Jump to content
Problems logging in? ×
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

Michael Ronayne

Members
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Michael Ronayne's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. The AGW religious cult has a dirty little secret. The theory of climate forcing predicts that the minor greenhouse gas Carbon Dioxide should have its greatest impact in the Arctic and Antarctic where the major greenhouse gas Dihydrogen Monoxide has predicated out of the atmosphere. While the Arctic has been warming as prophesized the Antarctic has been cooling, a fact about which the greenhouse industry has been in denial. Basically you have a theory which is correct 50% of the time and wrong 50% of the time. There is no need for an expensive supercomputers to do modeling; flipping a penny will yield the same results. But in Nature News there are joyous tidings for the faithful, the Holly Office of Anthropogenic Global Warming has determined that the Antarctic is cooling, and dare I say its ice mass increasing, because sinful humanity created the Ozone Hole, which thank Gaia is now shrinking. Once the Ozone Hole (which is really not a hole) is gone the Antarctic will warm and the icecap will melt just as prophesy foretold. O joyous day, soon the seaside cities of the evil Americans will be inundated if they don't repent their Carbon Dioxide addiction. The news for the sinful Australians is even bleaker, as they can expect inundation and drought. So for all you Watermelons out there, it is now OK to acknowledge that the Antarctic is cooling and its ice mass increasing. Sinful humanity is at fault! Antarctic ice threatened by ozone-hole recovery http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080429/full/news.2008.787.html This theory has been around for a number of years now. Once I jokingly commented that Antarctic cooling would be explained away by the Ozone Hole because in the AGW playbook, humans are always at fault. Remind me to never crack jokes involving the stupidity levels of Watermelons again. Mike
  2. Do not put too much stock in the numbers from CT. You will understand why in a few weeks! Mike
  3. A Few Comments On Solar Cycle 24 Sunspots #981 and #990 (See instruction at the bottom to run animations) I used the NASA SOHO archives to download and examined the high resolution (1024×1024) Continuum and Mannetogram images for the first SC24 sunspot #981 which was first observed on 2008/01/04 and persisted for three days. Here are the results. Blink Comparator of images used in NASA Press release 2008-01-04 14:24 & 14:28 http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/3149/su...01041424ab6.gif Blink Comparator of best images from 2008-01-05 06:24 & 06:26 http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/1548/su...01050624or8.gif In the image from 2008-01-05 there are three clearly desirable sunspots and three to four smaller sunspots. Note this little gem in the NASA press release, Solar Cycle 24 Begins http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/10...olarcycle24.htm http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/im...e24/newspot.jpg "Sunspot 981 was small–only about as wide as Earth, which counts as small on the grand scale of the sun–and it has already faded away. But its three day appearance on Jan. 4-6 was enough to convince most solar physicists that Solar Cycle 24 is underway." If Sunspot #981 was "small" how should NASA characterize Sunspot #990? Let's look at Sunspot #990. In the following Blink Comparator analysis one sunspot was clearly visible. There is approximately a one hour difference in time between the two images which is why there is a small displacement. Blink Comparator for Sunspot #990 2008-04-13 21:26 & 22:24 http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/3599/su...agblink2tq3.gif Load the following animation to see the event which occurred on 2008-04-14 between 16:05 and 16:15 where a second sunspot was attempting to form. I suspect that this was the event which earned Sunspot #990 a 12. Shortly after this Sunspot #990 disappeared from the 1024x1024 Continuum images. Blink Comparator for Sunspot #990 2008-04-14 between 16:05 & 16:15 http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/4360/suns...magblinkpg6.gif Clearly compared to Sunspot #981, Sunspot #990 is pathetic. It lasted a little longer than a day and the second spot may have been wishful thinking. Based on two data points Solar Cycle 24 is moving in the wrong direction. At this rate we will be lucky the reach solar minimum be the end of 2008, if then. Solar Cycle 23 sunspots continue to dominate. A SC23 Sunspot #991 emerged two days ago and then faded after 24 hours; the solar disk is again blank. If anything SC23 and SC24 activity continues to decrease in strength. I have additional posts over at http://www.solarcycle24.com/ on Sunspot #991. Mike Note: To view using IE press the "F11" key to toggle between full screen and the normal IE display. To stop the animation, press the "Esc" key. To restart the animation press "F5". The solar image is best viewed in full size, if using IE pass the pointer over the image and click if a magnifying glass is displayed with a "plus" sign in the center. The blink speeds are one frame per second for all animations referenced here. Date/time stamps are in the lower left corner.
