Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

[Spendulus]

Socialism at its best preventing cures for cancer:

http://www.nestmann.com/why-it-took-more-than-30-years-to-confirm-vitamin-c-fights-cancer

How many people die of cancer practicaldreamer?

I took a half hour to review the history of research on the injected-vC-fights-cancer issue, and I am not impressed.  My impression is that no, it does not fight cancer, shrink tumors, etc.   

Science formulates hypotheses and tests them through critical analysis and examination.  It appears that Linus Pauling had a very religious fervor about the subject of Vitamin C.  This is hardly different than the religious fervor which we observe in warmies, of whom few are any sort of actual scientist, of course.

Might want to use a different issue to illustrate the problem of interference of socialism and klepto kapitalism with scientific progress (this issue we are in agreement with).

[1714950677]

1714950677

[1714950677]

1714950677

[Wilikon]

By SETH BORENSTEIN
AP Science Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) - The Arctic isn't nearly as bright and white as it used to be because of more ice melting in the ocean, and that's turning out to be a global problem, a new study says.

With more dark, open water in the summer, less of the sun's heat is reflected back into space. So the entire Earth is absorbing more heat than expected, according to a study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

That extra absorbed energy is so big that it measures about one-quarter of the entire heat-trapping effect of carbon dioxide, said the study's lead author, Ian Eisenman, a climate scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California.

The Arctic grew 8 percent darker between 1979 and 2011, Eisenman found, measuring how much sunlight is reflected back into space.

"Basically, it means more warming," Eisenman said in an interview.

The North Pole region is an ocean that mostly is crusted at the top with ice that shrinks in the summer and grows back in the fall. At its peak melt in September, the ice has shrunk on average by nearly 35,000 square miles - about the size of Maine - per year since 1979.

Snow-covered ice reflects several times more heat than dark, open ocean, which replaces the ice when it melts, Eisenman said.

As more summer sunlight dumps into the ocean, the water gets warmer, and it takes longer for ice to form again in the fall, Jason Box of the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland said in an email. He was not part of the study.

While earlier studies used computer models, Eisenman said his is the first to use satellite measurements to gauge sunlight reflection and to take into account cloud cover. The results show the darkening is as much as two to three times bigger than previous estimates, he said.

Box and University of Colorado ice scientist Waleed Abdalati, who was not part of the research, called the work important in understanding how much heat is getting trapped on Earth.



http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/24748802/study-arctic-getting-darker-making-earth-warmer

[Onews1990]

That's kind of weird coming from people who should be totally open for debate.

[Spendulus]

By SETH BORENSTEIN
AP Science Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) - The Arctic isn't nearly as bright and white as it used to be because of more ice melting in the ocean, and that's turning out to be a global problem, a new study says.

With more dark, open water in the summer, less of the sun's heat is reflected back into space. So the entire Earth is absorbing more heat than expected, according to a study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.....
While earlier studies used computer models, Eisenman said his is the first to use satellite measurements to gauge sunlight reflection and to take into account cloud cover. The results show the darkening is as much as two to three times bigger than previous estimates, he said.

Box and University of Colorado ice scientist Waleed Abdalati, who was not part of the research, called the work important in understanding how much heat is getting trapped on Earth.



http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/24748802/study-arctic-getting-darker-making-earth-warmer

No.  See my prior comment about the need to directly measure IR going into space.  "Reflected visual" light measurements such as this have nothing to do with the essential question.  There is no "reflected IR" it is re emissions, visual light is absorbed then IR released.  Release is always at lower frequency spectral.

[Schleicher]

If you want to read the actual study:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/pnas-201318201-1.pdf

[Spendulus]

If you want to read the actual study:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/pnas-201318201-1.pdf

thanks.  That is an excellent critical review by Eschenbach.  He does not cover but indirectly the subject I mentioned, outgoing radiant flux in the IR region.

Basically he suggests heat is transported by the atmosphere to the tropics, where it is released to space.  This is of course an essential part of the global air circulation patterns.  Pistone said "look here at area A", Eschenbach says "look at A and B", I said "look regionally and globally".

