Niche Modeling - Latest Comments

Re: Levitus data on ocean forcing confirms skeptics, falsifies IPCC

ani — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 03:02:09 -0000

interesting info about climate and global warming, although it has no effect with cara mengobati keputihan berbau berwarna coklat

Re: AGW Doesn’t Cointegrate: Beenstock’s Challenging Analysis Published

budi — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 02:53:21 -0000

body moisture-induced changes affect the ad is cara mengatasi keputihan berwarna coklat must therefore be taken seriously.

Re: Santer: Climate Models are Exaggerating Warming – We Don’t Know Why

santi — Sat, 31 Jan 2015 02:47:21 -0000

I agree with John Daly in this case, but not for the cara mengatasi keputihan pada wanita I chose differently.

Re: From a Bright Young Climate Scientist

grepolis hack — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:44:46 -0000

Great informative blog. such a fantastic information on this blog. if you want to get free grepolis hack no download than jump to given link and get it without pay any coin .

Re: On the Use of the Virial Theorem by Miskolczi

Kalyan Harish — Thu, 04 Dec 2014 06:45:32 -0000

The
contents existing in this site are genuinely awesome for people experience,
well, keep up the nice work. packers
and movers in noida

Re: Book: Niche Modeling

ItsMyTurnNow — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 13:02:08 -0000

I don't know if you noticed the conventional interpretation of your ARIMA theory of climate change that I posted several weeks ago. (http://landshape.org/enm/ar...

In my experience, one can find many equations that will fit at least some data in an intriguing manner. We usually learn more from equations related to a realistic theory.

Re: The Widening Gap Between Present Global Temperature and IPCC Model Projections

Frederick Colbourne — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 03:48:47 -0000

Professor Bengtsson and his coauthors submitted a paper that compared the projections of models with the climate as actually observed. More specifically, the paper was concerned with inferences about climate sensitivity from observations and climate sensitivity as estimated in IPCC reports.

Now the reviewer who rejected Bengtsson's paper did so because he said that the comparison between the IPCC (model) estimates and inferences drawn from observations is not relevant to the discussion about climate change.

The reason given was that no correspondence should be expected between the models and observations.

How come Ben Santer was allowed to do what Bengtsson and colleagues were not permitted to do?

Re: Solar Cycle 24 peaked? The experimentum crucis begins.

Frederick Colbourne — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 03:40:42 -0000

You have inferred the wrong effect from your thought experiment. You should prefer, not the broad conclusion about small causes vs big effect, but a narrower conclusion that says "Humans can breathe in vastly more CO2 and not be harmed compared with the amount of arsenic pentaflouride that they can breathe without harm"

Re: ARIMA theory of climate change

ItsMyTurnNow — Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:23:23 -0000

Someone pointed me to your work and told me it proved that the GHE doesn't exist. While trying to prove your work was incorrect (the GHE does exist), I found that much of it made sense - but that your accumulation theory wasn't radically different from traditional approaches.

One section of your first unpublished manuscript (http://vixra.org/pdf/1108.0... says:

"A linear regression can be used to estimate the parameters of the system with the form:

T_i = aT_i−1 + bS_i−1 + c

where a is the AR coefficient, S is the solar irradiance at the TOA, b is the effect of changes in solar irradiance on global temperature T, and c is the intercept that allows us to calculate the equilibrium value. The result of fitting the HadCRU annual temperature to the solar irradiance from Lean et.al. (2001) are as follows:

a = 0.89 ± 0.04; b = 0.063 ± 0.029C/W m2; c = −86.2 ± 39; R2 = 0.8603

The solar effect on temperature is 0.06 ± 0.03C/W m2/yr. The volume of water that would rise by 0.06C after one year of even heating by 1 Watt has a depth of 159 meters, corresponding to the midpoint depth of the tropical ocean thermocline. We can also calculate the equilibrium value of 86.2/0.063 = 1365.9W/m2 as found previously."

