Patterico's Pontifications

12/5/2016

Al Gore Meeting with Ivanka Trump on Climate Change [UPDATE: And With Donald Trump Too]

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:58 am



Offered without comment:

Ivanka Trump is meeting Monday with climate change activist and former Vice President Al Gore.

The president-elect’s daughter, who reportedly wants to make global warming one of her signature issues, will meet with Gore at Trump Tower in Manhattan, according to transition spokesman Jason Miller.

The former vice president will not be meeting with the president-elect, Miller said in a conference call with reporters on Monday morning.

He would not elaborate on the contents of the meeting.

Ivanka has close ties to influential Democrats, and she has supported causes traditionally more dear to the left than to conservatives, including pushing her father to support child care and paid family leave policies.

OK, maybe a little comment.

There is no better place to make global warning one of your signature issues than as head of the Trump Organization, with no ties whatsoever to the government. Ivanka can learn from The Master how to keep the new hotels green. Win/win, is what I say.

Here is old Al himself walking in for the meeting:

I have some of the most intelligent commenters around, and they are generally sympathetic to Donald Trump. I am fascinated to see how they will react to this.

Speaking as a skeptic both of climate change hysteria and of climate change skepticism, I am fine with the Trumps taking a look at climate change. If they want to do by having a daughter who is supposedly soon to be out of government meet with a huckster who routinely exaggerates the issue, who am I to criticize?

How about you?

UPDATE: Looks like Mr. AlGore met with The Donald as well. Thanks to DRJ.

188 Responses to “Al Gore Meeting with Ivanka Trump on Climate Change [UPDATE: And With Donald Trump Too]”

  1. why does this nasty bubbleheaded piffle-ditz need to have signature issues exactly

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  2. “The Chinese are burning soft coal in their factories. Nuke them for me, Daddy! Nuke them!”

    nk (dbc370)

  3. I do not like it, green eggs and ham, manbearoig is creating his own gravity well

    narciso (d1f714)

  4. Well, are they actually cleaning the sheets everyday now? That would suck if Trump hoteliers picked up that horrible practice from the other chains.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  5. I voted for Trump because I could not tolerate the thought of continued lawlessness in the executive branch by the likes of Clinton, Lynch, et. al.
    And I hope for better judges under Trump,
    and perhaps less total abdication of American military strength and influence in the world.

    Other than that, I had/have little confidence in a Trump presidency.
    As I recall, Romney was pretty squishy on climate too.

    A major divine intervention is what is needed, nothing less.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  6. …the practice of laundering sheets on a less frequent cycle, that is…

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  7. According to Gore’s junk science he was pushing in 2004, Trump Tower ought to have been swallowed up by the ocean two years ago! (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  8. Al probably heard Ivanka does the massage technique rub rub the way he like it to where it feel so good make him so happy

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  9. which brings us back to the sheets discussion

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  10. I think that by and large Trump will break his little girl’s heart on AGW by not doing anything that will take away jobs, or cheap consumer good at Walmart, from the people who voted for him.

    nk (dbc370)

  11. your lips to God’s ears Mr. nk

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  12. “The president-elect’s daughter, who reportedly wants to make global warming one of her signature issues”

    What about the president-elect’s nieces, nephews and head house-keeper? What are their signature issues?

    Sounds like Ivanka’s sales might not be recovering – time for some virtue signaling.

    Rick Ballard (d17095)

  13. is that what they’re calling lap dancing now

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  14. You know when we will see Trump’s “environmentalist” position? When he reverses the Army Corps of Engineers’ denial of the Dakota pipeline permit.

    nk (dbc370)

  15. ^^^^^yep^^^^^

    “MY USA TODAY COLUMN: Trump as FDR with the Fireside Tweet: Democrats think caring means a government program. Trump thinks caring is getting to keep your job, just as he promised.
    FDR knew this. His New Deal economic policies were mostly snake oil — according to a study by UCLA economists, they actually prolonged the Great Depression by seven years. But FDR made people feel like he cared, even though he was a rich man from New York who had never been poor himself.

    Now another rich man from New York seems to be repeating the formula. FDR gave the Democrats two decades of political dominance. Today’s Democrats should be worrying that Trump could do the same for the Republican Party.”

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/250977/

    Colonel Haiku (1fcc64)

  16. Must a president (elected in non-emergency circumstances and scheduled to take office on January 20) accept the oath of office in Washington D.C.? He should don a coonskin hat, a fur, and take the oath in North Dakota accompanied with some military in late 19th century “throwbacks”.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  17. I think some patience for it to develop is in order. Remember when last week he was meeting with Romney supposedly to offer him Secretary of State? Or those meetings with Giuliani to offer him Secretary of State?

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  18. Anyway I am out of step with pretty much everyone here on climate change and I will not attending the argument clinic on that topic.

    And since we don’t even know yet how real or significant any of this is, it won’t be very interesting to join the argument clinic on Trump’s motivations, or plan, or fitness for office, or what have you.

    For all we know Al Gore will come out of there denouncing climate change.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  19. Everyone seems to be missing that Trump’s honeymoon is likely to be over before it starts. He won a mere plurality victory which much of the vote that fell on his side of the column motivated by loathing for his opponent. If it looks like he is trying to do what the Bush and Clinton families attempted to do, establish a political dynasty, there will be a backlash.

    NC Mountain Girl (4e1ba9)

  20. Nothing like the snake oil of a “new” New Deal and a modern-day FDR to destroy what’s left of American capitalism, right Instapundit?

    DRJ (15874d)

  21. When Republicans tell me Trump is the new FDR, that worries me.

    DRJ (15874d)

  22. Mark Steyn will not be pleased.

    So our host is an AGW guy? Does this include the campaign to discredit the Medieval Warm Period and the Maunder Minimum? Do you support the idea of carbon footprints? Any concern over recent happening on the Sun and how they might affect our weather? Oh my.

    BobStewartatHome (c24491)

  23. Mr. Trump’s awesome but his low-class freak daughter’s making an ass out of herself to where everyone’s revolted by her (except Al Gore)

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  24. Al Whore might actually be trying to convince whichever Trump will have him, to throw the hammer at Hillary — he and Bill didnt end their presidency on the best terms (Lieberman was used as a slap).

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  25. So our host is an AGW guy?

    Where did that come from?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  26. I’m skeptical of everybody.

    That makes me an “AGW guy”?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  27. You can be an AGW guy but be contra any measures to correct trends and preserve existing climatic/geographic conditions e.g. happy to see Oranges in Michigan and coastal FL under water.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  28. #19 NC Mountain Girl, a lot of Presidents throughout history have only with a plurality, including Bill Clinton with both of his elections, and JFK.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  29. @Patterico:Where did that come from?

    Comes from not unambiguously declaring yourself to be on a side, you get immediately tagged as being the OTHER side. Happens anywhere humans congregate.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  30. Any hot air that is allegedly “warming” the planet is emanating from the mouths of left wing dolts like Mr Gore.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  31. Well, everything is speculation at this point re the transition, so trying to read the tea leaves is a nice parlor game but that’s about it.

    My speculation is that Ivanka has been designated as the go-to person for issues that Trump has zero interest in, like global warming or government child care. Then it looks like he’s doing something when he has no intention to do so, and it won’t offend his base too much.

    As for his business, complete divestment is impossible. So, for me, transparency is it. In this case, Ivanka is openly meeting with Gore, not in secret.