  4. Your selection of 2011 as a GW drop-dead target date is quite interesting. When Kyoto was agreed to in December 1997 the treaty was to expire in 2012 which means that final negotiations for a replacement treaty would take place in 2011. Why was a 15 year treaty selected? Why not a 10 year or 20 year or 25 year treaty? Back in 1997 the consensus projection for the Solar Maximum during Solar Cycle 24 was 2011 and that is was going to be energetic. There is now one small problem with the 2011 date. The commencement of Solar Cycle 24 is now 16 months late and with the exception of one and "half" reverse polarity sunspots we are continuing to see equatorial Cycle 23 sunspots which are few in number. Technically we are still not at Solar Minimum because the number of Cycle 23 sunspots far outnumbers the pathetic showing for Cycle 24. With each passing day as the sunspot count remains zero it becomes increasing unlikely that we will see Solar Maximum in 2011 or 2012 and that the maximum when it does occur will be much weaker than projected. On May 11, 2006 NASA announced that "Solar Cycle 25 peaking around 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries". The cause of weakness was attributed to the Sun's Great Conveyor Belt slowing to the lowest speeds observed since the late Nineteenth Century. Some of us are beginning to suspect that the projected impact for Solar Cycle 25 is becoming manifest in Solar Cycle 24. But as you indicated it is too early to predict what is going to happen with planetary temperatures just yet. As we await the arrival of 2011, you should ask yourself, what cases El Nino and La Nina events? Your comments appear to suggest that these are wildcards which perturb the ever ascending smooth curves in one of Al Gore's presentations. I am looking forward to 2011 and indent to keep my snow blower in very good repair. At this point, I am looking forward to seeing just how late Solar Minimum is going to be. Each morning when I reconnect to the Internet I am finding myself checking the Sun's weather before checking on the Earth's weather. Admittedly the Earth's weather is more interesting because "almost" nothing is happening on the Sun. Mike
  5. Dear Roo, With enemies like Jo Abbess we don't need friends. The level of ineptitude exhibited Jo Abbess and Roger Harrabin is truly mind-boggling. Clearly neither Jo Abbess nor Roger Harrabin understands how the Internet works. If we can trust the date/time stamps in the original news story and Jo's Email journal here are the two values which are of interest. BBC Story: Page last updated at 00:42 GMT, Friday, 4 April 2008 01:42 UK Last Email: date Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:28 AM At a minimum the original story was on the Internet for 9 hours and 46 minutes. On a high profile site like the BBC, every search robot on the Internet copied and indexed the page multiple times. While the original page in no longer "publicly" available at Google and Live, but is available at Yahoo, rest assured that Google, Live and Yahoo retain private copies of everything for a very long time. And then there is the Wayback Machine which will not open its treasure drove until six months have expired. Trust my when I say that nothing is ever truly deleted from the Internet. The truth is always out there! Roger Harrabin is an old pro and I would have expected better of him. It is as if he wanted to be caught or had done this so many times before that he truly believed that no one would call him on it or both. Roger's undoing was that he evidently did not realize how incredibly stupid Jo Abbess was. Jo Abbess is an absolute delight. In one BLOG posting she set the cause of AGW back thirty years. She confirmed everything which the Climate [skeptics | Deniers | Nonbelievers | Nonconformists | Infidels | Atheists | Heretics] have been saying about the manipulation of the media for years. One has to wonder if Jo is a double-agent working for Exxon-Mobil or the Bush Administration, so extensive is the damage she has committed. If she had none absolutely nothing the story would have disappeared in the 24 hour news cycle but not now. Keep up the good work Jo; we are all pulling for you. Rest assured that all over the Internet thousands of computers are now tracking your name waiting for the next pearl of wisdom you will share with us. We remain your most obedient and adoring fans. Mike
  6. That should be April 4, 2008 not March 4, 2008; apparently I don’t have edit authority or more likely don’t understand your system. As I can edit this document please attribute the error to the user. Mike
  7. On Friday March 4, 2008 the BBC published a story on Global Warming which it subsequently redacted later that same day. Fortunately the all of the major Internet search engines caches copies of the original story, which many Internet users have now downloaded and archived. I generated a small animation using Blink Comparator technology, showing the text which was changed in the story. The animation report on the BBC story alteration is available here. BBC before and after http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/04/09/bbc-before-and-after/ To stop the animation press the "Esc" key; to restart it press the "F5" key. The original story which the Ministry Of Truth doesn't want you to see is still available via Yahoo Cache but make a copy quickly before it times out like copies in Google and Live. Global warming 'dips this year' http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=%22Global+warming+%27dips+this+year%27%22&fr=ush-news&u=reddit.com/goto%3Frss%3Dtrue%26id%3Dt3_6ellk&w=%22global+warming+dips+this+year%22&d=Nxe2VvH_QkkL&icp=1&.intl=us At the Ministry Of Truth you can read today's official reality. Global temperatures 'to decrease' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7329799.stm Please verify the accuracy of the animation by comparing it with the two versions the story referenced above. Only the first section of the BBC story was altered. Take special