No, there aren't. The article calls them 'ice "bergs"', but they are really ice floes and not icebergs. There have been ice floes in Lake Michigan every year since the last ice age. If the ice floes are smaller than usual, that could indeed be associated with global warming. However, it is an insignificant detail compared to the massive summer ice depletion in the Arctic Ocean and the possible destabilization of Greenland's ice sheet.
Rand Simberg wrote:
Jim, did someone excise your sense of humor at birth, or did it happen later?
Jim, did someone excise your sense of humor at birth
No, but maybe you should chill out.
Actually I had a whole line of jokes prepared, unfortunately the Clintons stole my manuscript.
Rand Simberg wrote:
No, but maybe you should chill out.
What a strange non sequitur.
Physician, heal thyself.
Actually I had a whole line of jokes prepared...
If so, it would be a first in our experience.
unfortunately the Clintons stole my manuscript.
It's hard to imagine that they'd be worth stealing by anyone.
Rand Simberg wrote:
No, but maybe you should chill out.
Apparently your sense of irony was removed at the same time.
mz wrote:
Explaining the joke:
There are no whales in lake Michigan. Same with the icebergs.
The global warming comment is not related to anything. The US had an average winter if you look at the 100 year record.
Green Bay has had record snowfalls this year. Eighty inches I just heard. I am in Michigan up on Lake Superior and my county (Alger) has a number of 180 inches listed by the road commission thus far. It's snowing today. I pray for global warming.
It isn't looking good for the warming advocates from where I shovel. I hope to see the ground this year by the end of May. Last year was a light snowfall year and by mid April most snow had melted. Not much in life or weather is certain and people should realize the same.
Rand Simberg wrote:
It isn't looking good for the warming advocates from where I shovel. I hope to see the ground this year by the end of May. Last year was a light snowfall year and by mid April most snow had melted. Not much in life or weather is certain and people should realize the same.
Just remember, when it's cold, it's weather, but when it's warm, it's climate.
Jim Harris wrote:
Just remember, when it's cold, it's weather, but when it's warm, it's climate.
The average temperature across both the contiguous U.S. and the globe during climatological winter (December 2007-February 2008) was the coolest since 2001, according to scientists at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. In terms of winter precipitation, Pacific storms, bringing heavy precipitation to large parts of the West, produced high snowpack that will provide welcome runoff this spring.
A complete analysis is available online.Can't wait to see this spun by the AlGore contingent.
I'll even do the rebuttal for you:
- Pat Michaels is a "denialist"
- Cato is funded by the oil industry
- The article is an "opinion piece" so can be dismissed as the unscientific rantings of a nonbeliever
There...now that I've done the easy work for you, you can focus your replies on rebutting the studies Michaels references in the piece.
Ice Mann wrote:
No rebuttal is required, you are a fool.
That's all anybody needs to know.
Jim Harris wrote:
Anonymous: Actually, Pat Michaels isn't mainly a denialist. He's really a retiree. He retired from science to become a political pundit. His opinion piece for the Cato Institute --- obviously a political organization --- certainly is an unscientific rant, but it has little to do with whether he believes or disbelieves any specific thing. Now that Michaels is retired from actual thinking, he can offer any fatuous opinions he pleases, whichever way the wind blows.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Cato Institute does get some oil money, but that too is beside the point. The real point is that the mandate of Cato is ideology rather than science. They are defense lawyers for American capitalism.
Michaels does make a small valid point. Even though Arctic ice is in very bad shape, Antarctic ice has been doing slightly better in some ways than 30 years ago. It is a net negative, and I'm sure that Michaels understands that point, but since he is a defense lawyer for American capitalism, it's not in his interest to say it.
JLawson: As the article says about global temperature for this winter, the coldest since 2001 is not very cold. When the coldest winter of the decade is still warmer than the average over the past century, that tells you something. Global warming is a century-long process, and not an 8-year story.
xj wrote:
>Global warming is a century-long process,
Presumably caused by all those SUVs we were driving during the McKinley administration?
Of course, if you actually _look_ at the century-long figures, we are in fact back at the long-term average. I guess the steps we have taken to curb Global Warming have worked, and we don't need to consider any more.
Jim Harris wrote:
Presumably caused by all those SUVs we were driving during the McKinley administration?
No, caused by burning coal, which not only released CO2 but also laid down a global ring of soot. But it is true that we have since stepped on the gas pedal.
Of course, if you actually _look_ at the century-long figures, we are in fact back at the long-term average.
It depends on what you mean by "we". Yes, the United States had an average winter for once. But global warming is not about the weather report in Peoria, it's about the globe as a whole.
"junkscience.com", by the way, is an aptly named web site. The site manager, Stephen Milloy, is another politico like Pat Michaels, except that he is much more bombastic and not as smart.
In twenty years, when it has been proven beyond doubt that Global Warming is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated, I am *so* going to sue Al Gore, Maurice Strong, and David Suzuki, for the damage that they have done (are doing) to the world economy.
glenn wrote:
Lab Write-Up
Part 1
Will overcrowding make the Wisconsin Fast Plants shorter?