    I also love the image of this guy tromping through the foyer on his way to meet the new president…er, I mean, one of his kids.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  32. Something is misssing…< AL Gore going to a meeting to disvuss Global Warming, shouldn't thre be a blizard blowing/? WTH HPPENED TO THE gORE eFFECT//

    NeoCon_1 (4d97ca)

  33. WAIT, WHAT HAPPNED TO THE GORE eFFECT, WHERE IS THE SNOW???

    NeoCon_1 (4d97ca)

  34. Where did that come from?

    Speaking as a skeptic both of climate change hysteria and of climate change skepticism

    You are skeptical of those who are themselves skeptical of the [claims of?] climate change. You aren’t hysterical about climate change, but you apparently accept the premise that man’s activities are changing the climate in a measurable and perhaps significant way. Why else would you be skeptical of the climate change skeptics?

    I am reading between the lines to a degree. I also believe in climate change, but I’m thinking in terms of millennia, not decades. For example, I am extremely grateful that we don’t have a kilometer of ice burying New York City, despite what I think of those living in the city. And I believe the earth is still warming after the little ice age in the 18th Century, so the climate is changing, but we have yet to approach the temperatures that existed in the MWP. So the “climate” hasn’t changed significantly when compared to written history. Which is to say the variations we see today are within historical norms.

    BobStewartatHome (c24491)

  35. If she’s going to be running her father’s company then she doesn’t have a signature issue, she has a business plan. However, if this is all smoke and mirrors and she’s looking to influence national policy through dear old dad, then I expect nothing will happen. Trump’s followers are already making excuses for the Carrier deal, and his 35% punishment tweet from yesterday, so why should AGW be the line in the sand?

    Sean (1d5074)

  36. 20&21… you have nothing to fear but Fear its own damn self.

    I think teh focus was more on the contemporary Democrats being left out in the cold.

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  37. 19… howDEE!!!

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  38. I hope he declares a war on illegal stills and cleans up them thar NC mountains!

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  39. Buford Pusser lives!!!

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  40. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

    https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/805836011011969025

    Sean (1d5074)

  41. @bobStewart@Home:you apparently accept the premise that man’s activities are changing the climate in a measurable and perhaps significant way.

    So do virtually all climate skeptics who write on the topic. If this disqualified anyone from climate skepticism, then you would have no climate skeptics to read.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  42. I’m with you, MD in Philly. I don’t think of him as a messiah or a devil, so I’m just hoping for not too much damage.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  43. Al Gore should be banned i think

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  44. Global warming is to meteorology as blood letting is to medicine.

    Harmful at low level, lethal when practiced as it’s practitioners prescribe.

    “Sounds like the God damned Spanish Inquisition to me.” Dr. Leonard McCoy – Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  45. Does this have anything to do with Trump considering the CEO of Exxon-Mobil for Secretary of State?

    I think actually maybe Al Gore sees a good mark.

    Sammy Finkelman (eb0eea)

  46. NeoCon_1 (4d97ca) — 12/5/2016 @ 10:40 am

    AL Gore going to a meeting to discuss Global Warming, shouldn’t there be a blizard blowing? What happened to the Gore Effect??

    I can’t say. The blizzard was cancelled, and it rained instead.

    http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-blogs/abrams/wintry-cold-to-hit-the-northeast-late-this-week/70000182

    Sammy Finkelman (eb0eea)

  47. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington#Death

    Washington] was a firm believer in bloodletting, which was a standard medical practice of that era which he had used to treat various ailments of slaves on his plantation. He ordered estate overseer Albin Rawlins to remove half a pint of his blood.
    A total of three physicians were sent for, including Washington’s personal physician Dr. James Craik[187] along with Dr. Gustavus Brown and Dr. Elisha Dick. Craik and Brown thought that Washington had “quinsey” or “quincy”, while Dick thought that the condition was more serious or a “violent inflammation of the throat”.[188] By the time that the three physicians finished their treatments and bloodletting of the president, there had been a massive volume of blood loss—half or more of his total blood content was removed over the course of just a few hours.[186][189] Dr. Dick recognized that the bloodletting and other treatments were failing, and he proposed performing an emergency tracheotomy, a procedure that few American physicians were familiar with at the time, as a last-ditch effort to save Washington’s life, but the other two doctors disapproved.[186][190]
    Washington died at home around 10 p.m. on Saturday, December 14, 1799, aged 67.

    Imagine you are a doctor in the late 1780-1850’s and you had just killed the father of our country?

    YOU THINK THAT GUY IS GOING TO ADMIT HE DOESN’T HAVE THE FIRST CLUE WHAT HE’S DOING?

    Much the same mindset allows the continuing saga of global warming/climate change/extreme weather/what ever they’re packaging it as this week, to continue.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  48. It’s not that global warming theory is difficult to disprove. It’s surprisingly easy and obvious when the flaws are pointed out.

    That’s the biggest problem when discussing the reasons AGW is bulls**t. It’s so obvious that it’s hard to point out the flaws without coming off as patronizing and condescending.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  49. Agreed, Patricia. My hope is that Ivanka listens sweetly and with an open mind, calmly shares her views with him, thanks Algore for coming to the meeting and then kicks him in the balls figuratively, if not literally. I really do not think that merely meeting with the former vice-President of the United States is necessarily an indication of global warming treason on the part of the Trump family at this point.

    elissa (b10ba6)

  50. that’s a very calm and reasoned perspective elissa

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  51. Apparently Al Gore did meet briefly w/the President-elect, so says a cabler. Hysteria may be a little extreme as any effective action would be long term anyway. But with increasingly sophisticated instrumentation applied to the science and study, the data clearly shows climate change is real on a planetary scale. Ask a Martian where their oceans went.

    Back here on Earth, the data indicates human activity over the past 150 years or so has had impact on our planet’s climate. It’s he interpretation that’s in debate. When we sent men to the moon just 47 years ago, the planet’s population was ‘only’ 4.5 billion. Today we have roughly 7.5 billion humans messing about in the same shell of gases in which they can survive and thrive in that’s about 3 to 5 miles deep at best– the 90-plus miles above it, not so welcoming to human activity. ‘Course if you swallow the belief that the water in a pool with a stressed filter system, where 30 people just peed, is just as ‘safe’ and tasty to gulp in a swim as water from the same pool with the same stressed filter system with 250 people peeing in it, there’s nothing more to say.

    “We’re so sorry, Uncle Albert; We’re so sorry if we caused you any pain…” – Paul & Linda McCartney ‘Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey’ RAM, 1971

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  52. elissa… I’ll go on record and say I have no issues – not one, zilch, nada, nein, nyet – with Ms. Ivanka giving Algore a world-class, tremendously yuge kick in teh testes. And I’d say “God bless her!!!” for that action.

    Thai is all.

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  53. Yes, I think that is what’s happening today, elissa.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  54. Mr Gore should have to pay a carbon tax for all the hot air he emits

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  55. While carbon dioxide is typically painted as the bad boy of greenhouse gases, methane is roughly 30 times more potent as a heat-trapping gas. … “There is more and more evidence that they have a contribution to the methane emissions.Mar 26, 2014

    A more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, methane emissions will leap as Earth warms (Nature)

    This is me trying not to be insulting while disproving global warming.

    Princeton edu is a pretty reputable outlet. Overwhelming to argue against in a he said/she said type situation, especially when me, myself, and I, is the opponent arguing the against proposition.

    Princeton says methane is a heat trapping gas that provides a blanket preserving warmth in the atmosphere. Further, they say methane is much better as a blanket than co2. Okay, if that is true then a moon with a substantial blanket of methane atmosphere will be warmer than say an airless moon, given both moons are at a comparable distance from their primary heat source, the sun.
    Titan and Hyperion are two moons orbiting Saturn. Titan has a thick atmosphere with a primary constituent of methane. Hyperion has no atmosphere at all.
    Satellites and telescopes measuring the heat signatures of Titan and Hyperion [wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperion_(moon)] come up with roughly (within a fraction of a degree) the same temperture.
    Let me repeat and forgive me for the redundancy but this is the key point, Titan and Hyperion have the same surface temperature.
    That’s a cold fact. In the case of Titan they landed a capsule on the surface to take the temperature directly which confirmed the measurements from satellites and ground telescopes.

