kind of weather related climate feedback. Vast areas of peristant high pressure clearing wide areas of clouds, narrower more violent storm fronts with training rain events. We saw it last year in the Gulf of Mexico, this year it’s in California and Europe. I’m trying to have a discussion with Harold Brooks about it right now, but he isn’t listening. Dennis claims it’s the sun, but we have very little evidence of any dramatic solar irradiance increases, it’s operating on time scales far shorter than other more traditionally expected climatic feedback effects, so by simple logical deduction it has to be the weather. Unfortunately we simply do not have the necessary space based and computational resources in place to quantify it as yet, and I place the blame solely on NASA and NOAA, and thus by default, congress, the president, and the American public. I think it is entirely relevant to the subject matter here.

Three days ago we had a huge flood here, maybe you heard about it. Yet another freak rain event. We had one in Pinellas Park, FL. last spring, maybe you heard about that one too.

But never mind, the market will adjust to future massive crop failures on an vastly overpopulated planet with a civilization utterly dependent upon coal, oil, uranium and weapons for its very existance, if one can indeed call it civilized.

Imagine my surprise to read a (long-established) nutball willingly living in the Bahamas in July complaining that it’s hot.

Were you expecting snow, Thomas?

Really big bucks are to be made as oil company shills. Go for it.

There is an intimate link between the two. In decrying NASA’s change of emphasis from science, it is legitmate to ask what is happening in regards to the use of data from the existing and upcoming solar/terrestrial missions.

I am actually quite amazed (as I am sure you are knowing your background) at the incredible revolution over the past decade in understanding our parent star. What irks me is that this data, this revolution, has been largely ignored outsided of solar/terrestrial physics circles. The recent discovery of the dramatic slow down in the solar convection currents should be discussed in their greater context of the potential effect on terrestrial climate but all that is heard is a lot of political hooey.

Dennis

While discussion of overall earth science and NASA policy is certainly on-topic here, debate over evidence of anthropogenic climate change would be better suited to other fora.

The Management

Here is the link to the article in Science if you are interested

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/313/5786/452?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=%28Bruce+AND+Harper+AND+Chris+AND+Landsea+AND+Hurricanes%29&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

Dennis

Have a nice weekend Dennis.

Dennis

We are in a planetary, fiscal and climatic emergency, the sooner the good folks at NOAA and NASA realize that, the sooner we can get started on solving the problems. You are a super denialist.

I patiently await the arrival of the terms ‘librul’ and ‘knee jerk’ from Space Politics more astute observers.

How about from Geophysical Research Letters?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4349133.stm

The paper is referenced in the article. Geophysical Letters is the same publication that published Mann’s original “Hockey Stick” paper.

Here is an article by the researchers on how they analyzed Mann’s own data.

http://www.junkscience.com/jan05/breaking_the_hockey_stick.html

Here is the original paper on the Hockey Stick

http://www.climateaudit.org/pdf/2004GL021750.pdf

Here is a second paper reviewing the data of both Mann’s and Macintyre’s paper, also from Geophysical Research Letters.

http://w3g.gkss.de/G/Mitarbeiter/storch/pdf/2005_von_Storch_etal__Comment_on_hockey_stick_GRL.pdf

Dennis