If the instrumental capability existed which I mentioned, this study would produce stunningly accurate results.  But as long as we can't measure global and regional outgoing IR flux, no worky.

It's like trying to guess the air temperature in a tea kettle and not knowing if the top was on or off.

For the gas envelope around the planet, more energy means that envelope expands, larger surface area from which it releases heat to space.  Less energy means less surface area.  IR heat release occurs 24/7, not during periods of visible light in and out.

[Spendulus]

That's kind of weird coming from people who should be totally open for debate.

But because it's totally, weird, we have something totally weird to discuss.   I say give us more weird!

[AnonyMint]

Socialism at its best preventing cures for cancer:

http://www.nestmann.com/why-it-took-more-than-30-years-to-confirm-vitamin-c-fights-cancer

How many people die of cancer practicaldreamer?

I took a half hour to review the history of research on the injected-vC-fights-cancer issue, and I am not impressed.  My impression is that no, it does not fight cancer, shrink tumors, etc.

Are you sure a half-hour is sufficient inquiry? I don't have time to go research, yet that source has prided himself on being very resistant to spreading false information.

And I am not sure if I trust your opinion. Because you tried to claim that falsifying a greenhouse effect would falsify AGW. The oceans may release more carbon than man does when they warm. Let me know when you have a model of the earth that can predict all macro effects over eons. Then you need to test it for eons too. As you know curve fitting over part of the curve is cherry picking.

You apparently have more time than I do to dig into the details of these matters. Yet I am wary of trusting without also digging myself, which I don't have time to do.

[practicaldreamer]

Don't piss on my shoes and tell me its raining 

[acid rain at that FFS]

[Wilikon]

Britain’s top climate scientist is being criticized for linking the recent deluge of winter storms and floods to global warming.

After the UK’s Met Office released a report on “extreme weather,” the office’s chief scientist Dame Julia Slingo said that “all the evidence” pointed to global warming playing a role in the harsh winter weather.

“In a nutshell, while there is no definitive answer for the current weather patterns that we have seen, all the evidence suggests that climate change has a role to play in it,” Slingo said.

Slingo’s remarks came after Prime Minister David Cameron said he “very much suspected” a connection between harsher winters and global warming. Scientists, however, have criticized Slingo, arguing that there’s not enough evidence to link extreme weather to global warming.

“What Dame Julia says goes, at least by implication, beyond what most climate scientists are willing to say,” one academic told the Times newspaper. “I find it very hard to look inside her mind as to what made her think that was a sensible thing to say.”

“I would be reluctant to go out and say any one instance is primarily attributable to climate change, but we are going to see adverse effects,” said Lord May of Oxford, a former chief scientific adviser to the government who now sits on the Committee on Climate Change.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/18/top-uk-scientist-criticized-by-peers-for-saying-floods-caused-by-global-warming/

[Anon136]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-yJ3K9fNos&t=27m24s

[lemfuture]

unfair

[Spendulus]

Socialism at its best preventing cures for cancer:

http://www.nestmann.com/why-it-took-more-than-30-years-to-confirm-vitamin-c-fights-cancer

How many people die of cancer practicaldreamer?

I took a half hour to review the history of research on the injected-vC-fights-cancer issue, and I am not impressed.  My impression is that no, it does not fight cancer, shrink tumors, etc.

Are you sure a half-hour is sufficient inquiry? I don't have time to go research, yet that source has prided himself on being very resistant to spreading false information.

And I am not sure if I trust your opinion. Because you tried to claim that falsifying a greenhouse effect would falsify AGW. The oceans may release more carbon than man does when they warm. Let me know when you have a model of the earth that can predict all macro effects over eons. Then you need to test it for eons too. As you know curve fitting over part of the curve is cherry picking.

You apparently have more time than I do to dig into the details of these matters. Yet I am wary of trusting without also digging myself, which I don't have time to do.

I'll leave the vitamin C question aside, as it leans heavily toward Pauling having had a set belief pattern and being very persistent with that belief.  Some fraction of such beliefs turn out true, or more precisely, some particular version of the treatment series has merit in certain delineated circumstances.   Did Pauling prove it?  Nope.  Is the recent study conclusive enough to show him vindicated?  Nope.  Is the string of 'yes-men' in the church chorus helping Pauling?  Nope.

