the data, is applied to benefit the government. Why? it has become another fake crisis for government to provide the solution for mankind's perceived mistakes. Their solutions are always the same. your (investments) TAXES! for to spend upon solutions provided by friends and relatives that will have no effect upon the climate. when it doesn't work they have answers to the ready. WE NEED MORE TIME FOR IT TO WORK! or WE NEED MORE MONEY TO SPEND IN THE CORRECT AREAS. better yet is THE RESERCH TELLS US WE MUST DIVERT INVESTMENTS IN OTHER DIRECTIONS. All are the normal excuses they expect us to follow without complaint while asking for more money. I say follow the money. show us where you spent it and who managed it? We would find too many inlaws and outlaws with their hand in the cookie jar. This is how politicians become so rich on just public salary's.
look for yourself at the presidents total worth before and after their presidency. every one became millionaires. all gained fortunes (except Trump) his total assets went down. Time we demand to see where our money is spent. the pentagon has lost over sixty billion they cant account for. We have allowed our gov. to become corrupt by using fake crisis. Time for citizens to take control.---I, Grampa
Many see the problem Tim but trying to do anything about it becomes another problem. just opposing governments plans label you a terrorist. I was ejected from a public meeting when I had the floor and in the middle of speaking. fortunately I had planned ahead and structured my talk exposing the facts first and provided printouts I handed out before called upon. I was told by the foreman who conducted the meeting that I was disruptive. on the way out, I told him I would see him dismissed from his position. Which I did. He was defeated with the next election. We as individuals can make a difference. The problem with many people is they think they have the right to speak in a public meeting. a right that is as fake as the virus. They put on a show and control it tightly. the one thing I found effective is having a minor get up and speak and prepared to call them out for interrupting. One young lady put them on the spot for interrupting and just asked them are they were always this rude. She told them she has but five minutes to speak and they hours. Then ask if they were actually interested in what she had to say or afraid she may say something that disagrees with their narrative. Then she picked up a stop watch she had been timing, their interruptions which was a full three minutes of her talk. Then demanded her time be extended to finish her point. The people all agreed and they were on the spot. They didn't like it but agreed. When interrupted again, she just held up her stop watch. We need more young people to become involved with more than their cell phones---------- I, Grampa
Not being a scientist I rely on my very low level of comprehension.
Geologists agree that there have been 5 ice ages and, during the last one, there was an ice sheet of approximately 3 to 5 kilometers thick were I live.
Looking outside, I do not see any of it remaining.
Could I suppose that there have been, through the eras, some climate warming ?
Until the contrary be proven so, we have known and still know the first industrial era of all, coud I suppose that all the previous " warming periods " had nothing to do with human activities ?
If so, may I suppose that there are cycles that expand on millenniums and not only on a human life time span ?
When a new hypothesis is formulated, could it be about a " said pandemic " or the human beings' activities " allegedly altering the earth climate " or "the politicians demonstrating sign of honesty, reason and intelligence", why not rely at first on the Occam's razor methodology ?
Could it be an easy and inexpensive way to shift possible out of probable and right from wrong?
Very interesting! An innovative way to look at the data. I understand the need to keep the argument simple but it would be nice for pedants like me to see estimates of the uncertainties in the data (which I think is a proxy for Antarctic temperature). I don't know how one might make such estimates but the ice-core data may contain them.
At the moment, you could also argue that the distribution is double peaked - which would mean that it's a little more likely for temperature to go up or down by a small amount over a century than to stay the same. That sounds plausible to me but error bars would help.
I have done a little looking at the errors in the Vostok Ice Core Data.
The biggest error is in the time-dating.
Since over centuries the Earth's atmosphere mixes, you are not looking at the Antarctic temperature, but, I think, the average temperature of the oceans: as the oceans heat up, they are more likely to evaporate heavy water molecules (having a deuterium atom instead of a hydrogen atom, or an O18 molecule rather than an O16 molecule).
The measurements of D and O18 are pretty precise.
You can easily see other things in the Data: as you go back more than a few hundred centuries, the century-to-century variations become smaller. That I believe is not because variations in the Earth's temperature today are larger than in the past, but rather because over hundreds of centuries there is diffusion of gas between the layers. The same phenomenon is seen in the Mud Core Date.
Given the DATA, I'd be reluctant to conclude there is a double-peak. I can see other points in the tail moving as far from the curve.
