studiot

Today I learned about the Titius-Bode Law and how a lady 'blagged' it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titius–Bode_law

Some years ago my brother and I bought identical cars. My brother has not used his, but has kept it in his garage ever since and, if anything, it now looks better than new. I have been rather busier and my car has nearly 150,000 miles on its clock. The saleman for both out cars was called Albert and he promised that the more and faster I drove, the younger my car would look, relative to the one of my brother. So why, oh why does mine look like a train wreck that has already happened ?

You seem to have fallen into the same trap as your sparring partner. If you are genuinely immune, there is no time limit. You surely mean natural resistance, which is different thing. Genuine immunity may be thought of as a kind of limit as the natural resistance tends to infinity. Both concepts are required to properly and fully discuss the subject.

The 'and' links 2 separate claims here. Your evidence for these figures are ?? I ask this because both of these claims are wildly different from the reviews at my UK district general hospital, which I get to see on a regular basis. Once again this conflicts with the evidence I review. Of course natural immunity is better. But if you are immune you are not (cannot be) infected, by definition. But such individuals are very few and far between. Exposure to the virus does not confer any guaranteed resistance to future exposure. Nor are vaccines claimed to confer immunity, even by those (inept) politicians who don't know any better (some are actually practising doctors). The claim and experience is simply that the clinical severity and acuteness of any infection or reinfection will be greatly reduced in most cases. This again is borne out not only in local experience but also in the national figures published on most days. Finally are you the ill informed member who believed the proposed compulsion covered the entire UK as too many journalists seem to have done?

Looking for a grant in Earth Sciences ? There are lots. For instance https://www.geolsoc.org.uk/Education-and-Careers/Grants

Au contraire it you who has missed the point. For instance it is on record that between March 20th 2021 and March 21 2021 nearly a million does were administered (844,285) in the UK. Please refer me to any study that takes account of that recorded population difference in one 24 hour period. It should be noted that that was the third record fifigure in a row so the population had made similar vast changes in the preceding days. Nothing has changed by February 2022, except that other countries have been catching up and the bigger ones overtaking that figure.

Any study on covid vaccination will be out of date before it is even drafted, let alone published. This is because the rate of vaccination is and has been so high and also been age and other group selective, that the sample space completely changes on a daily basis. We should let our best minds do the best they can with any data available at the time they have to act and not criticise them with 2020 hindisght.

I haven't taken an interest in this thread, but I thought some might appreciate this 1877 map.

Don't give up now that you have started to do so well. +1 for encouragement. I'm sorry if you feel confused, but remember that Rome wasn't built in a day. And yes, it's complicated. But your last post, in particular, shows that you are now understanding my comments. See below about the application of black bodies.* It's also true that if you want numbers then some mathematics is unavoidable. But a great deal can still be achieved by discussing the principles and their application. It is also worth noting that obtaining something from discussion is two way. I certainly am grateful for the personal clarification I often gain when trying to explain something to others. *I did promise to reply separately to the other point about temperature and I have come to the conclusion that that particular point is so important that it deserves a thread all of its own so watch for further developments. The S_B law is quite precise when it is applied to small bodies which have surfaces at essentially the same temperature. But the Earth is (in this context) a large body with substantial variation of temperature over its surface and in time. In such cases one possibility is to introduce the idea of an 'equivalent black body'. An equivalent black body is a BB with the same heat radiation flux as the Earth's actual flux. This is definable and manageable with the formulae so calculations can be performed using the temperature this equivalent black body must have. This equivalent BB temperature might be (probably will be) different from any of the different ways of averaging measurements over the Earth's surface. What temperature to use and how to arrive at that temperature is therefore of vital importance to climate science and is the proposed subject of my new thread to be. I hope this encouragement helps.

Would the uninformed troll who just went back over this thread sprinkling red marks around and in particular to this post own up and justify what they think was incorrect about this post. Covid vaccination has never has been mandatory in the NHS in the UK, nor was it ever proposed to be. I await their apology when they have fully checked their 'facts'.

🤣 +1

The BBC also has an article on this. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60308650

This article may interest you.

It should be noted that many crystalline substances incorporate 'water of crystallisation' in their crystal structure. It is debatable whether this water can be counted as part of a 'reservoir' of available water.

I see we have a clear example of miscommunication in action.