    This proves that Princeton is wrong when they say methane is a heat trapping gas that provides a blanket of warmth in the atmosphere.

    In science you only have to prove the theory is wrong one time, then you have to throw the theory away, no matter how many big institutions like Princeton, big time magazines like Nature, or whole parties of politicians like the Democrats, love it.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  56. @papertiger:In science you only have to prove the theory is wrong one time,

    That’s not true at all. In science you have to replace a theory with another that explains the same set of facts better or at least as well, and predicts new facts that can be disproven by observation. A theory cannot be replaced with nothing.

    This proves that Princeton is wrong when they say methane is a heat trapping gas that provides a blanket of warmth in the atmosphere.

    Methane is a “heat trapping gas” at temperatures near Earth’s due to the shape of the molecule. It’s not a heat-trapping gas under every possible circumstance. A “heat-trapping” gas has to be at a frequency that is significantly represented in the black-body spectrum. Titan and Hyperion are much too cold.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  57. 46. Google cache for “Zone Area Forecast for New York (Manhattan)”

    http://forecast.weather.gov/MapClick.php?zoneid=NYZ072 (what you see here constantly changes) But the Google cache has:

    Dry and Chilly on Sunday, then Light Snow early Monday Morning. Current conditions at. New York City, Central Park (KNYC). Lat: 40.78° …

    538 on errors both ways:

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-ominous-snow-forecasts-for-new-york-city-were-right/

    Sammy Finkelman (eb0eea)

  58. If all Democrats would just drink cyanide, then America could really reduce its carbon footprint. I guess it just depends upon how much they really want to save the planet.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  59. I’m about to hurt Gabriel’s feelings. Shall I continue? Leaving it up to the audience.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  60. 48. papertiger (c8116c) — 12/5/2016 @ 1:20 pm

    It’s not that global warming theory is difficult to disprove. It’s surprisingly easy and obvious when the flaws are pointed out.

    Climate models that attempt to treat the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as the only non-random factor DON’T WORK.

    If by doing all sorts of tweaking, you can “predict the past” it stops working right away.

    And even on their own terms, a slight reduction in the rate of increase can’t make much of a difference, unless you assume theer is an unknown, but soon to be reached, “tipping point”.

    Furthermore, there are other forms of geo-engineering that are much more controllable, reversible, and do-able other than just trying to get less carbon dioxide – or maybe add methane – into the atmosphere.

    Sammy Finkelman (eb0eea)

  61. @papertiger:I’m about to hurt Gabriel’s feelings. Shall I continue? Leaving it up to the audience.

    No, you’re not, because you don’t know anything about thermodynamics or electromagnetic waves, and I do.

    What you might do is waste my time, if I let you, and mislead anyone who listens to what you say.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  62. Anyway, papertiger, your comment suggests an intention to troll. It takes two, really. Not biting.

    Thermodynamics and electrodynamics are two huge subjects. Answering your Gish gallop would take way more time than I have.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  63. Said in my #18 I am not going to do argument clinic, and I’ve done too much already.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  64. @56-Methane is a “heat trapping gas” at temperatures near Earth’s due to the shape of the molecule. It’s not a heat-trapping gas under every possible circumstance. A “heat-trapping” gas has to be at a frequency that is significantly represented in the black-body spectrum. Titan and Hyperion are much too cold.

    Bingo.

    You win the cookie– in fact the whole jar.

    The variable is temperature, of course. Titan and Hyperion are too distant. ‘Zone of life’ stuff. [NASA is currently debating data about Titan possibly having- or not having- an internal heat source anyway which is another planetary variable.]

    Wonder if he realizes the imaging of those distant objects required the various probes to use an image motion technique to literally ‘rock’ the spacecraft so the images don’t ‘smear’ in the low light. But the Titan probe is a data point.

    If you asked him why Mercury, closest to the sun with no atmosphere, is cooler than Venus, further from the Sun and with an atmosphere, it would only confuse him.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  65. @DCSCA:You win the cookie– in fact the whole jar.

    It’s not winnable. If I use my physics Ph.D. math witchcraft that’s just argument from authority; but he’s written himself a license to just make stuff up.

    The only winning move is not to play.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  66. besides hiding the decline, there is the heat island manner where the sesense are placed.

    narciso (d1f714)

  67. @65–LOL B-b-b-but, it’s “Princeton!” 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  68. @narcisco: there is the heat island manner where the sesense are placed.

    Everybody forgot BEST. BEST is the independent temperature record that was going to blow the whole hoax open, until it agreed with GISS and all the others, and then the skeptics all forgot about it.

    Linked to it here so many times before, bored now. DCSCA is newer and maybe he’ll take it up with you.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  69. He gets his fake news through Michael Mann’s scamarama and enablers with nasa’s James Hansen and noaa’s lubcenco

    narciso (d1f714)

  70. papertiger (c8116c) — 12/5/2016 @ 1:11 pm

    Imagine you are a doctor in the late 1780-1850’s and you had just killed the father of our country?

    1850? That was when Zachary Taylor was killed by cholera, quite possibly deliberately infected by a few southerners who had closely followed medical developments in England. Not arsenic – that must have been a red herring. I’d like to know more where that arsenic theory came from. There is a reason to suspect Preident Zachary Taylor was killed . Taylor would have vetoed the Compromise of 1850 but Millard Fillmore signed it -.

    But 1850? What about 1881? An incompetent doctor -really a quack – killed President Garfield in 1881.

    He was known to be no good and was kept away from President Lincoln after he was shot, but not President Garfield.

    http://nypost.com/2016/09/22/the-inept-doctor-who-killed-president-garfield/

    In his new book, “Murdering The President: Alexander Graham Bell and The Race To Save James Garfield” (Potomac Books), journalist Fred Rosen makes the case that it was neither the bullet nor primitive medical practices of the time that killed Garfield, but the conscious, intentional negligence of one man — Dr. Bliss — who valued his own reputation and status over human life.

    D.W. Bliss was a Union surgeon in the Civil War. After the Battle of Bull Run saw 2,000 Union soldiers, including his infantry, killed or wounded, it was alleged that he turned coward and ran, leaving wounded soldiers to die. After, rather than feeling guilt, he wrote to a relative, “A great battle fought. I am safe.”

    …In April 1863, Bliss was arrested for taking a $500 bribe to use a certain inventor’s stove in the hospital. He was thrown in prison, but he had friends in high places. Sen. John Hale — whose daughter, Lucy, was engaged to actor John Wilkes Booth — agreed to represent him, and got the charges dropped.

    When Booth shot Lincoln at Ford’s Theater in April 1865, an Armory surgeon named Charles Leale took charge, attempting to save the president. Recognizing his wounds as lethal, Leale summoned the president’s family and cabinet, as well as his personal doctor, Robert Stone, the surgeon general, Joseph Barnes, and Bliss.

    “Leale assigned Barnes and Stone tasks to assist him in treating the president,” Rosen writes. “Despite the fact that Bliss was his boss, Leale gave him nothing to do. Bliss was forced to watch as history unfolded without him.”

    But Bliss took credit as part of the team that tended to the president after the shooting, and his practice grew along with his unearned prestige….

    ….When Garfield, who had met and befriended Bliss when both were in their 20s, was informed that Bliss would be in charge of his care, he was delighted, unaware of the doctor’s many transgressions.

    Part of what he did in 1881 was he pretended a device invented by Alexander Graham Bell for determining where a bullet was in the body, didn’t work.

    Believing that “electricity and magnetism” might help, he invented the induction balance.

    When he met with Bliss, their brief conversation left Bliss believing that “the person who wielded the invention was the one who would get credit for locating the bullet.” It also gave him the idea that if Bell could invent something, so could he.