note of the fact that the date/time stamps on both versions for the story are identical and are highlighted in red in the animation. The same date/time stamps were used in both versions in an amateurish attempt to cover up the fact that the story was altered. The individual taking full credit for forcing BBC to change the story is Jo Abbess. Apparently for Jo Abbess even the Ministry Of Truth is not truthful enough. You can read her victory statement and full Email journal here. BBC : Balance Restored http://portal.campaigncc.org/node/2089 There is an excellent report in The Register. Blog bully crows over BBC climate victory http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/08/bbc_blog_bully/ In the Email exchange between Jo Abbess and Roger Harrabin, Roger helpfully documents the fact the date/time stamp is a forgery. UPDATED VERSION (note : the page date and time has not changed) For those of you in the United Kingdom, who are paying the BBC to practice this band of journalism, ask the BBC two very simple questions? Why is the date/time stamp on the altered version of the story a forgery? How many other stories published by the BBC have forged date/time stamps? Mike
  8. The numbers I was quoting were the official party line at NASA, NOAA and SWPC. Your 2009 date may be much closer to reality. The consensus view at SWPC was that Solar Minimum would occur in the December 2006 to January 2007 time frame, which by that measurement means that Solar Cycle 24 is 15 months late right now. The December 2006 data was selected back in December 2000 (see SWPC report PRF1322.pdf page 18) and was the official minimum data for 6 years. In the animation I posted previously, the SWPC graphic maintained December 2006 until be bitter end. Watch the December 2006 minimum in the animation. http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/solar_cycle_23.png David Hathaway at NASA predicted a minimum at about September 2006. http://web.archive.org/web/20060823002332/http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict_l.gif The same values can be seen in this text file. Cycle 23 Sunspot Number Prediction http://web.archive.org/web/20060823002242/http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict.txt On March 6, 2006 NASA prematurely announced Solar Minimum, by two years as it now turns out. This is where I derive the 24 month late value from. Solar Minimum has Arrived http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/06mar_solarminimum.htm There is an interesting prediction just made by Jan Janssens, who is not an astrophysicists but a very serious amateur astronomer in Belgium. In his prediction, Janssens asserts that Solar Cycle 24 should not be expected prior to July 2008, and in all likelihood might take place only in the first half of 2009. I don't know anything about Janssens' credentials but given the track record of the SWPC wise men in Boulder Colorado I am not sure anyone can predict what is going to happen next. If Janssens is correct, Solar Cycle 24 could be over 3 years late at a minimum. Read his report towards the bottom of this page. http://users.telenet.be/j.janssens/Engwelc... Astronomy and paleontology are some of the few areas where armatures are still making contributions to science, so I would not dismiss Janssens just yet. If Solar Cycle 24 doesn't start in the next two to three months I am going to begin taking Janssens very seriously. In which case, this forum is not going to have to worry about the lack of sea ice. There will be other problems but the lack of ice anywhere will not be one of them. Mike
  9. Reluctantly I have to disagree with your estimate because you are being much too forgiving. Depending on whom you want to believe at NASA, NOAA or SWPC, Solar Cycle 24 is now between 15 and 24 months late not 15 months. As the animation I posted shows SWPC spent all of 2007 adjusting solar minimum one month at a time until even they gave up and published a significantly revised forecast which two conflicting predictions because there is no longer any conscious on what the sun is going to do during Solar Cycle 24. The one long-range prediction which everyone appeared to be in agreement with was that Solar Cycle 25 was going to be "off the bottom of the charts". Solar Cycle 25 peaking around 2022 could be one of the weakest in centuries. http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10may_longrange.htm Many of us are starting to suspect that the anticipated impact from Solar Cycle 25 is arriving early. Note the following comment in the NASA report. On the other hand, they will have to worry more about cosmic rays. Cosmic rays are high-energy particles from deep space; they penetrate metal, plastic, flesh and bone. Astronauts exposed to cosmic rays develop an increased risk of cancer, cataracts and other maladies. Ironically, solar explosions, which produce their own deadly radiation, sweep away the even deadlier cosmic rays. As flares subside, cosmic rays intensify—yin, yang. There was no mention on the impact of cosmic rays on weather. A most unfortunate oversight! One of the definitions for solar minimum is that point in time when the number of sunspots with the magnetic polarity of the old cycle equals the number of sunspots with the magnetic polarity of the new cycle. By that definition we are still in Solar Cycle 23 and have not yet reached solar minimum. If we don't see any more high latitude reverse polarity sunspots in the next two months look for SWPC to start marking revisions once again. I will keep my animation update as SWPC publishes monthly reports. The longer the arrival time for solar minimum is the more likely Solar Cycle 24 will be weak. So keep watching the sun. Today's number is Zero! http://www.solarcycle24.com/ Mike P.S. The group running Solar Cycle 24 are amateur radio operators and they are hopping an energetic sun so they can bounce their radio transmissions off the ionosphere. Think of them as surfers or skiers waiting for the next big wave or next big snow.