I have fitted the number of flowers-per-day to a Gaussian twice -- in both cases their deviation from a Gaussian is precisely the same. I plan to do a posting on that!
Tim, if your data are from the ice core d18O and d2H values then these are proxies for local air temperature. The atmospheric water cycle is very easily modelled as a Rayleigh distillation process. One can predict the d18O - temperature relationship using the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship for the liquid vapour, and ice-vapour phase boundary and the vapour-liquid/solid fractionation factor for either 18O or deuterium. The model fits extremely closely the empirical observation of Dansgaard that the d18O (and d2H) of meteoric waters vary linear with local temperature.
I see that the Dansgaard's Nature paper has a link to where I was able to download the raw data. While the Vostok Ice Core Data has about 1 data point per century, these data come in about 1/2 year increments. I will enjoy looking at it and maybe find something interesting ... e.g. maybe do a 10 year or 5 year temperature variation histogram!
How does one take a sample of the oceans to determine temperatures in past ages. The only place we can is in a place that is frozen. no data is totally accurate and will have variables. Take enough samples and your errors go down. why do we depend upon a few years of sampling data and call it as evidence for global warming. Using the sampling of surface temperature around the earth will only provide us with a moment in earth time equal to a blink of an eye. to influence the entire world temperature we would need to raise the temperature of the water. We as mankind havent produced enough BTU's within mans existence to raise all the water one degree the proof is with the math provided at --
Thanks for the speedy reply. I had missed the point about the gas concentrations being global rather than local to the Antarctic.
It's an interesting point about gas diffusion between layers. It would be interesting to see what difference removing the older measurements would make and whether it might tell us anything useful.
I'm afraid I didn't understand your last paragraph but I am looking forward to reading the post!
Yes, it might be interesting if I changed the bin-size, or the positioning of bins, to see if that small double-peak persists. I could just be statistical noise.
Al Gore & other fear-based climate doom pimps, predictions, [that never came true should] teach suckers & fools, about doom pimps trying to "save" you! We need salvation from the work Lib. fearmongers! I.e. the same pimps pushing toxic, mass-harm, so-called vaccines, pimped to the suckers & fools as being, "Safe & effective." I.e. causing a 40% rise in unexpected deaths! I.E. Nothing to worry or fear about that, Right?
I believe it's much more than simply being wrong! It's more a drive to gain political Power, so as to bring the Chaos needed to destroy this [once] Creator-inspired, capitalistic nation, to bring Marxism’s slavery & controls! I.e. the Satan inspired plane!
I wouldn't think so. Anyone familiar with the real science knows that any day (i.e., any few thousand years from now) we will enter another Ice Age (the normal state of affairs; the brief inter-glacial periods are only about 20 kyears longs, and come only about every 100 kyears). A few thousand years from now, real estate investments in MX will be priceless, and real estate investments in CA worthless !
Bezos & Zuckerberg don't seen to worried about global warming, they've recently picked up their huge new yachts & god knows what those things get to the gallon/s meanwhile the elite fly all over the planet in their private jets, unvaccinated pilots ofcourse. The 1% or is it now the .5% create 50% of the worlds pollution, from their private jets, limousines, multi homes, yachts etc etc. So if your still worried about global warming, the simple answer is too lock up this planet killers, take away there toys & share their enormous wealth around & what about warfare, the USA is the biggest polluter on the planet when it comes to bloodshed.
From one apostate to another, thanks for this simple explanation. Pretty sure Greta won't understand it. Pretty sure Al has too much loot riding on your analysis--and any similar analysis--being wrong to take a look!
And I thought he would really be oh-so-grateful for me helping him with his misunderstandings ! (/s)
I once, about 3 or 4 decades ago, recieved a letter from a Nobel Laureate showing how one of my (earth-shaking) manuscripts violated a fundamental theorem, Louiville's theorem, regarding conservation of 6-D phase-space volume. I was very grateful !
Yeah, well, while the MatheMagics look intimidating, the simple picture is conceptually simple.
Namely, in a Hamiltonian System (i.e., with nothing but conservative force fields [i.e. neglecting any frictional forces or Stochastic-or-Random-forces-that-are-correlated-to-the-distribution-and-thus-not-random]), one can alter the shape, in 6-D phase space, of a distribution, but not changes it's volume.