What this equation appears to say is that the current year's temperature anomaly will be: a) 89% of last year's anomaly PLUS b) the temperature change expected for heating 159 m of ocean mixed layer with last year's incoming solar radiation MINUS c) a 86.2 degC fudge factor. From a physics perspective, the equation initially appeared to be nonsense: 1) Radiative cooling varies with the fourth power of absolute temperature, not linearly with temperature anomaly. 2) The mixed layer is unreasonably deep. However, those problems can be fixed.

Let's start by using your formula to calculate the temperature change (dT) for any year:

dT = T_i - T_i−1 = aT_i−1 + bS_i−1 + c - T_i−1
dT = -(1-a)*T_i−1 + bS_i−1 + c

Now let's calculate dT from first principles. Incoming power from the sun is S, but it needs to be corrected for albedo and the view factor (the ratio of surface area of a sphere to a disk); something you ignore. Outgoing power is given by the S-B equation. In your notation, T is the temperature anomaly, so we need to add the average temperature Ta that was subtracted to calculate the anomaly. The radiative flux imbalance (W) is therefore:

W = 0.7*S/4 - o(Ta+T)^4
W = 0.7*S/4 - oTa^4 - (4Ta^3)T + ...

Ignoring the negligible terms with lower powers of Ta, convert to the annual energy imbalance (dE) by multiplying by the number of seconds (n) per year.

dE = -(4noTa^3)*T + (n*0.7/4)*S - noTa^4

Then we convert to temperature change by dividing the heat capacity per unit area, which is the heat capacity over water (C, in J/m3) times the depth of the mixed layer (d).

dT = -(4noTa^3/Cd)*T + (n*0.7/4Cd)*S - noTa^4/Cd

Eureka! We have an equation that looks like yours, but which provides a physical explanation for the coefficients you found by empirical fitting. Since the coefficient for S depends only on the depth of the mixed layer, we can use your value (0.063) to solve for d and get 29.9 m. This is much closer to the usual estimate for the depth of the mixed layer and the observed depth of seasonal warming. (If I didn't correct S, d = 171 m. For heat capacity, I assumed that 70% of the earth was covered by water and ignored everything else. The real heat capacity is somewhat larger. You may have made slightly different assumptions.)

Knowing the depth of the mixed layer, we can solve for Ta using your empirical value for c (86.2). Ta turns out to be 254.9 degK, which I'm sure you recognize as the blackbody equivalent temperature for the earth - the temperature at which post-albedo incoming and outgoing radiation are equal. So, your constant term arises from the fact that you chose to work with temperature anomalies instead of absolute temperature. (Of course, the temperature where the average photon is escaping to space is emitted is far more relevant to the planet's energy balance than surface temperature.)

Using these values for Ta and d, 1-a turns out to be 1.35, not 0.11. In essence, you are assuming that the mixed layer that the temperature anomaly diffuses into is 12-fold bigger than the mixed layer associated with the solar radiation. That can't be right. We do know that some heat does escape into the deeper ocean (a two-compartment model) and your empirical model appears to be trying to correct for this problem. You can see why a two compartment model is needed here: http://rankexploits.com/mus...

In this exercise, you have corrected the input solar radiation for interference from volcanic aerosols. You should also explore what happens when you correct for the interference from GHGs and other anthropogenic aerosols. I suspect you can do a better job of fitting both the first and second halves of the temperature record for the 20th century if you take GHGs into account. However, any model without two compartments can't deal with the problem that the ocean has a top compartment that is rapidly mixed by the wind and a deeper compartment that is slowly mixed by downwelling/upwelling and by eddy diffusion associate currents moving along the ocean floor.

Re: Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price

Angelina jullie — Sat, 08 Nov 2014 07:30:51 -0000

The correct guidelines! The given attribution and could attract a
penalty of readers because of refreshing views.