    “The president was having trouble eating,” writes Rosen. ”Bliss would invent another way of him taking food, besides through his mouth.”

    Bell instructed Bliss in advance to “move the president to a bed without metal box springs,” so they could search for the bullet without other metal confusing the signals.

    When Bell arrived, Bliss insisted he be the one to hold the coil. Bell was surprised, but relented. But as Bliss “moved the coil from the wound down the back, beside the spine, and near the liver,” they heard nothing.

    Bell was perplexed. The coil had worked every single time in the tests, yet was now ineffective. Bliss proclaimed the experiment over, and Bell thought he had failed.

    The inventor rechecked the device and made some tweaks. Testing it on soldiers again and finding it operable, he contacted Bliss for a second attempt. Not wanting blame for failing to do everything possible to save the president, Bliss agreed, but this effort failed as well.

    Bell was beside himself, “certain it had to be some outside source at the White House that caused his experiment to go awry.” He returned to the Executive Mansion the next day, pressing the other doctors on whether some metal might have remained near the president, and only then learning that Bliss had ignored his instructions about removing the box spring.

    But Bliss, having given Bell two attempts, saw no need to grant a third. He told the press of Bell’s failure, and newspapers “excoriated Bell as a charlatan. No one knew what Bliss had done to sabotage both of Bell’s attempts to use the induction balance on the president.” Bell’s life-saving induction balance was dead.

    We never got to use that. Eventually X-rays were used.

    Ultrasound didn’t really get used for another 85 years. Metal detectors aren’t used medically at all, I think.

    Sammy Finkelman (f6c6ee)

  71. she’s just too nasty, trying to hijack daddy’s presidency to shore up the last remaining vestiges of her once-healthy store of self-esteem she left behind long ago in the dirty sheets of nobody who ever loved her

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  72. That’s not true at all. In science you have to replace a theory with another that explains the same set of facts better or at least as well, and predicts new facts that can be disproven by observation. A theory cannot be replaced with nothing.

    LIKE HELL.

    Michaelson and Morely flatly disproved the Luminiferous Ether Theory of how light behaves. They PROVED that, regardless of the motion of the observer, light travels at the same velocity.

    It took a generation before Big Al was able to explain why this was so.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  73. they just kinda disproved the velocity of light thing it was on instapundit

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  74. here it is Mr. M i maybe overstated the disproving part

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  75. I have no idea to what level higher CO2 levels affect world temperature, and how much temperatures are dependent on other factors (e.g. solar activity). But I know two things:

    1. Higher CO2 levels will not lower average world temperatures.
    2. Raising CO2 levels to geologically record levels is probably unwise.

    There is the counter argument that we are entering a solar minimum and the only thing keeping temperatures up is CO2 emissions. This may even be correct. But the solar minimum will end, and at that point we may have a huge problem.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  76. Is that the way it works, Gabe?

    Here’s my competing theory. Atmosphere is a result of the ambient temperature, not the cause.

    How to prove it? Let’s go to something like Earth temperature.

    Venus has different temperature profiles for various depths in it’s atmosphere. At 1 bar (Earth pressure) Venus’ temperature after factoring out it’s closer position to the Sun is 20 degrees C. hotter than Earth. (Going by this guy’s numbers which seem competent enough to me. Now hot is Venus?. by Roger Bourke White Jr.
    Roger summarizes ~~~~~

    Earth’s surface is at 288K and Venus’s surface is at 755K. To get Venus’s temperature down to Earth’s temperature take out:

    • 386 degrees for adiabatic expansion from 93 atmospheres to 1 atmosphere (the cooling that happens as the pressure of a gas drops)

    • 52 degrees for Venus’s extra solar radiation

    • 20 degrees for Greenhouse effect, and all other plus and minus effects (such as thick cloud cover)

    It turns out that most of Venus’s “extra” surface heat is due to the adiabatic compression caused by the high pressure, the next most is caused by extra solar radiation, and greenhouse effect is a distant third.

    )

    I have a quibble with his calculations. Where he ascribes a difference due to a greenhouse effect of a 95% CO2 atmosphere on Venus, I notice he doesn’t factor in Venus’ abnormally slow rotation rate. On Venus a day lasts 243 Earth days—the slowest rotation of any planet. The solar day is 114 Earth days.

    How do you factor that out? It’s a problem. I don’t know the exact answer, but we can use Earth conditions to get a feel of the answer. For instance Guayaquil, Equador, a sea side city near the equator compared to Vancouver, Canada, a sea side city about half way to the pole.

    The average temperature of Vancouver is about 20 degrees C colder that Guayaquil.

    Earth at 5%, compared to Venus’ at 95% “greenhouse gas” has practically no room for a global warming effect in the temperature profile.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  77. happyfeet,

    The problem with the early universe is “what is time?” and “what is distance?” make it hard to say “what is the speed of light?” even if you are in agreement with “What was ‘light’ in the early universe?”

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  78. albedo is an exponentially larger determinant of planet temperature than CO2 levels

    (ivanka it’s like how the shinier poles at your club where you dance reflect more light)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  79. Mr. M I just try to follow along as best I can with that physics stuff

    I’m hoping they make a prequel soon so I can get caught up on the backstory

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  80. Knock it off with the sibling rivalry, happyfeet. Trump is not really your daddy and, besides, he won’t love you anymore if you keep talking about Ivanka like this.

    nk (dbc370)

  81. ouch!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  82. Then there was Lord Raleigh and his black-body catastrophe which disproved just about all of what classical physics said about how objects radiate. It again took quite a few years before anyone had a clue. And even Plank’s explanation was unconvincing.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  83. seriously though this isn’t healthy, this grandiose role ivanka slanka’s assuming for herself

    it’s tawdry and sick

    babycakes you’re a lot of things but first lady is not one of them god help you

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  84. The galactic rotation problem was open for a number of years. But now we have it solved with dark matter (that no one can find).

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  85. Well c isn’t always a constant in certain environments, I’m given to understand.

    narciso (d1f714)

  86. BTW, I annoy people by calling “Dark Matter” “Nonluminiferous Ether”

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  87. They just made up that dark matter, along with string theory I think

    narciso (d1f714)

  88. This is the same fundamental problem you have supposition of conditions which cannot be reoplicated.

    narciso (d1f714)

  89. Rip, Leonard sand.y

    narciso (d1f714)

  90. 1850 ish? Yeah Sammy, I’m not sure of where the cut off date is for Doctors as a species collectively saying, “You know this bleeding out patients thing we’ve been doing – I’m not sure it’s helping.

    1850 was a guestimate.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  91. Sean said this above but I think some people missed it. Ivanka was just the greeter. Gore’s meeting was actually with Trump:

    As Donald Trump continues to indicate that he might be willing to change his position on climate change, which he has long called a “hoax,” the president-elect met Monday with former vice president Al Gore, a prominent activist in the fight against global warming.

    Gore was in New York for the Climate Reality Project’s 24-hour live broadcast, “24 Hours of Reality,” and was invited to Trump Tower to discuss the topic by Trump’s oldest daughter, Ivanka, who is not registered with a political party and has pushed her father to adopt some positions usually promoted by Democrats.

    “I had a lengthy and very productive session with the president-elect. It was a sincere search for areas of common ground,” Gore told reporters after spending about 90 minutes at Trump Tower in Manhattan during the lunch hour Monday. “I had a meeting beforehand with Ivanka Trump. The bulk of the time was with the president-elect, Donald Trump. I found it an extremely interesting conversation, and to be continued, and I’m just going to leave it at that.”

    DRJ (15874d)

  92. One time, my daughter wondered that Christian Science was a thing, and I explained that when it was founded your chances of recovery were usually better if you did not go to a doctor.

