Some Jobs for Models and Modelers

By: Dr. Ricky Rood , 3:34 AM GMT on April 03, 2010

Share this Blog
2
+

Some Jobs for Models - Bumps and Wiggles (2):

Introduction: This is the second in a series on understanding climate variability, global warming, and what we might do about it. The series focuses on the past 30 years and the next 30 years.

Back in October I wrote an entry about a paper by Judith Lean and David Rind. They take a position on predictability of a measure of “global warming” on a decadal time scale. This is based on an analysis of past natural variability and the assumption that that variability extends into the future. Another recent paper by Keenlyside et al., 2008 in Nature, examines the impact of the variability in the Atlantic Ocean on regional and global climate. Keenlyside et al. project that based only on the projection of the observed Atlantic variability into the future, natural cooling will act counter to the projected human-made warming. Lean and Rind assert that their analysis suggests warming even in the presence of this projected cooling. These are both statements that will be subject to “validation” with observations.

Here is Figure 1 from Lean and Rind:



Figure 1 from Lean and Rind (2009), Geophysical Research Letters. Figure taken from tinypic.com. This figure shows the temperature record and the model representation from 1980 to 2030, the subject of this series of articles.

As we think about the development of climate services and the development of policies to manage, essentially, the average temperature of the planet, it is imperative that we start to understand all of the bumps and wiggles in this curve. It will no longer be adequate to say, simply, that the differences between observed warming and predicted warming are “well within” the normal observed variability.

How do we do this? First the problem needs to be broken down.

In the past few weeks I have seen some outstanding presentations by Professor V. Ramanathan from the University of California San Diego. (I recommend specifically this part of Ram’s web page.) In his talk he started by posing the question of why the warming of the Earth’s surface has not occurred as rapidly as predicted. This question requires following the heat. The answer lies in the ocean, where the heat is not only increasing, but it is increasing at different rates in the different oceans. This difference, due to how circulation varies from one ocean to the next, is predicted by model simulations. (See here) (Does it make sense that if the ocean can take up heat then it can give it back?)

So if we look at the differences between a climate projection and the subsequent observations, then there are a variety of possibilities of why the prediction might be in error. In the case of the previous paragraph, not all of the heat went into the surface air temperature. Another possibility is to look at the details of the ultimate source of the Earth’s energy, the Sun. As many of this blog’s readers know, the Sun had a very long sunspot minimum, suggesting a decline in the energy coming from the Sun (see here - It’s time for a solar update.) If we are going to thoroughly explain the differences between predictions and observations, then we will need to quantify, better, our knowledge of the output of the Sun.

The effort to quantify the difference between the predictions and observations reveals errors and inadequacies in the models (and the observations) that need to be addressed. So far in this article, we see the need to better represent the coupling of heat transfer between the atmosphere and the ocean as well as our observations and ability to model the Sun. There are those who would say that the presence of such errors means that the models are not up to the task. There are others who see the identification of errors as the opportunity to improve the models and the quality of predictions.

Explicit identification and correction of errors has been one of the best strategies for improving weather forecasts. During the 1990s, the scientists at the European Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF, the leading forecast center), started to focus on forecast busts and trying to identify the cause of busts. (A dense presentation on the subject) This has been so successful that methods to identify, automatically, sources of errors have been developed. (see learned article from a different Jim Hansen and Emanuel). For errors to be useful to guide incremental improvements to models and observing systems, the forecast has to have enough skill to provide a worthy estimate to start with. We are at that stage.

Climate modeling, prediction, and validation are moving into a new era. The projections and the validation of those projections are good enough to say definitively that the Earth will warm, sea level will rise, and the weather will change. This is actionable information; we need to prepare for this. We need to try to manage the warming to keep it from getting too large; we have stated in the Copenhagen Accord that we will keep warming to two degrees. Our models are not up to that task. Striving to understand the bumps and wiggles as a forecast problem will identify errors that will be corrected, improve the quality of the models, define the need for new observations, and set the foundation for meaningful predictions on decadal scales.


r

Bumps and Wiggles (1): Predictions and Projections

And here is

Faceted Search of Blogs at climateknowledge.org








Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 137 - 87

Page: 1 | 2 | 3Blog Index

137. cyclonebuster
6:23 PM GMT on April 11, 2010
Quoting martinitony:


Cyclone, why couldn't it be possible to harvest energy from the oceans? I just read up on geothermal heat pumps, but that is only a more efficient way to heat and cool rather than burning fuel. The reason it's not free is the energy used to pump.