There is more you need to know about energy transfer in general and heat transfer in particular apart from Stefan-Boltzman. There are two coefficients called emissivity and absorbtivity which relate to energy in the general case and heat in a particular case. An ideal 'black body has an absorbtivity and an emissivity of 1. There are no known ideal balck bodies in the universe. Actual amounts of absorbtion or emission are multiplied by the appropriate emissivity or absorbtivity coefficient. There are lots of these coefficients for different wavelengths, different body surface conditions and (thank you Stefan-Botlzman) different temperatures/ temperature ranges. All bodies are in a state of both continual emission and continual absorbtion. Emission depends upon the absolute surface temperature, absorbtion does not. So the balance between emission and absorbtion is a dynamic one. A hot enough (high enough temperature) body will emit more than it absorbs. At a low enough temperature a body will absorb more than it emits. Oops pressed the submit by mistake. The importance of the S_B law and Planck's law come from that low temperature emission. Sunlight is emitted by a very high temperature body. This is absorbed by bodies in the atmousphere (both liquid droplets, gaseous, and particulate solids) which are at a much lower temperature. These heat radiations will be at longer wavelength than the received sunlight. It is this fact that forms the basis of the greenhouse effect. Please note this is a very broad brush treatment so ask for clarification/amplification of any point. I have highlighted the word surface in my text. This is because you kindly replied to my comment and query on the Earth's (surface) temperature to which I shall make a separate reply. Edit2 Real bodies are modelled as gray or grey bodies. https://www.comsol.com/blogs/understanding-classical-gray-body-radiation-theory/ However if you read the articles you will find references to my coefficients and many more factors, some of which also play a part in the 'surface temperature' of the Earth.

But then you get two tunnels or bridges for the price of one ! Joking aside, the mathematics may not have been wrong, but the communications may have been blocked by someone not listening. There is a story about a viaduct I built where something like that happened.

Yes, since my question was referred to here, I posted information from NASA, new to me, although now about 10years old. I was aware of Gore's chicanery, but the NASA article claimed that the CO2 rise had historically long been lagging, but recently changed to leading. So if anyone is interested in discussing this or better has information as to whether this new lead has been maintained since the NASA article i would be interested. However all the CO2 stuff is measured. This thread is about models. And I asked a serious question about the difficulty of defining 'average global temperature' which has not been taken up. Again it is an important point (to models) worthy of discussion. Thank you for bringing these points up. +1

Wouldn't you rather have a visit from St Patrick ?

Thanks. +1

@joigus @Markus Hanke Here is an interesting discourse on order and disorder in relation to binary strings. From 'What is Random' by Edward Beltrami - Springr-Verlag . 1999 I have highlighted a short passage to read first. This explains the what it is all about ie what may be nuggets of order in a binary string. This passage is on the third attachment. The rest is supporting background. The point is how the nuggets can arise from purely statistical considerations. Entropy after all arises from statistical considerations of the behaviour of large ensembles.

Yes I agree this method is poor science. I have never heard of scafetta before, but I am immediately suspicious of the website posting the refutation you have linked to, because of this staement. I have done a great deal of curve fitting in my time and one thing stands out. The lesson that stands out is that the higher the order of the collocating function, the better the fit at the collocating points, but at the expense of the greater the 'wiggle' between those points. I can even supply many standard textbook references to this effect.

Where have you looked and what have you found out so far ? I would also advise providing a good deal more clarification of your question for anyone here to be able to help you further.

There have been too many red points scattered about in this thread, suggesting aurgement from antagonism rather than reason. So I have cancelled the one placed with this question, which seems a reasonable request to me. My answer to this would be the same as my answer to others for other climatic questions. Look to the oceans. In the oceans you will find lots of measurements of dying coral and acidifiction. Of course coral does not grow in heavily industrialised areas. Look to the oceans for the other big issues raised in this thread. Climate modelling is a very young science that was started by the father of climate science Gilbert Walker (1903) so it is worth reviewing his experiences. Gilbert was a statistician who was enganged to study the Monsoon. At that time it was believed that the monsoon was dirven by a periodicity, though no one had discovered an accurate mathematical model. Weather was thought to be a local phenomenon and 'climate' was a geographer's classification scheme. The era was also flush with the accurate modelling of the periodicity of the tides - a big success story. Walker assembled the largest data collection system and database ever undertaken by that time, a truly impressive feat and story in its own right. However he was forced to abandon the local weather cycles theory and nevr found a satisfactory way of predicting monsoons. In its stead he demonstrated the new idea of a 'global climate'. This became the beginnings of 'climate science.' I have not received an answer to this question (sorry for the mispelling) Another associated issue is that of what is meant by 'average global temperature' , which must be definable in order to measure a rise or fall. Time here is a big factor, which Walker was the first to address.

Whilst I accept your examples, I don't think they lead to your proposed conclusion. Does anyone have an update on this question of whether CO2 leads or lages temperature change ? As for measurement in Stevenson screens. About 2/3 of the Earth's surface is water. How many Stevenson screens are there in the middle of the ocean ? Proper global temperature measuement needs to take a variety of forms.