Part 2
If the amount of Wisconsin Fast Plants increases by one per cell, the height of the overcrowded Wisconsin Fast Plants will decrease.
Part 3
1. 1 tray
2. 1 spoon
3. 1 planter quad
4. 1 cup of potting mix
5. 4 wicks
6. 12 fertilizer pellets
7. 8 Wisconsin Fast Plant seeds
8. 1 toothpick
9. 1 planter label
10. 1 paper towel
11. 1 pair of forceps
12. 1 dropper
Part 4
1. Number each cell of the planter quad 1-4
2. Place one wick in each cell of the planter quad. Use your forceps to pull the wick through the hole until the tip sticks out 1 cm.
3. Using the spoon, fill each section of the planter quad halfway with the potting mix.
4. Add three fertilizer pellets to each cell. Look closely. The fertilizer pellets are larger than the seeds so you shouldn’t get them confused.
5. Fill each cell to the top with potting mix.
6. Put a drop of water on your tray and dip your toothpick in it. Use the wet toothpick to pick up one seed. Place two seeds (unless you’re experimental put three in each cell) just below the top of the potting mix in each of the cells and then cover them.
7. Using the dropper, drop water into the cells until water drips from the bottom of each wick.
8. Place your quad under the lighting/watering system about 2 to 3 inches from the bulb. Make sure your quad is on the watering mat.
9. If you are control pull one of the two plants out of the cell. Do this to all of the cells, unless you’re experimental don’t bother with this.
10. When your plants grow flowers cross pollinate them with your bee stick for five days in a row.
11. When your seed pods develop take them off the watering system.
12. After a week or so off the watering system open the seed pods and count the seeds.
Part 5
Graph in packet.
Part 6
In the experimental group the average height was 74.7 mm and the control group’s average height was 100 mm. Also the control group’s average should have been higher because one of the members of the control group got a transplant and the plants that have gotten transplanted were inevitably the smallest. The trends that we saw between the plants were very surprising. One of the trends that we saw was the shrinking during a certain period. My guess is the energy of the plant went to making flowers and seed pods. This trend was important to the height of the plant and if it didn’t happen it probably
Leave a comment
Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.
About this Entry
This page contains a single entry by Rand Simberg published on March 15, 2008 12:43 PM.
There are icebergs in Lake Michigan.
No, there aren't. The article calls them 'ice "bergs"', but they are really ice floes and not icebergs. There have been ice floes in Lake Michigan every year since the last ice age. If the ice floes are smaller than usual, that could indeed be associated with global warming. However, it is an insignificant detail compared to the massive summer ice depletion in the Arctic Ocean and the possible destabilization of Greenland's ice sheet.
Jim, did someone excise your sense of humor at birth, or did it happen later?
Maybe it was put on an ice floe.
Jim, did someone excise your sense of humor at birth
No, but maybe you should chill out.
Actually I had a whole line of jokes prepared, unfortunately the Clintons stole my manuscript.
No, but maybe you should chill out.
What a strange non sequitur.
Physician, heal thyself.
Actually I had a whole line of jokes prepared...
If so, it would be a first in our experience.
unfortunately the Clintons stole my manuscript.
It's hard to imagine that they'd be worth stealing by anyone.
No, but maybe you should chill out.
Apparently your sense of irony was removed at the same time.
Explaining the joke:
There are no whales in lake Michigan. Same with the icebergs.
The global warming comment is not related to anything. The US had an average winter if you look at the 100 year record.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=916&tstamp=200803#
Global warming is real, those ice floes are calving!
Green Bay has had record snowfalls this year. Eighty inches I just heard. I am in Michigan up on Lake Superior and my county (Alger) has a number of 180 inches listed by the road commission thus far. It's snowing today. I pray for global warming.
It isn't looking good for the warming advocates from where I shovel. I hope to see the ground this year by the end of May. Last year was a light snowfall year and by mid April most snow had melted. Not much in life or weather is certain and people should realize the same.
It isn't looking good for the warming advocates from where I shovel. I hope to see the ground this year by the end of May. Last year was a light snowfall year and by mid April most snow had melted. Not much in life or weather is certain and people should realize the same.
Just remember, when it's cold, it's weather, but when it's warm, it's climate.
Just remember, when it's cold, it's weather, but when it's warm, it's climate.
Boy, you really need to get a clue.
"Hope they aren't a problem for the whales."
Heck with the whales - won't anybody think about the polar bears?!
Who can you trust? AlGore, or NOAA? Personally, I subscribe to the Church of Long Time Anthropogenic Warming - "Heatin' it Up for 8000 Years" - but this is a bit chilling...
The average temperature across both the contiguous U.S. and the globe during climatological winter (December 2007-February 2008) was the coolest since 2001, according to scientists at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. In terms of winter precipitation, Pacific storms, bringing heavy precipitation to large parts of the West, produced high snowpack that will provide welcome runoff this spring.