Now, what if the pumping costs were free? Rather than harvest energy from surface winds with windmills, wouldn't it make more sense to harvest energy from subsurface water currents?

Cyclone, you should be thinking big. Lay out a plan for that system and then you would really have something.


It could also be used in conjunction with OTEC!
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
136. martinitony
10:39 AM GMT on April 11, 2010
Quoting cyclonebuster:


Barometer Bob asked Bill Read about hurricane suppression techniques such as cloud seeding and my Tunnels on his show in Orlando Fla. on 4/1/10. He said, "it is supreme arrogance to think we can change it." I think Bill has it wrong on what our brain is used for in Bobs pod cast. In my opinion the good Lord gave us a brain to figure our way out if this mess we placed ourself in.
Bill doesn't think we can control what the responce of the hurricane would be based on what we did to it. I am pretty sure Kerry Emanuals formula for maximum wind speed potential based on sea surface temperatures can nail that one down pretty good for the Tunnels. Calculate how much electrical energy they would produce that alone would eliminate massive amounts of fossil fuels. Since they can regulate SSTs then they can also regulate our climate.

Link


Cyclone, why couldn't it be possible to harvest energy from the oceans? I just read up on geothermal heat pumps, but that is only a more efficient way to heat and cool rather than burning fuel. The reason it's not free is the energy used to pump.

Now, what if the pumping costs were free? Rather than harvest energy from surface winds with windmills, wouldn't it make more sense to harvest energy from subsurface water currents?

Cyclone, you should be thinking big. Lay out a plan for that system and then you would really have something.
Member Since: July 29, 2009 Posts: 0 Comments: 970
135. cyclonebuster
6:59 AM GMT on April 11, 2010
Quoting sirmaelstrom:
No. 130
[Your] tunnels?
Are you building an underground city to escape the predicted cataclysm or something?


Barometer Bob asked Bill Read about hurricane suppression techniques such as cloud seeding and my Tunnels on his show in Orlando Fla. on 4/1/10. He said, "it is supreme arrogance to think we can change it." I think Bill has it wrong on what our brain is used for in Bobs pod cast. In my opinion the good Lord gave us a brain to figure our way out if this mess we placed ourself in.
Bill doesn't think we can control what the responce of the hurricane would be based on what we did to it. I am pretty sure Kerry Emanuals formula for maximum wind speed potential based on sea surface temperatures can nail that one down pretty good for the Tunnels. Calculate how much electrical energy they would produce that alone would eliminate massive amounts of fossil fuels. Since they can regulate SSTs then they can also regulate our climate.

Link
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
134. sirmaelstrom
8:35 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
No. 130
[Your] tunnels?
Are you building an underground city to escape the predicted cataclysm or something?
Member Since: February 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 580
133. sirmaelstrom
8:29 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
№ 131
According to the link I provided:
Formaldehyde in small concentrations is a normal part of our environment.
Gasoline burning may add to that somewhat but it would seem to be minimal (Google turned up an article that seem to say 80µg/L but the article is not accessible for free). Simply a case of the pros outweighing the cons for gasoline I would think. The link seems to identify new wood products' "outgassing" as the primary man-made source, which is totally unrelated to fossil-fuels. I think they're are far worse pollutants to be concerned about.
Member Since: February 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 580
132. LowerCal
8:23 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Re. 127 that's more good news.

A rapid replacement for NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory would be good news too.
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
131. cyclonebuster
8:13 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting sirmaelstrom:
№ 117
Formaldehyde in the atmosphere a concern? Considering the link you provided defines the lowest OSHA threshold as 0.75ppm and this link...
Link
...states that normal suburban concentrations are between 0.002 and 0.006ppm, I don't I would—wait for it—hold my breath worrying about formaldehyde in the atmosphere. Get it? "Hold my breath!" Anyone? anyone? Ahhh, Never mind.


Who would want any? Unless you are dead of course.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
130. cyclonebuster
8:12 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Bill Read calls my tunnels "Extreme Arrogance" on Pod Cast!

Perhaps that's what it takes to end global warming and "Extreme Greed" from the oil industries.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
129. sirmaelstrom
8:12 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
№ 117
Formaldehyde in the atmosphere a concern? Considering the link you provided defines the lowest OSHA threshold as 0.75ppm and this link...
Link
...states that normal suburban concentrations are between 0.002 and 0.006ppm, I don't think I would--wait for it--hold my breath worrying about formaldehyde in the atmosphere. Get it? "Hold my breath!" Anyone? anyone? Ahhh, Never mind...