Leon Kennedy Jacket

Re: 40 Years of Some BoM Australian Rural Temperature Data

Webkantin — Fri, 03 Oct 2014 15:27:11 -0000

I am curious about the the time period chosen. Not saying it is wrong, just asking why 1968 to 2008? I think there are about 20 rural sites going back to as far as 1910 when stevenson screens were deployed. Why not take as much reasonably consistently measured data as possible?
Rezzan Kiraz

Re: Optical Depth of CO2 Explained

Brown Mark — Tue, 29 Jul 2014 04:56:47 -0000

My name is Brown Mark and am from USA,let me share this testimony to the world to hear about him too this man really exit I was HIV positive over 6year I have being in medication and I try to look for cure to my problem and I go through internet doctor and I found a tradition named DR. CAFAI i contacted cafaispiritualtemple@yahoo.com for help he give me all his laws and rule that if I get cured I should write about him and that is what am doing now, this man ask for some information about me, which I give him this man cure me from HIV what a great man thank for your help when he get the information he told me that he is about to work on it 20 to 30 minute this man email me and told me what to do for the curing which I did after all the things needed for the cure is provide the man call me in 45mins later and tell me to go for test what a great day to me I was negative thanks Dr CAFAi you can through his email address,cafaispiritualtemple@yahoo.com or his phone number +234 7067607073

Re: Fact Checking the Climate Council

lee colleton — Mon, 19 May 2014 00:50:19 -0000

Mean Temp is a clear warming trend http://www.bom.gov.au/clima...[graph]=tmean&tQ[area]=seaus&tQ[season]=0112&tQ[ave_yr]=T

Re: Hyperloop for Sydney – Melbourne – Brisbane link?

Ciel Udbjørg — Sun, 20 Apr 2014 17:45:33 -0000

Build a test version first, as suggested elsewhere. As an airport shuttle, or between-terminals-transport. If this works, then try to scale it up.
However, bullet trains, or VFT works out of the box. Look to China, Japan, France, Germany, BeNeLux, and the Channel Tunnel. High Speed Trains (or TGVs) are here now, and the technolgy is well tested. Why reinvent the wheel?

Re: A Practical Project for the Hyperloop

Ciel Udbjørg — Sun, 20 Apr 2014 17:37:20 -0000

Indeed, let’s invent the wheel again! This "hyperloop" seems silly to me.
Look to France (and Europe) with the high-speed train networks that enables you to travel between tha major cities in hours, not days. The French started their high speed train service between Paris and Lille, and soon nobody bothered to fly anymore. Why bother with first slogging out to the airport, be present an hour (or two, for international flights), maybe wait in a long line for check-in (not all airports offer check-in machines), and then go thru security, havnig to strip and make sure you don’t have anything sharp with you, nor more fluid than 100 ml. And then wait by the gate, then shuffling into a cramped plane, then fly for a short hop, then shuffle out again and then try to find transport into the next city from some airport located in the middle of nowhere.
Wheras with high speed trains, you transport yourselves to the city centre, with a ticket you booked on-line, you may, if you have ice in your stomach, arrive more or less at departure time, no security hassle, enter a comfortable car with large windows, be whisked to the next destination, and then exit in the city centre, no need for airport shuttles or similar hassles.
America had this before, but allowed cheap air fare to undermine the passenger trains (and of course, cheap buses on the National Highway System as well).
My point is: High speed conventional rail technolgy, allowing travel from city centre to city centre is here now. Europe uses it, Japan uses it, China uses it. There is no need for silly hyperspatial "pods".

Re: How does cold fusion work?

AlainCo — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 06:10:14 -0000

for the best explanation of cold fusion proposed, much more credible by WL, I propose Edmund storms method

http://lenr-canr.org/acroba...

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

his analysis is IMHO the best, and his theory is yet another, but at least more credible than most.

by the way it explains the engineering problem of reactors builders like Rossi.