    It hasn’t changed all that much. A family friend recently died from an ingrown toenail. She got C. difficile from the antibiotic the doctor prescribed.

    nk (dbc370)

  93. How sad. I’m sorry.

    DRJ (15874d)

  94. I explained that when it was founded your chances of recovery were usually better if you did not go to a doctor.

    Homeopathy was founded on the same principle: something that did nothing whatsoever was a better remedy than what the doctor offered.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  95. @ DRJ # 91

    I live in hope that’s just Al Bore’s hubris coupled to the Wapo’s ongoing mission to damage the brand.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  96. Thank you, DRJ.

    nk (dbc370)

  97. Something else about Gabriel’s position that global warming only works at Earth’s temperature.

    Methane on Titan works in every other particular just like water vapor. It forms clouds and storm fronts, rains out into rivers, lakes and seas, snows out in the polar regions.

    I don’t see why we need to invent a whole new physics for Titan, when methane operates in all the greater aspects of heat transport for Titan that water does for Earth.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  98. I wonder how the meeting with Trump ended up happening. According a number of reports, the meeting was to be between Ivanka and Gore, at her in invitation:

    Before the meeting, Trump spokesman Jason Miller told reporters on a daily briefing call that Gore would meet with Ivanka Trump, the President-elect’s daughter, about climate issues, but he did not know what specifically was on the agenda. He had also said the former Democratic vice president would not meet with Trump himself.

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/05/politics/ivanka-trump-al-gore-climate-change/index.html

    Dana (d17a61)

  99. The world’s on fire, for sure, but that’s due to Islamic jihadists — not carbon emissions.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  100. I wonder how the meeting with Trump ended up happening.

    Trump: The bride at every wedding, the baby at every christening, and the corpse at every funeral.

    nk (dbc370)

  101. Dana,

    Maybe Ivanka arranged it since she is very committed to climate change. She describes it as one of her signature issues, and she wants to be a bridge between her father and liberals like Gore.

    DRJ (15874d)

  102. I am sure that I know less thermodynamics and electrodynamics than you, Gabriel Hanna,
    though in my prime I probably knew more organic and biochemistry than you, I imagine.

    I don’t think one needs to have an advanced degree in any of the sciences, however, to realize that if “X” is believed to be true, and evidence proves “X” is not true,
    then “X” is not true, whether or not you can replace it with “Y”.
    Sometimes “we don’t know” is a very intelligent answer.

    I think one could probably have a perfect understanding of thermodynamics in a lab setting,
    and still not know if AGW is true or not. As far as I know we can’t model how much cloud cover there will be and when to reflect or retain energy.

    My understanding of the 25+ year satellite feed shows that there has not been significant warming, certainly not at all like the computerized models predicted.

    In my very simple way, I know that prior to 1980 the available data led people to be concerned about another mini ice age. Somehow another 10 years of data, in the history of the earth, and all of a sudden people were saying the opposite. We have little idea as to what the natural variability is, except that we have good evidence that it has been both warmer and colder since recorded history began.

    And I know there are other people who also know a whole lot more physics than me that don’t ascribe to the human-caused-global-warming-will-destroy-life-as-we-know-it scenario.

    I hear the search for gravitons is back in vogue, (perhaps made of dark mater?). 😉

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  103. A theory cannot be replaced with nothing

    I believe papertiger’s comment was about disproving a theory. You have changed the topic. Nowhere is it required to provide another theory when disproving existing theory. Michelson and Morley disproved the concept of a stationary luminiferous aether, and they speculated about a dragging aether, but their data didn’t support that very well either, which they understood. It took Lorenz, Einstein and a few more bright lights to come up with special relativity. Nevertheless Michelson and Morley are given credit for closing the door to an old theory, and motivating the hunt for a new one.

    BobStewartatHome (822f64)

  104. Hey, Bob,
    I’m on the east coast, and so I beat you to it…

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  105. I hope so, too, papertiger 95.

    DRJ (15874d)

  106. R.I.P. Van Williams, played The Green Hornet on the 1960’s tv show (w/ Bruce Lee as Kato)

    Icy (a26b65)

  107. UPDATE: Looks like Mr. AlGore met with The Donald as well. Thanks to DRJ.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  108. Agreed, Patricia. My hope is that Ivanka listens sweetly and with an open mind, calmly shares her views with him, thanks Algore for coming to the meeting and then kicks him in the balls figuratively, if not literally. I really do not think that merely meeting with the former vice-President of the United States is necessarily an indication of global warming treason on the part of the Trump family at this point.

    Yeah, but the quote in the article says she wants to make climate change one of her signature issues, and DRJ linked another story to that effect, so the meeting itself is not the only evidence.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  109. Except the politico piece is based on anonymous sources, anything from her convention speech?

    narciso (d1f714)

  110. It is based on anonymous sources. But it’s dated 4 days ago. If the anonymous source was totally wrong about Ivanka wanting to make climate change one of her signature issues, then how about that crazy coincidence that she met with Al Gore today?

    Did the anonymous source have a crystal ball?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  111. They made some guesses, but that’s not really journalism, her big thing was child care from the speech she did give

    narciso (d1f714)

  112. Trump talked to Mayor Rahm Emanuel on the phone today, too. Talking to people is sooo weird. Why it’s almost unheard of. And it’s so much fun to speculate about. Hey, maybe he’s going to make Rahm Secretary of State or something. Or maybe he was asking Rahm how much money he’d need to keep Chicago a sanctuary city. Or maybe they just had, you know, a chat.

    Per NBC Chicago: President-elect Donald Trump called Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel to discuss the ongoing presidential transition process, Politico reported Monday.
    According to the report, Trump asked Emanuel about what lessons he learned working on past transition teams. Emanuel served as a senior advisor to former President Bill Clinton and later as President Barack Obama’s chief of staff. According to the source, the conversation was “cordial” and the two leaders plan to continue talking in the future

    …the two reportedly discussed sanctuary cities like Chicago, which Trump has condemned.

    elissa (73380f)

  113. BobStewartatHome (822f64) — 12/5/2016 @ 7:04 pm

    Yeah. #s 72, 82 & 84

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  114. So you did Doc! I’m working off a DSL connection, not my usual cable, so perhaps that accounts for my tardiness.

    But the real reason I dropped a minute on you is that I started reading the history from the time, and got distracted.

    It is so difficult to take all this concern over CO2 seriously when we have another green house gas that is present in vastly greater quantities. One of it’s green house mechanisms is exactly the same a CO2, so I’m sure Gabriel knows about it, but it has several other ways of influencing the temperature of the earth. Heck, I can see the stuff rising off the water into the air every winter morning as the cold air drains down from the hill in the stream beds into the cove and over the (relatively) warm sea water. It is so ubiquitous it forms white mists at all sorts of elevations, all the way up to 40,000 feet, in addition to the streamers we can see as the lighter, moist air rises into the cool morning air and forms an aerosol of condensation. One could say the sky is either blue or white depending upon the stuff. Why, this stuff is so plentiful that it can both heat and cool the earth, and it’s not clear which predominates. In fact, all the silly computer models work their magic by tweaking a parameter that lets a tiny bit of CO2 control the fate of this stuff in the atmosphere. And this parameter represents no known physical process that could be estimated by independent means. This parameter is a classic kludge.

    BobStewartatHome (822f64)

  115. Nowhere is it required to provide another theory when disproving existing theory.

    Also, it is not necessary to come up with the real killer when defending a client for murder. Mason was just a show-off.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  116. Yes but Hamilton Berger made it so easy.

    narciso (d1f714)

  117. Just the same, bs@h, it probably isn’t a very smart thing to see just how much CO2 we can pump into the sky before it breaks.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  118. Kevin @113, 72, 82, &84: Oops! I did a ctrl-F for “Michelson”, and not finding one (you spelled it Michaelson,) I thought I was ok. My apologies. And I like your other examples.