As for my comment about falsifying greenhouse effect falsifying AGW, that would falsify AGW as we know it.  As the greenies believe in it.  Ask any of them.  Take away the greenhouse effect, you'd have them bitching about what?  Soot?  Particulate emissions?   Tell ya what, their insistence on controlling your life wouldn't change one bit.  Probably go up, get even more strident.  That's why we're hearing it in the news now - temps go down or are stable, they start to panic a bit.

More precisely, I described, I believe in answer to your question, an experimental strategy that could falsify AGW.  Notice something humorous?  Yep.  All these scientists scurrying around trying to find a cause for the recent cooling.  AS LONG AS IT IGNORES SOLAR, AND DOES NOT REQUIRE LOWERING THE EXTENT OF THAT REQUIRED AGW.

Therefore, my experimental paradigm is obviously blasphemous.

So they scurry, and scurry, and come up with every even more un probable stretches of logic and reason.  And passively accept the corruption of science with government money and politics.

ALL HAIL!  THE SCIENCY METHOD!

[Spendulus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-yJ3K9fNos&t=27m24s

David is no Milton.

[Anon136]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-yJ3K9fNos&t=27m24s

David is no Milton.

I prefer him myself. David is my intellectual hero. He taught me what it meant to be truly objective and intellectually honest ever since then I've striven to live up to those standards in my own life.

[Wilikon]

A new study broadens a notion held by the earliest criminologists: Periods of higher temperatures — on an hour-by-hour or week-to-week basis — are likely to produce more crime.

The study by Matthew Ranson of Abt Associates, a research and consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass., suggests global warming will trigger more crimes including murders and rapes over the next century, with social costs estimated to run as high as $115 billion.

Between 2010 and 2099, climate change can be expected to cause an additional 22,000 murders, 180,000 cases of rape, 1.2 million aggravated assaults, 2.3 million simple assaults, 260,000 robberies, 1.3 million burglaries, 2.2 million cases of larceny and 580,000 cases of vehicle theft, the study published this week in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management says.

Compared with the number of crimes expected to occur during this period in the absence of climate change, these figures represent a 2.2% increase in murders, a 3.1% increase in cases of rape, a 2.3% increase in aggravated assaults, a 1.2% increase in simple assaults, a 1% increase in robberies, a 0.9% increase in burglaries, a 0.5% increase in cases of larceny and a 0.8% increase in cases of vehicle theft, the study says.

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-climate-change-crime-20140219,0,2765136.story#axzz2tos4AI95

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course let's not forget about this fact:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCCBFTRTXEE

[Spendulus]

A new study broadens a notion held by the earliest criminologists: Periods of higher temperatures — on an hour-by-hour or week-to-week basis — are likely to produce more crime.

The study by Matthew Ranson of Abt Associates, a research and consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass., suggests global warming will trigger more crimes including murders and rapes over the next century, with social costs estimated to run as high as $115 billion.

Between 2010 and 2099, climate change can be expected to cause an additional 22,000 murders, 180,000 cases of rape, 1.2 million aggravated assaults, 2.3 million simple assaults, 260,000 robberies, 1.3 million burglaries, 2.2 million cases of larceny and 580,000 cases of vehicle theft, the study published this week in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management says.

Compared with the number of crimes expected to occur during this period in the absence of climate change, these figures represent a 2.2% increase in murders, a 3.1% increase in cases of rape, a 2.3% increase in aggravated assaults, a 1.2% increase in simple assaults, a 1% increase in robberies, a 0.9% increase in burglaries, a 0.5% increase in cases of larceny and a 0.8% increase in cases of vehicle theft, the study says.

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-climate-change-crime-20140219,0,2765136.story#axzz2tos4AI95

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course let's not forget about this fact:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCCBFTRTXEE

Hey, give the robbers, rapists and burglars and murderers a break, will you?  You want them out working in the cold, the rain, the snow?  They have feelings too.  They could catch pneumonia and die.

