OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth

Terry Pinnell · Jan 31, 2005

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

Now that's a source I'd tend to respect...

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK

Jim Thompson · Jan 31, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:20:20 +0000, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

Now that's a source I'd tend to respect...

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Rich Grise · Jan 31, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:20:20 +0000, Terry Pinnell wrote:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

Now that's a source I'd tend to respect...

Are these the same 90,000 computers that are running the spybots
and stuff? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

Active8 · Jan 31, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:16:35 GMT, Rich Grise wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:20:20 +0000, Terry Pinnell wrote:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

Now that's a source I'd tend to respect...

Are these the same 90,000 computers that are running the spybots
and stuff? ;-)

That's a new one on me. Any links?

I was happy to learn that, like SETI, there's a few cancer research
outfits using distributed PCs of online voluteers to crunch numbers.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

Chris Carlen · Jan 31, 2005

Terry Pinnell wrote:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

Now that's a source I'd tend to respect...

Considering all your PC troubles, I can't imagine why.

--
_______________________________________________________________________
Christopher R. Carlen
Principal Laser/Optical Technologist
Sandia National Laboratories CA USA
crcarle@sandia.gov -- NOTE: Remove "BOGUS" from email address to reply.

John Woodgate · Jan 31, 2005

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jonathan Kirwan
<jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote (in <0n9tv0hup3cbkeo5fgi0dic0plpn4v4kkl@4
ax.com&gt

about 'OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Mon, 31 Jan 2005:

Global warming might be twice as catastrophic as previously thought,
flooding settlements on the British coast and turning the interior into
an unrecognisable tropical landscape,

Unless, of course, the Gulf Stream really does stop and Britain becomes
glaciated.

Maybe, with both effects in operation, we'll stay roughly as we are.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

Winfield Hill · Jan 31, 2005

Jonathan Kirwan wrote...

Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since 1980.

Where can we read more about that, which record, how long?

--
Thanks,
- Win

James Beck · Jan 31, 2005

In article <0n9tv0hup3cbkeo5fgi0dic0plpn4v4kkl@4ax.com>,
jkirwan@easystreet.com says...

David Stainforth of Oxford University, the chief scientist of the
latest study, said processing the results showed the Earth's climate
is far more sensitive to increases in man-made greenhouse gases than
previously realised. The findings indicate a doubling of carbon
dioxide from the pre-industrial level of 280 parts per million would
increase global average temperatures by between 2C and 11C.

But somehow it (the Earth) is less sensitive to naturally occurring
greenhouse gasses?

Jim Thompson · Jan 31, 2005

On 31 Jan 2005 14:57:06 -0800, Winfield Hill
<hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote...

Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since 1980.

Where can we read more about that, which record, how long?

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

James Meyer · Jan 31, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:20:20 +0000, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wroth:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66424,00.html

"Global warming may ramp up average temperatures by 20 degrees
Fahrenheit in less than 50 years, according to the first climate
prediction experiment relying on the distributed computer power of
90,000 personal computers. The startling results were published this
week in the journal Nature."

Now that's a source I'd tend to respect...

Remember GIGO? If you start with a stupid premise, you get a stupid
answer. How in hell are you going to increase the CO2 by a factor of two?
There are mechanisms built into the ecosystem that will try to maintain a
constant CO2 level despite attempts to change it. I'll bet their model
completely ignores that. GIGO.

Jim

Jonathan Kirwan · Feb 1, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:11:26 GMT, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com>
wrote:

But somehow it (the Earth) is less sensitive to naturally occurring
greenhouse gasses?

I hope no one is suggesting that.

Jon

gwhite · Feb 1, 2005

Winfield Hill wrote:

Jonathan Kirwan wrote...

Each of the hottest 15 years on record have been since 1980.

Where can we read more about that, which record, how long?

It is not here:

http://mitosyfraudes.8k.com/INGLES/Warm.html

Jonathan Kirwan · Feb 1, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:48:42 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

Seems to me that 2 and 11 are different numbers.

Yup, they sure are!

Also seems to me that the parameters of complex nonlinear models can
be tweaked for maximum publicity and political effect.

They can be.

