On Energy

Without it, life is brutish and exceedingly brief. Just ask the folks over in Africa.

The Sins and Idiocy of Michael Mann

a) He used as a temperature proxy (bristlecone pine tree rings) something that literally any paleoclimatologist could have informed him was a thoroughly unreliable one and he even cherry-picked here.............b) He hid data that was inconvenient to his hypothesis (the bristlecone pine tree ring data actually started showing a temperature DECLINE in the '90s).............c) He refused to release his data and calculation methods to the public and it was only after a legal tug of war that he ultimately did so (in dribs and drabs).............d) He utilized a flawed statistical technique/computer program which (according to Economist, Ross McKitrick), even if he had inserted random numbers into it, still would have given him a hockey-stick shape.............d) He only utilized one type of temperature proxy (the already mentioned bristlecone pine tree rings), ignoring others such as ice cores, lake sediments, fossil pollen, captains logs, etc..............e) He has viciously and personally attacked (even going as far as to sue the guy who did the uproariously funny Youtube spoof of him) anybody who has ever criticized him.

Top 5 All-Time Favorite Cartoon Sidekicks

5) Dingaling (to Hokie Wolf).......4) Chumley (to Tennessee Tuxedo).......3) Boo Boo (to Yogi Bear).......2) Blabber Mouth (to Super Snooper).......1) Baba Louie (to Quickdraw McGraw)

On Climate Sensitivity and Feedbacks; Theory and Reality

The IPCC's theory of anthropogenic global warming hinges on one key element; a positive feedback loop. The essence of it is that even a small increase in atmospheric CO2 will interact with the preexisting water vapor and clouds and cause an amplification of the normal one degree increase per doubling of CO2 by a factor of anywhere from 2-5 (the theory is based upon the plausible notion that increases in CO2 will cause the ocean water to evaporate and create an even more powerful greenhouse effect). It was a "putting your all your eggs in one basket" approach to climatology that eventually prompted the now infamous computer models of the '90s.........................................................................................So, how well has the data from the past twenty or so years supported this theory of anthropogenic global warming via a CO2-water vapor positive feedback loop? "Not very" would be putting it quite mildly. The fact of the matter here is that global temperatures (as determined by satellites) over the past 16 years are actually down from the 1997-1998 peak of El Nino (itself a naturally occurring climate phenomena) and the trajectory doesn't appear to be changing. This, despite the fact that global CO2 emissions have continued to rise and rise markedly................................................................................................Oh, and if that isn't sufficient enough proof for you folks that the feedback isn't a positive one but a negative one, these satellites have also been measuring the amount of radiation that's been escaping back into space, and GUESS WHAT? The amount of radiation that's been escaping hasn't been decreasing. It's been INCREASING. It seems, folks, that when you evaporate more water, you aren't just increasing the greenhouse effect. You're also increasing cloud cover and what does cloud cover do? Yeah, that's right, it blocks the sun from hitting the land/lower atmosphere and the temperatures moderate accordingly....Wow. I guess that it's back to the drawing board YET AGAIN.

The Top Two Activities of My Youth

2) Listening to Dewey Redman, Jack DeJohnette, Ralph Towner, Keith Jarrett, Gary Burton, Eberhard Weber, Kenny Wheeler, Wayne Shorter, and Jan Garbarek.......1) Listening to Dewey Redman, Jack DeJohnette, Ralph Towner, Keith Jarrett, Gary Burton, Eberhard Weber, Kenny Wheeler, Wayne Shorter, and Jan Garbarek wasted.

Global Warming Predictions, Two Contrasting Views

1) "Because of natural variability, it is impossible to pinpoint what 2100 would look like. The climate sensitivity to greenhouse warming is still pretty uncertain, and it is not clear whether or to what extent man-made factors will dominate the climate of this period. It IS clear that the computer models used to predict future warming were deeply flawed."...Judith Curry, Georgia Tech University climatologist.............2) "Half of Florida and San Francisco will be under water by the end of the century (obviously I'm paraphrasing)."...Albert Gore, he needs no introduction.............So, which of these two individuals has more adroitly thought the matter through? Anybody?

O'Reilly's Biggest Blunder?

Wow. It would probably have to be the time when he made that boneheaded comment about the young kidnapped boy enjoying his captivity, a situation in which we later found out that the youngster was actually being butt-fucked repeatedly by the perpetrator. Yeah, I'd probably have to go with that one.