They don't mention the drop in oxygen didn't cause the water at 1000 meters to be as low as the naturally occurring drop in oxygen as you come up from 1000 meters to the surface.
The fun part will be tracking these oil plumes / clouds. They won't be able to in two months time. They'll claim they can, naturally. But the thing about a true cloud is that it has adiabatic properties that formed it. Mixing will take care of this in short order.
If you want a solar story that adds a bit more mystery to the rehash of the current solar tale in the linked article, google up Livingston and Penn about the observations that the sunspot frequency is diminishing. In the past, the solar flux would match up to the sunspot number closely. Beginning some twenty some odd years ago, this century long curve matching parted ways. To sum up the mystery, in ten years time, solar cycles will continue. It's just there won't be any more sunspots. (a little hyperbole, but not as much as you think)
When did Seldon predict Iran gets the bomb? I don't think I want to know how high the power levels end up going...
All one has to do is to retrieve EVERY SINGLE TEMPERATURE RECORD AVAILABLE and then figure out which ones were selected.
There's little prejudice in that, is there?
What's being alleged is a selection based on a criteria that can't be easily explained away.
I would have thought this would be modded up a bit, seeing as this was the code that made what they were doing fraudulent.
Oh, wait. This is Slashdot. What was I thinking?
Forgetting for the moment that the recently hacked and released emails from one section of the warming folks illustrates the political nature of the "butcher's thumb on the scale"...
I believe the claim of "6deg of warming" is _STILL_ based on a projection of "runaway" conditions unrelated to mankind's emission increases.
I personally haven't gone in and checked these latest claims, but most claims above 3deg warming haven't stood up to serious challenges.
This is why they're seriously considered in the IPCC reports.
I seriously doubt the study linked to at the top of the thread has uncovered any new information or model that wasn't already considered by the IPCC for their AR4.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
[Lyrics are now contradictory]
If you could assure your investors and insurers that you'd never be at risk for severe storm damage, I could see flying a kite at that altitude.
Once. You might keep it up there for three months, maybe six. And then a storm comes along with a change in wind direction that exceeds your tolerances, and you have wounded duck hurtling down to knock some heads. The conditions that would disrupt your kite and potentially bring it down would be the same conditions you would NOT allow an inflated balloon to be in, the only thing that would keep it from reaching terminal velocity.
You might be able to launch a balloon that runs above everything, to say 45,000', but I doubt the amount of lift that would provide -- perhaps someone can run the numbers.
You could call the first one launched "The Sword Of Damocles"!
NIMBY turns into NAMH (Not Above My Head)
OMG! You just totally screwed over the Sooper Sekret security arrangements of the Secret Service! Now everybody knoas!
even a caveman could do it!
As long as we're going to reinvent the wheel again, we might as well try making it round this time. - Mike Dennison