Edited: forgot the word "think". Wow the Modify Comment procedure really hates dashes.
Member Since: February 19, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 580
127. idontknowforsure
7:39 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting LowerCal:

cb, I thought you and idontknowforsure would like that news.


SEE post #60
Member Since: January 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 290
126. cyclonebuster
7:36 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting skepticall2:


Before it was something else I can't remember and neither can you next it was extent now it is thickness. Your losing your argument.


LOL! Change as you go.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
124. cyclonebuster
6:01 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting LowerCal:

cb, I thought you and idontknowforsure would like that news.


Tell that to Idontknowforsure Ialreadyknowthatforsure! LOL!
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
123. SWFLgazer
5:25 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Thank you LowerCal. I fail to see why measuring ice extent and thickness is compromised by not measuring at precise 24 hour increments. Seems to me that it would be more accurate to adjust for time since it can be determined what the time differences than it is to miss a few degrees of polar measurements when the purpose is polar measurements.
Member Since: August 14, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 448
122. LowerCal
5:13 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting cyclonebuster:
""One of the primary objectives of CryoSat is to determine what the mass loss is, rather than the aerial loss.""

True answers coming soon for the naysayers paid for by our tax dollars! LOL! Alleluia!
Alleluia!

cb, I thought you and idontknowforsure would like that news.
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
121. LowerCal
5:11 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting crucilandia:
sorry Lowercal I ll leave you alone

Apology accepted.
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
120. cyclonebuster
5:09 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
""One of the primary objectives of CryoSat is to determine what the mass loss is, rather than the aerial loss.""

True answers coming soon for the naysayers paid for by our tax dollars! LOL! Alleluia!
Alleluia!
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
119. crucilandia
5:06 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
sorry Lowercal I ll leave you alone
Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
118. LowerCal
4:58 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting SWFLgazer:
Why aren't satellites who's purpose is to measure ice extent launched into polar orbits? That way there should be no problem with holes in the measurements from measuring at short angles.
What specific satellite(s) are you referring to? CryoSat will achieve a virtually polar orbit with an orbital inclination of 88°. An overview of some of the issues with polar orbits and coverage can be found at Polar orbit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

CryoSat-2

Image credit: ESA

ESA's Earth Explorer CryoSat mission is dedicated to precise monitoring of the changes in the thickness of marine ice floating in the polar oceans and variations in the thickness of the vast ice sheets that overlie Greenland and Antarctica.

From Europe launches satellite to observe polar ice caps:
....
CryoSat 2 will have two principal targets during its mission, according to Wingham.

"The first is to examine closely just how much mass is being lost out of the Arctic Ocean due to the ongoing melt," Wingham said. "Although NASA has done a very fine job of mapping what the aerial retreat has been, there's no simple way of converting area to mass. One of the primary objectives of CryoSat is to determine what the mass loss is, rather than the aerial loss."

Wingham, a professor at University College London, said CryoSat 2's measurements of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean will help researchers determine how melting ice sheets will impact climate.

Parts of the ocean left exposed by melted sea ice are subject to winds and currents that could alter regional weather patterns that drive global climate.

Ice caps on Antarctica and Greenland are also targets for CryoSat 2.

"In the last five years, we have seen very dramatic changes in these ice masses, particularly at their margins," Wingham said. "We don't understand the cause or effects of these changes very well. We have to keep learning about them, and CryoSat will take up that cause."
....
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
117. cyclonebuster
3:07 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Great News!
Lets just keep breathing in carcinogens from fossil fuels while they warm our planet!

Health Effects
Formaldehyde is an eye, skin, and respiratory tract irritant. Inhalation of vapors can produce narrowing of the bronchi and an accumulation of fluid in the lungs.
Children may be more susceptible than adults to the respiratory effects of formaldehyde.
Formaldehyde solution (formalin) causes corrosive injury to the gastrointestinal tract, especially the pharynx, epiglottis, esophagus, and stomach.
The systemic effects of formaldehyde are due primarily to its metabolic conversion to formate, and may include metabolic acidosis, circulatory shock, respiratory insufficiency, and acute renal failure.
Formaldehyde is a potent sensitizer and a probable human carcinogen.

Link
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
116. cyclonebuster
3:01 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
More tidbits on GHGs. Let's embalm our lungs now!