Re: Probability of the Cosmic Ray Flux Theory of Climate Change

Nouman Rasheed — Mon, 14 Apr 2014 06:05:13 -0000

The way you article making is unmistakably well known. I like the post you put here on this site. This one is sincerely significant for each one of the individuals who are looking this sort of stuff on web crawler. Thankful concerning Sharing such stunning data and continue posting. Article Writing

Re: Nir Shaviv

Nouman Rasheed — Sat, 12 Apr 2014 02:31:13 -0000

The way you article making is unmistakably well known. I like the post you put here on this site. This one is especially sensible for every one of the people who are looking this kind of stuff on web crawler. Thankful concerning Sharing such staggering information and keep posting. Article Writing

Re: A semi-empirical approach to sea level rise

Nouman Rasheed — Sat, 12 Apr 2014 02:30:05 -0000

The way you article making is unmistakably well known. I like the post you put here on this site. This one is particularly down to earth for each one of the individuals who are looking this sort of stuff on web crawler. Grateful concerning Sharing such stunning data and continue posting. Article Writing

Re: Nir Shaviv

Frederick Colbourne — Sun, 06 Apr 2014 05:47:13 -0000

Actually, both Nir Shaviv and Svensmark are on record as supporting the effect of GHG up to a sensitivity of slightly more than one degree Celsius. Based on this sensitivity and the logarithmic response to CO2 concentration, an increase from 300 to 400 ppm CO2 from 1950 to 2000 would give an increase in global temperature between 1950 and 2000 of about 0.45 degrees Celsius.

As I understand it, this fits the observed global warming figure by NASA's Earth Observatory of 0.5 degree Celsius since 1950.. http://earthobservatory.nas...

So both Shaviv and Svensmark agree that CO2 has had the effect described by NASA.

The assertion that observations during the latter part of the 20th century falsify Shaviv and Svensmark is not supported. In effect, neither author denies the climate warming effect of CO2 that has occurred during the 20th century.

Where the argument lies is not with the observations between 1950 and 2000, the modern industrial era, but with the hypothesis that positive feedback from water vapor in the atmosphere amplifies the effect of CO2 and will therefore result in much higher sensitivity to global warming..

As we know the parameterization of cloud effects is the weakest part of climate modeling. Thus, cloud effects in current models are not well-supported.

Why not therefore take these scientists seriously and explore ways to improve the modeling of clouds and their effects?

Re: How does cold fusion work?

AlainCo — Wed, 02 Apr 2014 03:35:15 -0000

interesting article comparing the myth aroudn titanic propagated by hateful and incompetent journalist, with th same for cold fusion

http://www.lenr-canr.org/ac...

the incompetence of the crtics, agullibility of Nobel and journalist is pathetic.

the beginning of high temperature superconductors evidence hidden as footnote is amazingly similar
http://www.mosaicsciencemag...

revolution in physics is accepted quickly, because before it is accepted it cannot be published.

Re: Solar Cycle 24 peaked? The experimentum crucis begins.

Rwtl — Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:29:29 -0000

Sorry I was out by a factor of 10. The LC50 (concentration that kills 50%) is 20 ppm, so it's either: 2 red to 40 black. Or 20 red to 400 black

Re: Solar Cycle 24 peaked? The experimentum crucis begins.

Rwtl — Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:26:04 -0000

Now take that jar with 1 million marbles (40 black) and add 20 red marbles to signify arsenic pentaflouride.

It's only half as much as the co2. Do us a favour and breathe it in!

Even a small amount if something can have big consequences

Re: Nickel Hydrogen LENR Theories

AlainCo — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 04:00:48 -0000

After some time watching various theory, the best approach I've observed is the one of Ed Storms
http://lenr-canr.org/acroba...

more than the theory of Hydroton metallic hydrogen chain, inside cracks, he provide a framework and remind key points...

Widom-Larsen after some analysis reading critics (some by Ed Storms about the fact that no mechanism can screen neutrons and gamme at 1/1million residual) seems hard to accept...

Re: Fact Checking the Climate Council

sk — Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:59:05 -0000

where is the statement:

Southeast Australia is experiencing a long-term drying trend
has it been removed?