    BobStewartatHome (822f64)

  119. Well there are conseqences to that belief.

    narciso (d1f714)

  120. Kevin M,

    Plant a tree.

    NJRob (ba17c0)

  121. Patrick, what we were saying about Ivanka is “so what” if she has a portfolio. The speculation being that it’s just for show.

    Patricia (03e7c3)

  122. Kevin, I agree that we shouldn’t waste petroleum or needlessly burn debris. We compost all of our organic waste, either on site, or we take it to the transfer station’s clean green bin. And we recycle our paper, plastics and metals. But I’m not convinced by current studies of the significance of our use of petroleum as it affects CO2 concentrations that this will have anything to do with future CO2 levels.

    The fate of CO2 is complicated. Plants love the stuff. They actually grow by converting it into cellulose and other things. And in the process, they excrete other things like oxygen and water. Image that! And these plants aren’t just on land, they can be found in the oceans. And then there is the release of CO2 from volcanic action, basically the heating of mineralized carbonates. And then there is the release of CO2 from oceanic upwelling. These are natural sources of CO2, as opposed to sinks. The errors of our estimates of the mass fluxes of all these source and sink processes are of the same order of magnitude as the relatively well known production of CO2 through the burning of petroleum. And the processes themselves, both sources and sinks, are estimated to be about two orders of magnitude greater than petroleum’s contribution.

    The assumption of the mass balance studies I have seen is that the sources and sinks of CO2 in the “natural” environment were in perfect equilibrium prior to the industrial age. This is crazy. All of the geological evidence indicates that there have been very large swings in CO2, which suggests that the dynamics are critical. There must be a strong response of the biosphere to increased CO2, and this must result in an increase in formation of long lasting deposits of carbon in the form of wood and sea organisms that will form sediments. Never mind, this complicated dynamical system is analyzed as though it is in steady state. Perhaps because the level of detail required to properly model this is staggering. Fir trees accumulated on forest floors for eons until a fungus came along to eat the dead wood. Our deposits of coal attest to the quantity of wood that accumulated prior to the advent of the fungus. These are just two processes that require modeling, and the model would have to include temperature, light, soil conditions, to name just some obvious things. And there are thousands of such processes.

    So I don’t trust the current models, and I don’t believe our knowledge of the earth’s climate history is well enough known to make predictions a decade hence, let a alone a century. We only have forty years of comprehensive satellite measurements and complimentary studies of other physical processes. These come together to create “climate” in ways that are poorly understood. It is an act of extreme hubris to think we know how this works so well that we can intervene in something as important as providing power and modern technology throughout the world.

    BobStewartatHome (822f64)

  123. I love carbon dioxide in the air it’s so good

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  124. @Kevin M: In every example you used, the existing theory continued to be used until something better had been developed.

    Newtonian mechanics continues to be used even after something better has been developed.

    An existing theory is already good at explaining a wide variety of phenomena or it would not be the existing theory.

    At this point, a large number of commmenters who are not scientists and do no scientific work will now tell me how science is really supposed to work, but they don’t know what they are talking about.

    Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a)

  125. @Bob Stewart:Michelson and Morley disproved the concept of a stationary luminiferous aether, and they speculated about a dragging aether, but their data didn’t support that very well either, which they understood.

    There’s about twenty years between Michelson-Morley and Einstein. In that time, nobody abandoned luminiferous ether or the Maxwel equations. What they did was continued to work the old theory (which actually is not any different) in the places where it made sense, while trying to understand the parts that didn’t. This is where the Lorentz contraction came from, but it was completely ad-hoc so until Einstein it was not widely accepted: and the Lorentz contraction basically just declares the Michelson-Morley experiment to come out the way it does, it doesn’t explain anything.

    What did NOT happen: everyone said, oh one experiment doesn’t work the way we think, Maxwell’s all wrong, back to zero.

    And as it turned out there is not a thing wrong with the Maxwell equations.

    The same thing is true for every other example Kevin M mentioned, and you learn that by reading what was written at the time by people who were working in the field.

    Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a)

  126. But with increasingly sophisticated instrumentation applied to the science and study, the data clearly shows climate change is real on a planetary scale.

    – DCSCA @ 51

    You know those increasingly sophisticated instruments rather than being applied are ignored in favor of the crappy old gear when the sophisticated outgput doesn’t comport with the AGW mission statement.

    The data collected by 4000 robot temperature sounding buoys of Argo [wikipedia.org/wiki/Argo_(oceanography)] had it’s original result (showing the oceans cooling slightly) tortured into compliance by adjusting it to match sea going vessel’s water bucket thermometer method.

    \ for instance.

    Satellite remote sensing of the entire atmosphere (with a small drop out over the north and south poles) is ignored by media and conniving politicians in favor of NASAGISS’ rag tag collection of temperature boxes read haphazardly by volunteers and x hippys because the warmers get to pencil whip the product into shape

    \ for another.

    On that other point, Mercury being “cooler” than Venus, You forgot to factor out the 92 bars air pressure and normalize their orbits.
    Apples and oranges mate.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  127. 112… geeze, elissa, it seems like some folks have too much time on their hands, not enough Christmas shopping to do?

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  128. You criticize everyone who disagrees with you and now you want us to leave, Haiku?

    What happened to the America I grew up in that welcomed debate and different views? It’s obviously very different where elissa and Haiku grew up.

    DRJ (15874d)

  129. 21. DRJ (15874d) — 12/5/2016 @ 10:00 am

    When Republicans tell me Trump is the new FDR, that worries me.

    They say he’s running his administration like FDR did, too.

    But did FDR use the Socratic method on people?

    Sammy Finkelman (96f386)

  130. Grimmity grim grim, DRJ. How did you arrive at that straw man?

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  131. You talk about debating the disagreement while you dismiss people who don’t meet your “true conservative” criteria?

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  132. Again, we’ll know within 6 months time whether Trump is up to job. Knowing what the MSM is all about, what sense does it make to look for every little thing that is attributed to anonymous sources?

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  133. Some of us find no small comfort in the fact that Hillary Clinton will never be the President of the United States of America.

    And that’s a very good thing!

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  134. But YMMV.

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  135. elissa (73380f) — 12/5/2016 @ 8:21 pm

    Hey, maybe he’s going to make Rahm Secretary of State or something.

    he is considering giving two Democratic Senators (from Republican leaning states) Cabinet members: Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota for something unspecified and Joe Manchin of West Virginia either for Secretary of Energy or Secretary of State. West Virginia has a Democratic Governor but generally votes heavily Republican for Congress and president.

    Sammy Finkelman (96f386)

  136. Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a) — 12/6/2016 @ 3:09 am

    What did NOT happen: everyone said, oh one experiment doesn’t work the way we think, Maxwell’s all wrong, back to zero.

    I understand that quantum mechanics and general relativity contradict each other.

    Sammy Finkelman (96f386)

  137. Hair on fire, is the fashion nowadays, ebell seems a reasonable to scare away skydragons

    narciso (d1f714)

  138. You talk about debating the disagreement while you dismiss people who don’t meet your “true conservative” criteria?

    Colonel Haiku (64320c) — 12/6/2016 @ 8:47 am

    I’m here talking, which is the opposite of dismissal. elissa is the one who will never answer my questions, even though I patiently answer hers. And you and Cruz Supporter are the ones who think the answer to every concern is LOL, an insult, or saying Trump is better than Hillary. That isn’t debate.

    DRJ (15874d)

  139. I came back even though I felt you threatened me because I enjoy discussions here, although not with you. I was a fool to go any place where you are.