Formaldehyde (HCHO) is one of the most abundant hydrocarbons in the atmosphere and is an important indicator of so-called non-methane volatile organic compound (NMVOC) emissions and photochemical activity. As such, it is an indicator of the presence of volatile organic compounds in the atmosphere, which in turn play an important role in the formation of toxic ozone close to the surface and also have an important influence on climate through the formation of large aerosol particles. HCHO is a primary emission product from biomass burning and fossil fuel combustion, but its principle source in the atmosphere is the photochemical oxidation of methane and non-methane hydrocarbons. Metop-A measurements of HCHO can be used to constrain NMVOC emissions in current state-of-the-art chemical transport models used in the forecasting and analysis of pollution events and also in modelling climate change.

Operational GOME-2 H2O and HCHO data are being produced by the Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), the German Aerospace Center, a partner of EUMETSAT's Ozone and Atmospheric Chemistry Monitoring SAF (O3M-SAF) coordinated by the Finnish Meteorological Institute. The H2O and HCHO retrieval algorithms for GOME-2 have been developed by the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz, Germany, and the Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy (BIRA/IASB) in Brussels, respectively.

GOME-2 H2O and HCHO as well as other operational products can be ordered via the O3M-SAF site. DLR provides near-real-time and historical maps of GOME-2 total column (ozone, nitrogen dioxide, tropospheric nitrogen dioxide, bromine oxide, sulphur dioxide, H2O, HCHO) and cloud products.

Link
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
115. idontknowforsure
2:54 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Mr. Buster, nothing you posted suggested that SSTs melt Arctic ice from underneath. It melts from on top and from the edges. Water from on top may increase the melting from underneath. You have blinders on.

I'm not laughing because your blindness just reinforces the difficulty of using logical arguments to dissuade a fanatic from his views.
Member Since: January 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 290
114. cyclonebuster
2:44 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
"You're wrong about the melting from below caused by SST increases. It is not rational to believe that SST under the ice is warmer than SST at the edges."

LOL! No your WRONG! You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink! It's all over the internet all you got to do is look for it before spouting off your mouth! Here are few fine examples READ IT! Then perhaps YOUMAYKNOWFORSURE.

The warm North Atlantic water intrudes into the central Arctic Ocean through Fram Strait, the deep channel between Greenland and Spitsbergen that connects the Nordic Seas to the Arctic Ocean, contributing to sea ice melting.

Link

Scientists at the National Oceanography Centre Southampton working in collaboration with researchers from the University of Birmingham, Royal Holloway London and IFM-Geomar in Germany have found that more than 250 plumes of bubbles of methane gas are rising from the seabed of the West Spitsbergen continental margin in the Arctic, in a depth range of 150 to 400 metres.

Methane released from gas hydrate in submarine sediments has been identified in the past as an agent of climate change. The likelihood of methane being released in this way has been widely predicted.
Link

In recent years, the amount of ice replaced in the winter has not been sufficient to offset summer ice losses. The result is more open water in summer, which then absorbs more heat, warming the ocean and further melting the ice. Between 2004 and 2008, multi-year ice cover shrank 1.54 million square kilometers (595,000 square miles) -- nearly the size of Alaska's land area.During the study period, the relative contributions of the two ice types to the total volume of the Arctic's ice cover were reversed. In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic's total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice, with 38 percent stored in first-year seasonal ice. By 2008, 68 percent of the total ice volume was first-year ice, with 32 percent multi-year ice.

"One of the main things that has been missing from information about what is happening with sea ice is comprehensive data about ice thickness," said Jay Zwally, study co-author and ICESat project scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. "U.S. Navy submarines provide a long-term, high-resolution record of ice thickness over only parts of the Arctic. The submarine data agree with the ICESat measurements, giving us great confidence in satellites as a way of monitoring thickness across the whole Arctic Basin."
Link

High ocean surface temperatures have also been found to result in a more vigorous deep ocean circulation system. This increase results in a faster transport of large quantities of warm water, with possible impacts including reduction of sea ice extent and overall warming of the Arctic.

Link
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
113. idontknowforsure
2:14 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting cyclonebuster:


It melts from below ALSO because GLOBAL SSTs have risen 1.5 degrees since 1880.


You're wrong about the melting from below caused by SST increases. It is not rational to believe that SST under the ice is warmer than SST at the edges.

Perhaps a real scientist that knows something about this will chime in to explain.