A complete analysis is available online.Can't wait to see this spun by the AlGore contingent.
And here's a clue for you, Jim:
More Ice than Ever
I'll even do the rebuttal for you:
- Pat Michaels is a "denialist"
- Cato is funded by the oil industry
- The article is an "opinion piece" so can be dismissed as the unscientific rantings of a nonbeliever
There...now that I've done the easy work for you, you can focus your replies on rebutting the studies Michaels references in the piece.
No rebuttal is required, you are a fool.
That's all anybody needs to know.
Anonymous: Actually, Pat Michaels isn't mainly a denialist. He's really a retiree. He retired from science to become a political pundit. His opinion piece for the Cato Institute --- obviously a political organization --- certainly is an unscientific rant, but it has little to do with whether he believes or disbelieves any specific thing. Now that Michaels is retired from actual thinking, he can offer any fatuous opinions he pleases, whichever way the wind blows.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Cato Institute does get some oil money, but that too is beside the point. The real point is that the mandate of Cato is ideology rather than science. They are defense lawyers for American capitalism.
Michaels does make a small valid point. Even though Arctic ice is in very bad shape, Antarctic ice has been doing slightly better in some ways than 30 years ago. It is a net negative, and I'm sure that Michaels understands that point, but since he is a defense lawyer for American capitalism, it's not in his interest to say it.
JLawson: As the article says about global temperature for this winter, the coldest since 2001 is not very cold. When the coldest winter of the decade is still warmer than the average over the past century, that tells you something. Global warming is a century-long process, and not an 8-year story.
>Global warming is a century-long process,
Presumably caused by all those SUVs we were driving during the McKinley administration?
Of course, if you actually _look_ at the century-long figures, we are in fact back at the long-term average. I guess the steps we have taken to curb Global Warming have worked, and we don't need to consider any more.
Presumably caused by all those SUVs we were driving during the McKinley administration?
No, caused by burning coal, which not only released CO2 but also laid down a global ring of soot. But it is true that we have since stepped on the gas pedal.
Of course, if you actually _look_ at the century-long figures, we are in fact back at the long-term average.
It depends on what you mean by "we". Yes, the United States had an average winter for once. But global warming is not about the weather report in Peoria, it's about the globe as a whole.
"junkscience.com", by the way, is an aptly named web site. The site manager, Stephen Milloy, is another politico like Pat Michaels, except that he is much more bombastic and not as smart.
In twenty years, when it has been proven beyond doubt that Global Warming is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated, I am *so* going to sue Al Gore, Maurice Strong, and David Suzuki, for the damage that they have done (are doing) to the world economy.
Lab Write-Up
Part 1
Will overcrowding make the Wisconsin Fast Plants shorter?
Part 2
If the amount of Wisconsin Fast Plants increases by one per cell, the height of the overcrowded Wisconsin Fast Plants will decrease.
Part 3
1. 1 tray
2. 1 spoon
3. 1 planter quad
4. 1 cup of potting mix
5. 4 wicks
6. 12 fertilizer pellets
7. 8 Wisconsin Fast Plant seeds
8. 1 toothpick
9. 1 planter label
10. 1 paper towel
11. 1 pair of forceps
12. 1 dropper
Part 4
1. Number each cell of the planter quad 1-4
2. Place one wick in each cell of the planter quad. Use your forceps to pull the wick through the hole until the tip sticks out 1 cm.
3. Using the spoon, fill each section of the planter quad halfway with the potting mix.
4. Add three fertilizer pellets to each cell. Look closely. The fertilizer pellets are larger than the seeds so you shouldn’t get them confused.
5. Fill each cell to the top with potting mix.
6. Put a drop of water on your tray and dip your toothpick in it. Use the wet toothpick to pick up one seed. Place two seeds (unless you’re experimental put three in each cell) just below the top of the potting mix in each of the cells and then cover them.
7. Using the dropper, drop water into the cells until water drips from the bottom of each wick.
8. Place your quad under the lighting/watering system about 2 to 3 inches from the bulb. Make sure your quad is on the watering mat.
9. If you are control pull one of the two plants out of the cell. Do this to all of the cells, unless you’re experimental don’t bother with this.
10. When your plants grow flowers cross pollinate them with your bee stick for five days in a row.
11. When your seed pods develop take them off the watering system.
12. After a week or so off the watering system open the seed pods and count the seeds.
Part 5
Graph in packet.
Part 6
In the experimental group the average height was 74.7 mm and the control group’s average height was 100 mm. Also the control group’s average should have been higher because one of the members of the control group got a transplant and the plants that have gotten transplanted were inevitably the smallest. The trends that we saw between the plants were very surprising. One of the trends that we saw was the shrinking during a certain period. My guess is the energy of the plant went to making flowers and seed pods. This trend was important to the height of the plant and if it didn’t happen it probably