    DRJ (15874d)

  140. it’s christmastime there’s no need to be afraid at christmastime we let in light and we banish shade

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  141. I want people to discuss Trump but that’s not what I hear in response. I hear “Be quiet until the Inauguration” or “Go shopping” instead of complaining. If you ever wondered why people stay silent when authoritarian governments come to power, this is why. Tell people to shut up enough and they will.

    DRJ (15874d)

  142. I never threatened you. I would never threaten you. I want to make that perfectly clear. That was a several decades old comic that humorously – for some- characterized the “lack of patience” exhibited by people who find displaying patience a challenge.

    My sincere and humble apology if that frightened you.

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  143. It was never directed at you, DRJ.

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  144. You could have said that the other day but you didn’t then and I don’t believe you now.

    DRJ (15874d)

  145. I found it hard to believe you would perceive it in that manner. In retrospect, I should’ve made that clear and apologized then.

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  146. I’m still here. Come scare me on the thoroughfare.

    Bring your PhD and credentials, and belief in Bigfoot.

    Bring Princeton. More the merrier.

    http://giphy.com/gifs/films-monty-python-mp-ieNQQpuMHsWGs

    papertiger (c8116c)

  147. http://giphy.com/gifs/films-monty-python-mp-ieNQQpuMHsWGs

    presented with 99 and 44/100ths % certainty it will not add one jot of global warming to the planet!

    http://giphy.com/gifs/monty-python-john-cleese-and-the-holy-grail-7cAGURf0zN2Bq

    papertiger (c8116c)

  148. DRJ,

    I am always glad to see your appearance.
    And you and our host and others are free to talk about Trump as much as you want, afaiac,

    I’ll just say that I am tired of talking about Trump because I already expect him to be a problem if not outright disaster,
    and I can’t begin to daily criticize him,
    or multiple times a day criticize him,
    when he hasn’t even taken office yet.
    Maybe once a week a post on the most problematic events of the week would be to my liking, fwiw.

    Besides, one often doesn’t know what is for real or a head fake, and I would rather save my energy for the real deals,
    But that is just me, fwiw.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  149. So the kingdom is supporting ghani’s govt but Saudi zakat is supporting the taliban

    narciso (d1f714)

  150. This is from Scott Adams, posted at WUWT blog;

    There is a severe social or economic penalty for having the “wrong” opinion in the field. As I already said, I agree with the consensus of climate scientists because saying otherwise in public would be social and career suicide for me even as a cartoonist. Imagine how much worse the pressure would be if science was my career.

    It’s a truism. I have little to lose because of my station in life. A PhD holder who makes a living in the sciences has everything to lose. Global warming pieties are only the beginning of the picnic basket of crap sandwiches such a person is forced to swallow.

    I am sympathetic to your predicament, but it’s worth pointing out that if there was ever a time to rise up against your oppressor with Trump coming into office now is the time, the climate fraud is the place.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  151. algore molested a massage therapist that he invited to his hotel room. He is a pervert. why do we need to hear from him at all.

    SD Harms (c7dded)

  152. @Sammy Finkelman:I understand that quantum mechanics and general relativity contradict each other.

    I’ve seen this in science journalism but I don’t know what it’s based on. Relativistic quantum mechanics has been around for almost one hundred years, at least since 1925.

    The only interpretation of it that makes sense to me is that one does not “grow out” of the other, so to speak. You can tweak relativity to get Newtonian mechanics but you can’t tweak relativity even more and get quantum mechanics. But I can’t see why it would be a contradiction to have a quantum mechanics fully consistent relativity; quantum mechanics is more like a class of theories that can accommodate a wide variety of physical laws, than it is a single theory.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  153. @Sammy Finkelman:I understand that quantum mechanics and general relativity contradict each other.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1) — 12/7/2016 @ 5:31 am

    I’ve seen this in science journalism but I don’t know what it’s based on.

    I’m not sure, and maybe I can find something, but I would think it is based on the fact that in relativity, time and space is infinitely divisible, but in quantum mechanics there are fixed quantities for everything. Either there are “atoms” of time and space or there are not. Well, maybe they get around it with the uncertainty principle.

    It might be that in some extreme situations you get different results when you calculate what would happen.

    This seems to be borne out here:

    http://www.askamathematician.com/2009/12/q-howwhy-are-quantum-mechanics-and-relativity-incompatible/

    Quantum Mechanics (QM) and relativity are both 100% accurate, so far as we have been able to measure (and our measurements are really, really good). The incompatibility shows up when both QM effects and relativistic effects are large enough to be detected and then disagree. This condition is strictly theoretical today, [2009] but in the next few years our observations of Sagittarius A*, and at CERN should bring the problems between QM and relativity into sharp focus…

    General relativity needs space to be “smooth”, or at the very least continuous. So if you have two points side by side, then no matter how close you bring them together you can still tell which one is on the right or left. Quantum mechanically you have to deal with position uncertainty. At very small scales you can’t tell which is right or left. In addition (as the name implies) QM requires everything to be “quantized”, or show up in discrete pieces. You see this clearly with atoms, photons, and even phonons (which is quantized sound! How awesome is that!?). Less clear is the quantization of space, which would require space to be “chopped up”. This choppiness will never be directly measured. The predicted “chunky scale” should be no large than 10-35 m. For comparison, a hydrogen atom is about a million, million, million, million times larger (10-24).

    …According to general relativity when stuff falls into a blackhole everything about it’s existence (with the exception of mass, charge, and momentum) is completely erased….However, if all the information about something is destroyed, then you lose time-reversibility….QM requires that time-reversibility (or “unitarity”, to a professional) holds. So QM requires that blackholes cannot destroy information. One way around this is amazingly complicated entanglement between all of the in-falling matter, and all of the Hawking Radiation that comes out later. Again, we’ll never be able to measure this. To get results we would have to exactly measure at least half of all of the photons generated by Hawking radiation over the essentially infinite life time of the blackhole (every blackhole that exists today will be around long, long after the heat death of the universe).

    Sammy Finkelman (96f386)

  154. The contradiction in a nutshell:

    General relativity needs space to be “smooth”, or at the very least continuous. Quantum Mechanics requires everything to be “quantized”, or show up in discrete pieces.

    I think because of superposition and waves, you may be able to get things as smooth as you want. Or maybe not.

    Sammy Finkelman (96f386)

  155. Teh Queen of Unclean takes to her throne!

    http://heatst.com/culture-wars/lena-dunham-hits-rock-bottom-with-vile-toilet-selfie/

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  156. Meanwhile we are making progress on an em drive.

    narciso (d1f714)

  157. @Sammy Finkelman: Quantum mechanics does not require “everything” to be quantized, not even space. I understand that the popular presentations give you that idea, but when you actually do calculations you don’t quantize space. Quantized quantities can still be continuous anyway. There’s plenty of continuous solutions.

    What you’re citing is a popular presentation which is enormously over-simplified.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  158. @narcisco:Meanwhile we are making progress on an em drive.

    I have a lot of doubts about what I’ve seen in the media on that. The reason is that once EM fields are involved “momentum” no longer means what people usually mean and keeping track of it correctly is extremely complicated.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  159. Yes, I wasn’t so sure wuantum mechanics quantitizes space, but I don’t know whether that’s logical.

    Sammy Finkelman (96f386)

  160. Where the F did Maxwell come into this? His equations remain the single most stunning achievement of a human mind two centuries later. They have never failed to predict EM behavior at any point. Now, maybe there were folks trying to save “aether” by dissing Maxwell in some way, but you’re going to have to explain that.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  161. I understand that quantum mechanics and general relativity contradict each other.

    No, they just don’t mix well and there is no good way to test the two in the same experiment.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  162. @Kevin M:ow, maybe there were folks trying to save “aether” by dissing Maxwell in some way, but you’re going to have to explain that.