From the article:

"The Summer Melt Period
In the Arctic, the overlying snow layer typically begins to melt in mid-June and is gone by early July. The meltwater from the snow gathers to form a network of meltwater pools over the surface of the ice. On first year ice, which has a smooth upper surface at the end of winter (except where ridged), the pools are initially very shallow, forming in minor depressions in the ice surface, or simply being retained within surviving snow pack as a layer of slush. As summer proceeds, however, this initial random structure becomes more fixed as the pools melt their way down into the ice through preferential absorption of solar radiation by the water, which reflects only 15-40% of the radiation falling on it compared to 40-70% for bare ice.

As the melt pools grow deeper and wider they may eventually drain off into the sea, over the side of floes, through existing cracks, or by melting a thaw hole right through the ice at its thinnest point or at the melt pool's deepest point. The downrush of water when a thaw hole opens may be quite violent, and on very level ice, such as fast ice, a single thaw hole may drain a large area of ice surface. From the air such thaw holes give the appearance of "giant spiders", with the "body" being the thaw hole and the "legs" channels of melt water draining laterally towards the hole.

The underside of the ice cover also responds to the surface melt. Directly underneath melt pools the ice is thinner and is absorbing more incoming radiation. This causes an enhanced rate of bottom melt so that the ice bottom develops a topography of depressions to mirror the melt pool distribution on the top side. In this way an initially smooth first-year ice sheet acquires by the end of summer an undulating topography both on its top and bottom sides. Some of the drained melt water may in fact gather in the underside depressions to form under-ice melt pools, which refreeze in autumn and partially smooth off the underside, leaving it with bulges but not depressions.

A final and most important role of the melt water is that some of it works its way down through the ice fabric through minor pores, veins and channels, and in doing so drives out much of the remaining brine. This process, called flushing, is the most efficient and rapid form of brine drainage mechanism, and it operates to remove nearly all of the remaining brine from the first-year ice. The hydrostatic head of the surface meltwater provides the driving force, but an interconnecting network of pores is necessary for the flushing process to operate. Given that the strength properties of sea ice depend on the brine volume, this implies that the flushing mechanism creates a surviving ice sheet which during its second winter of existence has much greater strength than in its first winter."

I can't find any quotes by you in the article explaining how warmer water underneath melts the ice. You should send your written theory into NOAA and get them to correct the article.

Member Since: January 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 290
112. cyclonebuster
2:02 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting idontknowforsure:


Have you not noticed that as the maximums have increased so have the minimums?

Simply put, if there is more ice at each maximum, then it takes more melting than the previous year to get back to a previous minimum. Therefor, if the melting is the same or less, than the next minimum will be the same or higher. That can't be hard for you to understand.

How Arctic Ice Forms and Decays

Long article. I didn't see a mention of ice melting from below by warming waters. The melt from above is what reduces the ice area and extent.


It melts from below ALSO because GLOBAL SSTs have risen 1.5 F degrees since 1880.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
111. idontknowforsure
1:52 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting cyclonebuster:
"Why would someone need to post over and over that the ice is not as thick as the extent increases to higher and higher levels?"

Because the problem is not only EXTENT it is also THICKNESS. If it is not as THICK it melts out quicker during the summer due to it having less mass.


Have you not noticed that as the maximums have increased so have the minimums?

Simply put, if there is more ice at each maximum, then it takes more melting than the previous year to get back to a previous minimum. Therefor, if the melting is the same or less, than the next minimum will be the same or higher. That can't be hard for you to understand.

How Arctic Ice Forms and Decays

Long article. I didn't see a mention of ice melting from below by warming waters. The melt from above is what reduces the ice area and extent.
Member Since: January 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 290
110. cyclonebuster
1:16 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
"Why would someone need to post over and over that the ice is not as thick as the extent increases to higher and higher levels?"

Because the problem is not only EXTENT it is also THICKNESS. If it is not as THICK it melts out quicker during the summer due to it having less mass.
Member Since: January 2, 2006 Posts: 127 Comments: 20401
109. idontknowforsure
12:31 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
A routine post here is to explain increased ice area and extent in the Arctic away by suggesting the ice is thinner.

It is intuitive to believe that as ice extent reduces, the thickness of the remaining ice would likely reduce. It is also intuitive to believe the opposite, that ice thickness would on average increase as extent increased.

I am not a physicist, but I would bet that there are physical laws that support that intuition that probably relate to heat transfer and such.
If I put a new tray of ice in the freezer, the freezing starts somewhere and it seems to me that where that is is where it would get thicker as the remaining ice starts to freeze.

