tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4004381248378157742.post3077074732664897438..comments2012-02-01T15:34:02.027ZAlastairhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15152292130415788120noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4004381248378157742.post-25645097736668293162010-08-17T03:54:48.625+01:002010-08-17T03:54:48.625+01:00To get started winning at an online casino the first thing that you need to do is find one that suits your needs. After all, if you do not have an internet casino that you can wager with, you will never be able to reach your goals in the end. In order to find a casino all you have to do is start your search online. This will allow you to find several options to choose from, and also research each one. In turn, you will never have any problems finding the one that will best match your needs. <br />[url=http://www.casinolesoleil.com]casino[/url] http://www.casinolesoleil.com <a href="http://www.casinolesoleil.com" rel="nofollow">casino</a> If you want to have the fun of a casino without leaving home, online casinos can be just as exciting and as hopefully profitable as brick and mortar casinos. Whether your new to internet gambling, just need a refresher, or are looking to maximize your profits, our short guide can help you get started! <br />[url=http://www.redlotuscasino.com]casino[/url] http://www.redlotuscasino.com <a href="http://www.redlotuscasino.com" rel="nofollow">casino</a> Remember, before you visit any sites like these, check your local laws. Make sure that gambling and online gambling are allowed in your area. Even in different areas that allow online gambling, the rules may differ, so be sure to check the laws and rules thoroughly. Also, read all the terms, conditions, and rules of an online casino before signing up. Thanks for reading this guide! [url=http://www.triumphcasino.com]casino[/url] http://www.triumphcasino.com <a href="http://www.triumphcasino.com" rel="nofollow">casino</a> http://www.affrewards.com [url=http://www.affrewards.com]casino affiliate program[/url] Bingo is a beautiful game of luck, which involves patience, rapid coordination between hearing and searching out the numbers and lots of fun. [url=http://www.bingokisses.com]bingo[/url] [url=http://www.bingoeuphoria.com]bingo[/url] <a href="http://www.bingokisses.com" rel="nofollow">bingo</a> <a href="http://www.bingoeuphoria.com" rel="nofollow">bingo</a> http://www.bingokisses.com http://www.bingoeuphoria.com What you have to do is, coordinate the numbers that are called out by the host with what you have on our sheet, aiming at filling up a pattern reading bingo. The pattern would be announced at the beginning of the game, so you have to be careful to know what pattern you are looking out for. The cards have the b-i-n-g-o letters on rows and numbers running as a column. A host would call out a letter-number combination, which you would have to mark on your sheet. For example if I-34 is called, you will have to look at the I column down to search for number 34. In case you have it, you place a market on it, and so on. <br />http://www.casinolesoleil.com http://www.redlotuscasino.com http://www.triumphcasino.com http://www.bingokisses.com http://www.bingoeuphoria.com http://www.pulsebet.com http://www.affrewards.com http://www.thehighrollerclub.com<br />http://www.buyphentermine1.com [url=http://www.buyphentermine1.com]buy phentermine[/url] http://www.norxbuy.com <a href="http://www.buyphentermine1.com" rel="nofollow">buy phentermine</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4004381248378157742.post-45125029500576525092008-11-03T22:49:00.000Z2008-11-03T22:49:00.000ZHi Alastair<BR/><BR/>You may be interested to iknow that I was not able to post text below at RC, as Gavin has now deemed anything I say is unacceptable, no doubt because he got caught out at my last accepted posting #77 on his Greenspan &amp; Einstein thread.<BR/><BR/>TC to real Climate 3 Nov 08, 1355pm<BR/><BR/>I note that Gavin has yet to reconcile the difference between his view of the Airborne Fraction of CO2 and that of Hansen &amp; Sato PNAS 2004 or Hansen et al 2008. [see my #77 at RC]<BR/><BR/>More generally, I would again like to call into question the high regard enjoyed by the Friedlingtein at 28 al paper of whom 7 were contributing authors of ch.7 of WG1 of AR4 2007, in Journal of Climate vol.19 15 July 2006, 3337-3353. Its Figs. 2e and f show massive reductions in land and ocean uptakes with changes in surface temperature, based only on its models with NO reference to any observed evidence to that effect. This paper was endorsed - nay adopted - by Stern, by IPCC loc.cit of course (surprise!), and by the Garnaut report here in Australia, ch 4, p.103. The paper presents no real world evidence at all, offering instead only the ensembled &quot;findings&quot; of the C4MIP models (recommended to me by Gavin) that rising Temperature will reverse the growth of natural uptakes. Naturally F et 28 al. ignore any paper offering statistical analysis of real world field experiments showing that rising temperature reinforces CO2 fertilization over a wide range of the former. For example, although citing Nowak et al 2004 in New Phytologist 162 253-280, they omit any reference to Norby and Luo in the SAME issue of that journal (281-293), who however very tiresomely (for F et al) reported the results of their controlled experiments using red and sugar maple trees at Oak Ridge TN, which showed that without elevated CO2, higher temperature would reduce growth of dry mass, but with elevated CO2, growth was not much less than with ambient temp. and elevated CO2 (Fig.5). One can see why F et 28 al dislike Norby &amp; Luo, because the latter say &quot;models to forecast future [climate] changes need data support to be useful, and data-model fusion has become essential in global change