    Aether came about because at that time physicists, including Maxwell, thought of light waves as mechanical.

    Maxwell’s equations predict the speed of light, but with reference to what? Maxwell assumed “with reference to the aether”.

    But aether had to have very strange properties: thousands of times stiffer than steel, yet we move through it without noticing. There were a lot of puzzles about ether.

    The Michelson-Morley experiments were not considered to disprove the idea of ether, but the constraints and oddities were piling up. It was not clear you could keep the Maxwell equations and throw out ether.

    Einstein’s special relativity essentially takes Maxwell’s equations at face value: the speed of light is always the same regardless of the motion of the observer. That fixed everything right up.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  163. @Kevin M:No, they just don’t mix well and there is no good way to test the two in the same experiment.

    That’s not true. Measuring the hydrogen spectrum tests the two together. Agreement with theory is in parts per billion.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  164. Maxwell’s theory of the “Silver Hammer Effect” has proved to be hard to disprove.

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  165. @Kevin M: You might (or might not) realize that what we today call “Maxwell’s equations” are not actually what he wrote up. He included a lot of things like Ohm’s law which are not actually fundamental, but are properties of some classes of material.

    What we today call “Maxwell’s equation” are the product of many hands, mostly involved in winnowing and restating them, and we know far more about how they work than Maxwell did.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  166. They argue the impossibility of Maxweell’s demon. But isn’t Maxwell’s demon the reason we cool off everytime we sweat?

    Sammy Finkelman (96f386)

  167. @SAmmy: But isn’t Maxwell’s demon the reason we cool off everytime we sweat?

    No. Maxwell’s demon would make you heat up as you sweat.

    Maxwell’s demon is more complicated than you think it is.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  168. Maxwell’s demon was invented to illustrate the difference between statistical models and kinetic models. Another analogy Maxwell used was, throw a cup of water into the ocean, then scoop up a cup of water. You will not get back exactly the same water, but of course it is technically possible that you could if Maxwell’s demon would pick each molecule out of the ocean for you one by one and put them in your cup (he’s tiny, and quick).

    It turns out that Maxwell didn’t understand thermodynamics as well as people do now, and so Maxwell’s demon to some extent represents a misunderstanding, and it’s resulted in enormous clarification of what we mean when we talk about thermal systems.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  169. Colonel Haiku (64320c) — 12/7/2016 @ 8:09 am

    I saw what you did there colonel. -groan- (heh!)

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  170. Teh Beatles forever, felipe!

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  171. I think we are starting to see a common theme here: a lot of us like to read about science, and we’re coming away with misunderstandings and misconceptions based on what we’ve read, which is of course not our fault. Very few of us have the time or the inclination to spend many years studying something that isn’t our job.

    And the people we were reading were doing their best to represent it fairly in an accessible way. They didn’t have an ax to grind about it. And yet we came away with misunderstandings about what the real situation is. It just might be the case that people who work on it for a living probably know a lot more about it than we do.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  172. ANOTHER step in the right direction!

    “A BIG CHANGE FROM JEH JOHNSON: Retired Marine Gen. John F. Kelly picked to head Department of Homeland Security. “In the end, people familiar with the transition said, the choice came down to Kelly and Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. McCaul was considered an early favorite, but his chances were hurt by opposition from some conservatives who found him insufficiently tough on border security, the people said.”

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/251196/

    Colonel Haiku (64320c)

  173. Statement from the hyperliberal econazi in charge at misleadingly named California league of conservation voters;

    “The naming of a climate denier like Scott Pruitt to head the EPA is nothing less than an effort to undermine the agency’s core mission to safeguard our environment. On the campaign trail President-elect Trump vowed to break America’s commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement, to open our public lands to drilling, and to dismantle the EPA. By nominating Scott Pruitt he’s making it clear he intends to follow through on those promises.

    So the cookie Al Gore was serving to the public is full of raisins.

    Trump’s cookie has the chocolate chips.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  174. his poor sad stripper daughter’s just gonna have to recycle even harder now, and xeriscape, and localvore, and bike to work and what have you

    together we can still save the erf!

    i truly believe this

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  175. Maxwell is my hero. He and Tyndall (especially Tyndall) explain why rain condenses out of water vapor in the sky, which is also the answer to why the global warming religion is full of crap at the Earth’s temperature range.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  176. BTW Happy when you said up above (way up there a couple days worth ago) that albedo determines a planet or moons average temperature, (pretty sure that’s what you meant)

    When did you get so smart?

    papertiger (c8116c)

  177. that’s totally just observable you don’t have to be smart even i can see it

    when people really want to make an impact and save real monies on cooling what do they do?

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  178. i remember in

    where was i

    the salton sea

    which is a kinda special place in a short bus way

    you would see entire mobile homes (manufactured homes)

    parked underneath a kind of really tall white steel carport sort of thing

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  179. Try explaining it to Gabriel.

    I’m afraid his paycheck depends on not understanding.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  180. that heat them salton sea people is keeping off their trailers

    ever wonder where it goes?

    i sure have

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  181. That was a rhetorical tweak of Gabriel’s nose.

    You don’t really have to explain it.

    I got your nose Gabe.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  182. ever wonder where it goes?

    It’s like when the cat curls up on the tray underneath the barbeque when I’m flipping burgers.

    Why isn’t he on fire?

    Some questions are better left as a mystery

    papertiger (c8116c)

  183. @papertiger: Every time you say something ignorant, and I explain the error, you counter with two more, even more ignorant.

    First you show you don’t know about radiant heat or blackbody radiation. Then, when I show you a radiant heater on demo at Costco right now, you claim it “should be sitting in a puddle of plastic goo”.

    You then doubled down and said “WHAT ABOUT BLACK HOLES HUR DUR”. Black holes emit blackbody radiation. So know you’ve shown you don’t know how black holes work.

    I mean it just never ends. It’s a waste of time. It’s like if you said hot air balloons disprove gravity.

    And since most of your commments in this thread are just trolling, why the hell would I bother?

    Gabriel Hanna (9b1f4a)

  184. Pretty sure you waved your magic PhD talisman in lieu of argument the first time.

    And now you’re just off point.

    Who’s trolling who?

    papertiger (c8116c)

  185. happyfeet. Don’t discount the genius of personal observation.

    Instapundit just had a link to a guy named Matt Ridley.
    Ridley argues that the tiny amount of global warming in the satellite record is an artifact of the co2 enhancement of vegetation around the world. Greener being a darker albedo than bare earth.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  186. Thesis: indulging the insults and obfuscation of people in economic thrall to the agw group think enforcement, which makes them toe the line or else, is like giving money to panhandlers.

    Discuss.

    Gabriel your tell is digging up and mischaracterizing an argument from 14 months ago.
    People don’t let stupidities from trolls stick in their craw that long.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  187. @papertiger:It’s like when the cat curls up on the tray underneath the barbeque when I’m flipping burgers.

    Why isn’t he on fire?

    This is exactly what I am talking about. You are saying that a pound of feathers is lighter than a pound of lead, and if I doubt that I should drop them on my foot until I’m satisfied of the difference, and if I try to explain to you what is wrong with what you said, you’ll counter with gravity can’t be right because of hot air balloons.

    And you don’t know enough about heat and temperature to understand the confusion you are making. “Heat” and “temperature” are not the same thing any more than weight and density are.

    It’s an endless Gish gallop. It’s a waste of time.

    Anyone on this thread or any other asking me a question honestly expressing a desire to understand gets a considered answer. But all you do is contradict with increasingly ill-informed statements, which must then be responded to in turn.

    It’s boring and I’m tired of it.

    If you want to know why your cat does not catch fire under the barbecue grill I will be delighted to explain it. But you don’t want to know, you want to do argument clinic, and I have other things I’d rather do.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1620 secs.