  10. Your words may prove to be prophetic but not in the way you intend. The climate research laboratories at Columbia University in New York City have developed an exceptional Google Earth visualization of all the GISS planetary surface stations. If you download the KLM and/or KLZ files you may want to pay particular attention to the stations in Antarctica. The West Antarctic Peninsula, which comprises approximately 2% of the above sea level area of Antarctica, exhibits two distinctly different climate systems based on the temperature histories. The Western Slope of the West Antarctic Peninsula which until recently had been exhibiting warming now appears to have entered a cooling phase. For the Eastern Slope of the West Antarctic Peninsula, the word "cold" would be a gross understatement. The recent temperature changes have been so extreme that I checked the GISS database to eliminate the possibility of a programming error in the graphics software and found none. The temperature changes appear to be quite real. Ken Mankoff's Google Earth implementation of all the GISS surface stations is outstanding. All of the hot-spots, cold-spots and incomplete data are graphically rendered in living color, with trend lines for the last 10, 25, and 50 years for each station. This resource is very useful in identifying where problem stations are located. Many international borders can be identified, based on the color codes assigned to the condition of the surface stations. I don't know want it is with Americans be we appear to have an incredible fondness for weather stations. Before you down load the KLM and/or KLZ files, read the following documentation and my commentary. The must have file is StationData_net.kmz which can unzipped to StationData_net.kml, but I would download everything. This is an excellent learning aid. Documentation for Global Temperature Station Data in Google Earth http://dev.edgcm.columbia.edu/wiki/StationData Public pages of Ken Mankoff at Columbia/GISS: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mankoff Folder containing all of the GISS Station data for Google Earth: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mankoff/StationData/ This small Google Earth KLM file links to the larger KLM file: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mankoff/StationData/StationData.kml This large Google Earth KLM file contains all the GISS station locations: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mankoff/StationData/StationData_net.kml The ZIP version of StationData_net.kml can be read directly by Google Earth: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mankoff/StationData/StationData_net.kmz You can convert a KML file into a KMZ file using the ZIP command. ZIP StationData_net.kmz StationData_net.kml This folder is where all the generated Postscript images are stored. http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mankoff/StationData/images/ This folder is where station data though 2006 is stored: http://edgcm.columbia.edu/~mankoff/StationData/data/ While the above folder appears to contain data through 2006, many of the station graphics in Google Earth are complete through 2007. I suspect that updates are being made from the primary GISS database. For anyone interested in climate and weather, this is a fantastic resource. I don't understand why GISS or Columbia is not promoting it. Ken Mankoff has to be one outstanding programmer. Mike
  11. I apologize for this off topic post but I need to get in contact with you immediately. I have the high quality animations and blink comparator analysis of the Northern Hemispheric Sea Ice Anomalies. I also did the same with the Northern Hemispheric Sea Ice Area graphics. I became aware of your work in response to a recent animation I did on Solar Cycle 23 and its alleged transition into Solar Cycle 24. Here is my report and animation. If you read the posts you will see the link to your un-attributed work. I have been looking for you ever since. Solar Cycle 23 Forecasts - The Movie http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/03/29/solar-cycle-23-forecasts-the-movie/ By the way, if Solar Cycle 24 doesn't start for real very soon, the event will be officially by know as the "Gore Minimum". We Yanks take great pride in our Resident Prophet and he never received any credit for inventing the Internet. Did you ever receive a response from Dr. William Chapman to your Email on the sea ice calculations? I believe I have identified who made the changes and it was not Dr. Chapman. I would very much like to obtain copies of any and all graphics which you downloaded directly from Cryosphere Today with the dates of the downloads. I have everything from Archive.org. There are problems with some of the other graphics at CT; when you cook to books, you have to be consistent! Could you send me a private message with your contact information? I do not have that level of authorization on this forum. Michael Ronayne
×
×
  • Create New...