The engineer Simon van der Meer won the Physices Nobel Prize in 1984 for his invention of "Stochastic Cooling", a technology which allowed the reduction of the phase-space volume of a particle beam, and consequently, the accumulation of anti-protons for subsequent proton/anti-proton collisions in the CERN collider ring which lead to the discovery of the W particle.
This not only ignores the 18% chance of 5 degrees of warming but also assumes that investment and policies aimed at the most likely scenario are a waste if they don't come to past, which is false.
Mr Ellison, an interesting supplement to your information, a confirmation perhaps, is the late geologist Douglas Vogt's work. Watch 11 minute video on Rumble "Unveiling Geological Evidence for the 12,000 year Cycle of Climate Disasters."
Use of the Vostok data should be taken with a grain of salt. NASA abandoned their previous position about CO2 following atmospheric warming the in the paleo record from CO2 and methane measurements made at "sea level" from depths around 2 miles. Tell me those gasses were trapped as gasses and not solids or liquids from their trip up the column. A aver that a majority of extant CO2 and methane was lost. What is all that popping and fizzing noise? We are about to experience a CME from the sun. So far, it won't be a Carrington Event, but the sun won't abide and sides with entropy.
the data, is applied to benefit the government. Why? it has become another fake crisis for government to provide the solution for mankind's perceived mistakes. Their solutions are always the same. your (investments) TAXES! for to spend upon solutions provided by friends and relatives that will have no effect upon the climate. when it doesn't work they have answers to the ready. WE NEED MORE TIME FOR IT TO WORK! or WE NEED MORE MONEY TO SPEND IN THE CORRECT AREAS. better yet is THE RESERCH TELLS US WE MUST DIVERT INVESTMENTS IN OTHER DIRECTIONS. All are the normal excuses they expect us to follow without complaint while asking for more money. I say follow the money. show us where you spent it and who managed it? We would find too many inlaws and outlaws with their hand in the cookie jar. This is how politicians become so rich on just public salary's.
look for yourself at the presidents total worth before and after their presidency. every one became millionaires. all gained fortunes (except Trump) his total assets went down. Time we demand to see where our money is spent. the pentagon has lost over sixty billion they cant account for. We have allowed our gov. to become corrupt by using fake crisis. Time for citizens to take control.---I, Grampa
Yes.
Problem, Reaction, Solution. All orchestrated.
Many see the problem Tim but trying to do anything about it becomes another problem. just opposing governments plans label you a terrorist. I was ejected from a public meeting when I had the floor and in the middle of speaking. fortunately I had planned ahead and structured my talk exposing the facts first and provided printouts I handed out before called upon. I was told by the foreman who conducted the meeting that I was disruptive. on the way out, I told him I would see him dismissed from his position. Which I did. He was defeated with the next election. We as individuals can make a difference. The problem with many people is they think they have the right to speak in a public meeting. a right that is as fake as the virus. They put on a show and control it tightly. the one thing I found effective is having a minor get up and speak and prepared to call them out for interrupting. One young lady put them on the spot for interrupting and just asked them are they were always this rude. She told them she has but five minutes to speak and they hours. Then ask if they were actually interested in what she had to say or afraid she may say something that disagrees with their narrative. Then she picked up a stop watch she had been timing, their interruptions which was a full three minutes of her talk. Then demanded her time be extended to finish her point. The people all agreed and they were on the spot. They didn't like it but agreed. When interrupted again, she just held up her stop watch. We need more young people to become involved with more than their cell phones---------- I, Grampa
Not being a scientist I rely on my very low level of comprehension.
Geologists agree that there have been 5 ice ages and, during the last one, there was an ice sheet of approximately 3 to 5 kilometers thick were I live.
Looking outside, I do not see any of it remaining.
Could I suppose that there have been, through the eras, some climate warming ?
Until the contrary be proven so, we have known and still know the first industrial era of all, coud I suppose that all the previous " warming periods " had nothing to do with human activities ?
If so, may I suppose that there are cycles that expand on millenniums and not only on a human life time span ?
When a new hypothesis is formulated, could it be about a " said pandemic " or the human beings' activities " allegedly altering the earth climate " or "the politicians demonstrating sign of honesty, reason and intelligence", why not rely at first on the Occam's razor methodology ?
Could it be an easy and inexpensive way to shift possible out of probable and right from wrong?
Very interesting! An innovative way to look at the data. I understand the need to keep the argument simple but it would be nice for pedants like me to see estimates of the uncertainties in the data (which I think is a proxy for Antarctic temperature). I don't know how one might make such estimates but the ice-core data may contain them.
