-
Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille! -
A judge just also ruled that Mann's emails have to be released. Should be interesting reading if and when they get released. But I'm sure they will challenge the decision to try and delay letting the details of how they were trying to "cook the books".Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post
PHOENIX — An organization that is questioning the research behind climate change will get another chance to demand to see the emails of two University of Arizona scientists.
The state Court of Appeals has overturned the ruling of a trial judge who said the university need not disclose 1,700 emails and other records from Jonathan Overpeck and Malcolm Hughes. Pima County Superior Court Judge James Marner had said the university did not abuse its discretion in concluding that disclosing the documents would not be in the best interests of the state.
But appellate Judge Joseph Howard, writing for the unanimous court, said it’s legally irrelevant what university officials thought was appropriate to disclose.
Howard said everyone involved in the case acknowledges the emails are public records. And he said state law has a presumption that all public records are subject to disclosure, with certain exceptions.
What that means, Howard wrote, is that trial judges must actually examine the records to determine whether making them public really would harm “the best interests of the state’’ as the university is claiming.Comment
-
It's getting harder and harder to debate that the planet is in the midst of an anomalous warm period coincident with an increase in gases with high absorbance and emittance and increasing land-surface changes.
Arctic sea ice, though it had a good December, is now back to 2 standard deviations below normal.Last edited by wsushox1; March 9, 2016, 03:08 AM.The mountains are calling, and I must go.Comment
-
The period between 1981 and 2010 only represents a fraction resulting in 0.00000000444 of the total time span of the Earth. Shouldn't we take a look at some larger time slices before we declare a time span of 4.44 x 10^(-9) "normal"?Originally posted by wsushox1 View PostKung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!Comment
-
No, because the meteorological definition of "normal" is a 30 year normal; the most recent being the 1981-2010 normal.Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post
Semantics yes, but when you hear "normal" referred in a climatology or meteorology sense they are referring to only the 30-year normal.The mountains are calling, and I must go.Comment
-
Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!Comment
-
Record warmth likely to last until AT LEAST mid-November. The Canadian plains have no snow, meaning any sustained cold weather into the central/Midwest extremely unlikely.
The earth is getting warmer. People can not deny that. You can argue all day about CO2 emissions, and in some ways those arguments are valid, but people can not continue to doubt the warming of the earth.The mountains are calling, and I must go.Comment
-
First of all, a one season warm spell in one region of the country is NOT proof of global warming. Second of all, yes, we are in the midst of a climate temperature increase. The only questions that matter are: what's causing it, and should we try to stop it?Originally posted by wsushox1 View PostLivin the dreamComment
-
It is not one region of the country.....the entire contiguous 48 states has been well above normal and will continue to be.Originally posted by wufan View PostThe mountains are calling, and I must go.Comment
-
What is proof of global warming is literally every study that has looked at global temperatures in the past 50 years. Denying that the earth was even warming was cute for a while, but now it's like denying that bears **** in the woods.Originally posted by wufan View PostThe mountains are calling, and I must go.Comment
-
Whether you believe in global warming or not I do know one thing for sure and that
is we don't have any control over it. Throw all the money at it you want and mankind
will not make any meaningful impact.Comment
-
I meant globe...I agree that there are other regions that are also warming, but some that are cooling. I'm only pointing out the logical fallacy that just because one region is warming, that is not proof that all regions are warming. I agree the planet is warming, but you seem overly passionate about this, and if you want to discuss it, specific examples of single regions in single years is not a good way to present the argument...Originally posted by wsushox1 View PostLivin the dreamComment
-
This is not true.Originally posted by asiseeit View Post
If man can change local microclimates (urban heat island, oasis effect, etc) then there is some logical line of thinking to believe that widespread human impact can change the climate. Whether that is through: deforestation, land-use changes causing massive CH4 releases, CO2 emissions, etc......is anyones guess.The mountains are calling, and I must go.Comment
-
You are 100% correct. I won't disagree that my argument was flawed.Originally posted by wufan View Post
That wasn't the point of my post.The mountains are calling, and I must go.Comment
Tweet
Comment