research&quot;, precisely what F et 28 al are determined to avoid, with the support of Stern, IPCC,and Garnaut. The Garnaut report at Fig2.7 accepts F et 28 al as evidence for its curves showing declining future natural uptakes for which it has not a shred of evidence in the historical record. Nor does it offer any plausible a priori argument that improvements in varieties of all major food crops will cease, resulting in reduced growth of natural uptakes. <BR/><BR/>Regards<BR/><BR/>TimTim Curtinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17180135871599630167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4004381248378157742.post-90105392787979411822008-10-07T11:37:00.000+01:002008-10-07T11:37:00.000+01:00Bob,<BR/><BR/>That is as if I had written "Men are taller than women" and you had replied "But my wife is taller than me." It is a fact that men are taller than women but as in Earth Science there are always exceptions.<BR/><BR/>Mathematics is different. Euclid's theorems first published over 2000 years ago are still true today. Meanwhile sea level in the Mediterranean has risen AND fallen. See the <A HREF="http://www.victorianweb.org/science/lyell.html" REL="nofollow">frontpiece to Lyell's Principles.</A><BR/><BR/>The problem that I have when explaining my ideas to professional scientists is that they immediately look for the exception to the rule I am advocating, find one and dismiss my ideas. It is as if I state that men are taller than women and they soon find an exception and say I am wrong. But as you know men are taller than women. That's why Ms Palin wears high heels!<BR/><BR/>Thus I am fundamentally correct when I say that the models are based on a radiation balance at the top of the atmosphere between incoming and outgoing radiation. The mistake in the modellers are making is to assume that the balance is maintained by adjustments to the outgoing longwave radiation (OLR). In fact it is controlled by changes to the net incoming shortwave radiation (ISR) viz. by alterations of the albedo. This is not a smooth process and hence abrupt climate change.<BR/><BR/>Just as there are tall women, there are also changes OLR when the surface temperature changes. But the simple engineering model leaves those out. The complex engineering model includes them along with bandwidth broadening, water vapour feedback, cloud blackbody radiation, convection, ozone, etc. <BR/><BR/>I'll start putting some of the de Saussure stuff on the web today. Once that is done I can explain my ideas in a bit more depth.<BR/><BR/>Cheers, Alastair.Alastairnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4004381248378157742.post-72889089278597225212008-10-05T21:25:00.000+01:002008-10-05T21:25:00.000+01:00Alastair: One thing you get wrong is to think that engineers, or at least engineering mindset, aren't to be found in climate modelling. Since my undergraduate degree was engineering, and I was active in the EE/CS student group, I had more than passing introduction to the people and the thought processes. They're present in the climate world too.<BR/><BR/>One of the quite common comments -- from modellers -- is to quote "All models are wrong, some models are useful." Or, a comment I heard "We have to beat on the model to see how bad it is." Again, from a climate modeller.<BR/><BR/>The question is <B>never</B> whether the model is perfect. It isn't. We all know that before we start with one. The question is whether the model is useful -- does it answer the questions we have.<BR/><BR/>Scientists are quite aware that they make mistakes. Again, that isn't the question. One of the most memorable Seligman Crystal (top award in glaciology) was given, I'm told, by Hans Weertman. His speech was to list off the mistakes he'd made over the years.<BR/><BR/>The thing is, the mistakes they make are seldom the ones they're accused of in climate. Every few seconds, someone says that scientists don't know about the urban heat island, or that Mauna Loa is a volcano, or that the models don't include water vapor (or clouds, or ...), or the models fix the lapse rate, or ... any of a large number of errors that the scientists, in fact, did <I>not</I> make.<BR/><BR/>On a flip side, it is strange to see you comment about engineers not using complex models. That doesn't square at all with my experience with engineering and engineers. The chemical engineers certainly had quite involved systems, as much or more so than atmospheric chemists have been using and putting in to climate models. Mechanical and Aerospace engineers certainly have fluid dynamic models about as complex as those used in general circulation models. And so on.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, there are still people who try to do climate with simple models. Richard Lindzen is one. He'd built his career on being able to find simple models for apparently complex problems. That said, he also serves as a warning. In spite of his well-developed talents at this, he has <I>not</I> been able to construct a simple model of earth climate that is successful. Some problems, whether it's that industrial scale chemical reactor or the climate system, really are fundamentally complex and just don't have a good simple model.<BR/><BR/>Even if all that climate people did was to slavishly follow astrophysicists, which they don't, they still wouldn't have the problem you think. Astrophysics involves much more than high pressure/temperature/density. Hence Lyman Spitzer's book, which I'll recommend to you, <I>Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium</I>. The astrophysical case ranges from far above to far below terrestrial pressure/temperature/density conditions, including fully ionized to fully neutral, and everything in between on all counts.Penguindreamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10783453972811796911noreply@blogger.com