At the moment, you could also argue that the distribution is double peaked - which would mean that it's a little more likely for temperature to go up or down by a small amount over a century than to stay the same. That sounds plausible to me but error bars would help.
Nice Comment.
I have done a little looking at the errors in the Vostok Ice Core Data.
The biggest error is in the time-dating.
Since over centuries the Earth's atmosphere mixes, you are not looking at the Antarctic temperature, but, I think, the average temperature of the oceans: as the oceans heat up, they are more likely to evaporate heavy water molecules (having a deuterium atom instead of a hydrogen atom, or an O18 molecule rather than an O16 molecule).
The measurements of D and O18 are pretty precise.
You can easily see other things in the Data: as you go back more than a few hundred centuries, the century-to-century variations become smaller. That I believe is not because variations in the Earth's temperature today are larger than in the past, but rather because over hundreds of centuries there is diffusion of gas between the layers. The same phenomenon is seen in the Mud Core Date.
Given the DATA, I'd be reluctant to conclude there is a double-peak. I can see other points in the tail moving as far from the curve.
I have fitted the number of flowers-per-day to a Gaussian twice -- in both cases their deviation from a Gaussian is precisely the same. I plan to do a posting on that!
Tim, if your data are from the ice core d18O and d2H values then these are proxies for local air temperature. The atmospheric water cycle is very easily modelled as a Rayleigh distillation process. One can predict the d18O - temperature relationship using the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship for the liquid vapour, and ice-vapour phase boundary and the vapour-liquid/solid fractionation factor for either 18O or deuterium. The model fits extremely closely the empirical observation of Dansgaard that the d18O (and d2H) of meteoric waters vary linear with local temperature.
Thank you for this comment.
I see that the Dansgaard's Nature paper has a link to where I was able to download the raw data. While the Vostok Ice Core Data has about 1 data point per century, these data come in about 1/2 year increments. I will enjoy looking at it and maybe find something interesting ... e.g. maybe do a 10 year or 5 year temperature variation histogram!
How does one take a sample of the oceans to determine temperatures in past ages. The only place we can is in a place that is frozen. no data is totally accurate and will have variables. Take enough samples and your errors go down. why do we depend upon a few years of sampling data and call it as evidence for global warming. Using the sampling of surface temperature around the earth will only provide us with a moment in earth time equal to a blink of an eye. to influence the entire world temperature we would need to raise the temperature of the water. We as mankind havent produced enough BTU's within mans existence to raise all the water one degree the proof is with the math provided at --
at https://www.physics.uci.edu/. do the math for yourself. what can provide enough heat?
THE SUN!!!---- I, Grampa
Thanks for the speedy reply. I had missed the point about the gas concentrations being global rather than local to the Antarctic.
It's an interesting point about gas diffusion between layers. It would be interesting to see what difference removing the older measurements would make and whether it might tell us anything useful.
I'm afraid I didn't understand your last paragraph but I am looking forward to reading the post!
Yes, it might be interesting if I changed the bin-size, or the positioning of bins, to see if that small double-peak persists. I could just be statistical noise.
Yes. I think you already know the answer to this question !
It is well-known that greenhouses add CO2 to increase the growth of plants.
CO2 is Plant Food ! (not a pollutant).
CO2 levels are at historic lows .... many plants that evolved during periods of much higher CO2 levels are literally almost starving to death today.
Data show increasing CO2 levels increase the amount of green covering the Earth, and reduce the size of deserts.
well someone that knows the facts! The climate activists will cry about C02 until their last breath (no pun intended)------- I, Grampa
Al Gore & other fear-based climate doom pimps, predictions, [that never came true should] teach suckers & fools, about doom pimps trying to "save" you! We need salvation from the work Lib. fearmongers! I.e. the same pimps pushing toxic, mass-harm, so-called vaccines, pimped to the suckers & fools as being, "Safe & effective." I.e. causing a 40% rise in unexpected deaths! I.E. Nothing to worry or fear about that, Right?
The main thing is that the Vostok Ice Core DATA prove Mr. Gore's arguments to be wrong:
https://timellison.substack.com/p/hoisting-mr-gore-on-his-own-petard
I believe it's much more than simply being wrong! It's more a drive to gain political Power, so as to bring the Chaos needed to destroy this [once] Creator-inspired, capitalistic nation, to bring Marxism’s slavery & controls! I.e. the Satan inspired plane!