[Wilikon]

With no end in sight, the winter of 2014 rages on, ushering in frigid Arctic air and dumping record-breaking snow and ice on much of the nation. This season, ice coverage on Lake Superior has exceeded other measurements in recent history.
"By the long shot this is the most ice we've had on Lake Superior in 20 years," Associate Professor Jay Austin of the Large Lakes Observatory in Duluth, Minn., said.
During a typical winter, 30 to 40 percent of the Great Lakes are covered by ice, according to AccuWeather Senior Meteorologist Brett Anderson.



Usually Arctic air swept over the Great Lakes creates lake-effect snow, but modifies the air, making it warmer. This usually makes regions from Ohio through the Northeast a little warmer than it otherwise would be.
However, this winter 80 to 90 percent of the Great Lakes are covered in ice. As of Thursday, Feb. 13, 2014, Lake Superior was classified as 90 percent covered.



"The Arctic air masses don't get warmed up as much because of all the snow and ice," Anderson said. "There has not been much of a thaw so the ice keeps building up."
The last time in recent history the ice coverage was even close to this winter's percentage was the winter of 1993/94. That winter ice coverage was measured at 90.7 percent.
Unlike a pond, the depth of the Great Lakes prevent it from being a completely frozen sheet of ice, but instead the ice atop the lakes can actually move with the wind, according to Austin. Due to the ability of the ice to move around, the thickness of the ice across the lakes vary and therefore researchers do not know how thick the ice is in all portions of the lake.
So, this makes it hard for scientists to define what freezing over entirely means.
Depending on who you ask, Lake Superior already has frozen over, Austin stated. However, with two to three weeks to go until the typical peak of ice coverage in mid-March, the Lakes will only freeze even more.
"The ice will become more robust, we are going to have more ice rather than less over the next three weeks," Austin said.

Other than the ice jam worries, the ice coverage on the Great Lakes, specifically on Lake Superior, is mounting concerns for the region's climate.
"With all of this ice, all the sunlight that hits the surface of the lake is going to get bounced back out into space, so it's going to take longer to get warmer this spring and summer," Austin said. "The lake is going to just start warming this year when it will start cooling off for next year."

This could bring a relatively cool year for the communities surrounding the lake.
However, the silver lining of the massive ice coverage is that perhaps it can prevent lake water levels from lowering like they did just last year.
"With the ice cover, less water gets evaporated so lake levels stay high and help preserve some of the water," Anderson said.
Regardless of the impending impacts of the ice on the region, one thing is for sure, the ice isn't going anywhere, anytime soon.
An impending return of the now-infamous polar vortex for the middle of next week ill send temperatures from the Midwest to the Northeast plummeting 15 to 20 degrees below normal. As it drops down to the James Bay in Canada, it will deliver another blast of arctic air for the area.
"This type of airmass will give the Great Lakes the potential for a new satellite-era ice coverage record," Anderson said.
The winters of 1993 and 1994 had the previous highest since we started monitoring ice coverage with satellites about 30 years ago.
According to AccuWeather.com Long Range Expert Paul Pasetlok, "Because some of the Great Lakes are fairly shallow they can recover quickly later in the spring, so that there may be minimal impact on land area temperatures for most of the summer."

http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/nearly-frozen-lake-superior-ma/23439393


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But but but... Polar vortex will make the planet hotter. It's a fact.

[Spendulus]

With no end in sight, the winter of 2014 rages on, ushering in frigid Arctic air and dumping record-breaking snow and ice on much of the nation. This season, ice coverage on Lake Superior has exceeded other measurements in recent history........

But but but... Polar vortex will make the planet hotter. It's a fact.

Let me get this straight. 

Because it's colder than a witch's tit we are going to see more girls in bikinis?

[Wilikon]

With no end in sight, the winter of 2014 rages on, ushering in frigid Arctic air and dumping record-breaking snow and ice on much of the nation. This season, ice coverage on Lake Superior has exceeded other measurements in recent history........

But but but... Polar vortex will make the planet hotter. It's a fact.

Let me get this straight. 

Because it's colder than a witch's tit we are going to see more girls in bikinis?

... I would believe more sexier witches instead... https://i.imgur.com/GlaxoZI.png