Why would someone need to post over and over that the ice is not as thick as the extent increases to higher and higher levels? That's a rhetorical question.
Member Since: January 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 290
108. idontknowforsure
12:22 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
Skeptical, the surest sign that a post is troubling to the alarmists is the lack of response to that post.

When there is no explanation for a post that runs contra to AGW, there are no responses. It has happened here often.
Member Since: January 17, 2010 Posts: 0 Comments: 290
107. SWFLgazer
12:09 PM GMT on April 10, 2010
That wasn't the question skeptical. The question was...Why aren't they launched into polar orbits? If you're going to measure conditions at the poles, launch them into orbits that allow them full access to polar conditions.
Member Since: August 14, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 448
104. SWFLgazer
10:53 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
Why aren't satellites who's purpose is to measure ice extent launched into polar orbits? That way there should be no problem with holes in the measurements from measuring at short angles.
Member Since: August 14, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 448
103. LowerCal
7:25 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
Pat Thanks for your endorsement. I don't really anticipate winning the Nobel or sainthood though, lol. However I would like to know what cruci has against earth observing satellites.
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
102. LowerCal
7:05 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
So cruci, what are your answers to the questions in 92?
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
101. crucilandia
5:55 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
answer 99
Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
100. Patrap
5:20 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
CryoSat-2 Launch Yesterday

Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 426 Comments: 128749
99. crucilandia
5:17 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
does Al gore stand up to her?
Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
98. Patrap
5:09 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
Quoting crucilandia:
mother theresa did not get the peace nobel


Al gore did







Mother Teresa
The Nobel Peace Prize 1979
Biography



Mother TeresaMother Teresa was born Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu in Skopje*, Macedonia, on August 26**, 1910. Her family was of Albanian descent. At the age of twelve, she felt strongly the call of God. She knew she had to be a missionary to spread the love of Christ. At the age of eighteen she left her parental home in Skopje and joined the Sisters of Loreto, an Irish community of nuns with missions in India. After a few months' training in Dublin she was sent to India, where on May 24, 1931, she took her initial vows as a nun. From 1931 to 1948 Mother Teresa taught at St. Mary's High School in Calcutta, but the suffering and poverty she glimpsed outside the convent walls made such a deep impression on her that in 1948 she received permission from her superiors to leave the convent school and devote herself to working among the poorest of the poor in the slums of Calcutta. Although she had no funds, she depended on Divine Providence, and started an open-air school for slum children. Soon she was joined by voluntary helpers, and financial support was also forthcoming. This made it possible for her to extend the scope of her work.


There is no "H" in Mother Teresa.

I'll get da graph on dat.

Sheesh,..dis aint so hard,

LOL

Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 426 Comments: 128749
97. crucilandia
5:03 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
mother theresa did not get the peace nobel

Al gore did

Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
96. crucilandia
5:02 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
:( uh uh....
Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
95. crucilandia
5:01 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
poor lowercal...
Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
94. Patrap
4:37 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
Facts and science tend to scare the weak minded seems.

Sheesh.

Ban Lowercal?

Thats like banning Bing Crosby or Mother Teresa...from heaven.

Post #47 didnt have near that effect on my psyche.



Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 426 Comments: 128749
93. LowerCal
4:03 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
JF, SSI Thank you for your kind words of support.
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
92. LowerCal
3:56 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
Re. 52
Quoting crucilandia:
ban lowerCal please

& 62
Quoting crucilandia:
vote to BAN LowerCal

Whatever did I do that you find so offensive, cruci? The only comment I've posted on this blog entry is 47
Quoting LowerCal:
... and CryoSat-2 was successfully delivered to orbit -

Europe launches satellite to observe polar ice caps
That satellite will tell us the actual change in volume of sea and land based ice on planet Earth. Why would you find the prospect of that knowledge so disturbing?
Member Since: July 26, 2006 Posts: 58 Comments: 9188
89. crucilandia
3:28 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
47 employees? is it a big deal? what is your revenue?

do you give them health insurance?
Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212
88. crucilandia
3:27 AM GMT on April 10, 2010
leave skeptical alone. you have used ad hominen comments all the time. check you record.
Member Since: March 6, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 2212

Viewing: 137 - 87

Page: 1 | 2 | 3Blog Index

Top of Page

About RickyRood

I'm a professor at U Michigan and lead a course on climate change problem solving. These articles often come from and contribute to the course.