Well, most of the followers of this "Religion" (see https://timellison.substack.com/p/the-dawn-of-a-new-religion) are probably true believers.
The DATA show they are wrong.
Who and Why this Wrong Specious Narrative is being pushed (and any contrary views being censored) is not a question of science, so I don't go there.
Certainly False Narratives have been used for thousands of years as a method to control populations (especially in times of war!).
I don't see the wacko global warmists moving to the Arctic or Antarctic in droves to save themselves from the earth melting next month.
I wouldn't think so. Anyone familiar with the real science knows that any day (i.e., any few thousand years from now) we will enter another Ice Age (the normal state of affairs; the brief inter-glacial periods are only about 20 kyears longs, and come only about every 100 kyears). A few thousand years from now, real estate investments in MX will be priceless, and real estate investments in CA worthless !
Bezos & Zuckerberg don't seen to worried about global warming, they've recently picked up their huge new yachts & god knows what those things get to the gallon/s meanwhile the elite fly all over the planet in their private jets, unvaccinated pilots ofcourse. The 1% or is it now the .5% create 50% of the worlds pollution, from their private jets, limousines, multi homes, yachts etc etc. So if your still worried about global warming, the simple answer is too lock up this planet killers, take away there toys & share their enormous wealth around & what about warfare, the USA is the biggest polluter on the planet when it comes to bloodshed.
Look at Nancy Pelosi in 1992 with her con. https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4863326/user-clip-agenda-21-1992-nancy-pelosi
From one apostate to another, thanks for this simple explanation. Pretty sure Greta won't understand it. Pretty sure Al has too much loot riding on your analysis--and any similar analysis--being wrong to take a look!
I did try sending a link to this posting to Al Gore --
https://timellison.substack.com/p/hoisting-mr-gore-on-his-own-petard
But never received a response; my message probably didn't get through to him.
Dude. When you are enjoying carbon credits and Fois Gras on your private jet, posts from substack cannot get through.
Oh, ...
And I thought he would really be oh-so-grateful for me helping him with his misunderstandings ! (/s)
I once, about 3 or 4 decades ago, recieved a letter from a Nobel Laureate showing how one of my (earth-shaking) manuscripts violated a fundamental theorem, Louiville's theorem, regarding conservation of 6-D phase-space volume. I was very grateful !
Good lawd! I just Googled for Louisville's theorem, and I think my brain is actually broken.
Yeah, well, while the MatheMagics look intimidating, the simple picture is conceptually simple.
Namely, in a Hamiltonian System (i.e., with nothing but conservative force fields [i.e. neglecting any frictional forces or Stochastic-or-Random-forces-that-are-correlated-to-the-distribution-and-thus-not-random]), one can alter the shape, in 6-D phase space, of a distribution, but not changes it's volume.
The engineer Simon van der Meer won the Physices Nobel Prize in 1984 for his invention of "Stochastic Cooling", a technology which allowed the reduction of the phase-space volume of a particle beam, and consequently, the accumulation of anti-protons for subsequent proton/anti-proton collisions in the CERN collider ring which lead to the discovery of the W particle.
Can you link to the data you used? I am trying to reproduce your results
get me your contact info and we I can share my info.
This not only ignores the 18% chance of 5 degrees of warming but also assumes that investment and policies aimed at the most likely scenario are a waste if they don't come to past, which is false.
Policies aimed at greater energy independence for the poorer countries, reduction in pollution and therefore respiratory illness and better education will significantly improves the lives of millions. https://jowaller.substack.com/p/davos-have-even-turned-equality-into?utm_source=publication-search
Mr Ellison, an interesting supplement to your information, a confirmation perhaps, is the late geologist Douglas Vogt's work. Watch 11 minute video on Rumble "Unveiling Geological Evidence for the 12,000 year Cycle of Climate Disasters."
Wouldn't reducing CO2 hurt plants and reduce the amount of CO2 they absorb?
Use of the Vostok data should be taken with a grain of salt. NASA abandoned their previous position about CO2 following atmospheric warming the in the paleo record from CO2 and methane measurements made at "sea level" from depths around 2 miles. Tell me those gasses were trapped as gasses and not solids or liquids from their trip up the column. A aver that a majority of extant CO2 and methane was lost. What is all that popping and fizzing noise? We are about to experience a CME from the sun. So far, it won't be a Carrington Event, but the sun won't abide and sides with entropy.