Jon

Active8 · Feb 1, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:11:26 GMT, James Beck wrote:

In article <0n9tv0hup3cbkeo5fgi0dic0plpn4v4kkl@4ax.com>,
jkirwan@easystreet.com says...
David Stainforth of Oxford University, the chief scientist of the
latest study, said processing the results showed the Earth's climate
is far more sensitive to increases in man-made greenhouse gases than
previously realised. The findings indicate a doubling of carbon
dioxide from the pre-industrial level of 280 parts per million would
increase global average temperatures by between 2C and 11C.

But somehow it (the Earth) is less sensitive to naturally occurring
greenhouse gasses?

The statement clearly says it's more sensitive than we thought
previously - not that it's more sesitive to man-made gas than
naturally occuring gas.

The natural stuff should be in equilibrium. Whether or not it's been
reponsible for past temp cycles and how much it contributed to the
cycles, I don't know.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

Active8 · Feb 1, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:46:25 GMT, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:27:08 -0500, Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote:

That's a new one on me. Any links?

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=604955

snip

Come on Jonathan. The line you snipped out from above my reply
should have been a dead giveaway that I was asking Rich about the
alleged spybots. I've heard of global warming.

Thanks for theadded info, anyway.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

Jonathan Kirwan · Feb 1, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 22:32:31 -0500, Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote:

Yeah. That's something to keep in mind. And ranges like that with no
further explaination make me wonder, too.

I think the whole article was either poorly written or else the entire exercise
they were reporting on needs a very careful look before thinking much more about
it. There were several "sloppy" quotes in there that worry me a lot and make me
wonder. The article is probably more of interest for the use of computing power
than anything else in particular.

But, someone was wondering if there was an article on the subject and I posted
the one I knew of.

Jon

Jonathan Kirwan · Feb 1, 2005

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 22:49:18 -0500, Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote:

Come on Jonathan. The line you snipped out from above my reply
should have been a dead giveaway that I was asking Rich about the
alleged spybots. I've heard of global warming.

Hehe. Maybe it should have!

Thanks for theadded info, anyway.

No problem. Just glad my mistaken post worked for you.

Jon

Active8 · Feb 1, 2005

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 04:20:43 GMT, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 22:49:18 -0500, Active8 <reply2group@ndbbm.net> wrote:

Come on Jonathan. The line you snipped out from above my reply
should have been a dead giveaway that I was asking Rich about the
alleged spybots. I've heard of global warming.

Hehe. Maybe it should have!

Thanks for theadded info, anyway.

No problem. Just glad my mistaken post worked for you.

Jon

I think Rich was just making a joke, not talking about a specific
exploit. Maybe you've heard of AdAware by Lavasoft... I found
another spyware removal tool that might be good - totally freeware.

Googling "spybot" will return download sites for Spybot Search and
Destroy.
--
Best Regards,
Mike

John Woodgate · Feb 1, 2005

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jonathan Kirwan
<jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote (in <h5rtv0peh8sos8645fuqrs99m7bn97s8nu@4
ax.com&gt

about 'OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth', on Tue, 1 Feb 2005:

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:11:26 GMT, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com
wrote:

But somehow it (the Earth) is less sensitive to naturally occurring
greenhouse gasses?

I hope no one is suggesting that.

Probably marginally true, or completely backwards, for CO2 from fossil

fuel, which contains less C^14O2 than the natural product.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

James Beck · Feb 1, 2005

In article <h5rtv0peh8sos8645fuqrs99m7bn97s8nu@4ax.com>,
jkirwan@easystreet.com says...

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 23:11:26 GMT, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com
wrote:

But somehow it (the Earth) is less sensitive to naturally occurring
greenhouse gasses?

I hope no one is suggesting that.

Jon

Well the article said :
"the results showed the Earth's climate is far more sensitive to
increases in man-made greenhouse gases"

I would have to conclude that it is somehow been shown to be less
sensitive to naturally occurring gasses, or that the author is selecting
words to emphasize a particular point of view.

Jim

OT: Home PCs Predict Hotter Earth

Terry Pinnell

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Rich Grise

Guest

Active8

Guest

Chris Carlen

Guest

John Woodgate

Guest

Winfield Hill

Guest

James Beck

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

James Meyer

Guest

Jonathan Kirwan

Guest

gwhite

Guest

Jonathan Kirwan

Guest

Active8

Guest

Active8

Guest

Jonathan Kirwan

Guest

Jonathan Kirwan

Guest

Active8

Guest

John Woodgate

Guest

James Beck

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor