supercomputer progress...

[server]

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a7f5b2f5-3b81-4298-985c-1bbec41ed982n@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 7:30:55 AM UTC-7,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Climate simulation uses enormous multi-CPU supercomputer rigs.

Not so; it\'s WEATHER mapping and prediction that uses the complex
data sets for a varied bunch of globe locations doing sensing, to
make a 3-d map for the planet\'s atmosphere. Climate is a much
cruder problem, no details required. Much of the greenhouse gas
analysis comes out of models that a PC spreadsheet would handle
easily.

We have real time sat imagery of our weather patterns.

*I* can see what is coming or not. The forecasting tool does not
do that great a job and is it my phone\'s computer\'s forcast or coming
from the site feeding me the weather imagery? Either way it aint that
great and hardly the main utilization factor.

Weather modeling is done on a bigger scale looking at storm systems
crossing the ocean in our direction (US).

Our local stuff used to be predicted by individual opinions of
local meteorologists. Now even they all rely on a nationally
available data set, which is where my app from a Michigan TV station
sources its data. The app works fine here, hundreds of miles away.

My phone is great. I also have an anatomy app on there and I can
look at individual piece of cartilage and it will tell me what its
name is. It looks real cool on my iPad. I have one for the brain as
well.

Movies used to take hours and hours of frame rendering time to
\'render\' a frame of movie video and all the CGI was in its infancy.

Now I have a multi-core Xeon and a Quadro graphics card and can do
3D rendering at 4K resolution.
And they just came out with Unreal Engine 5. It is friggin\'
amazing how far they\'ve come.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZLibi6s_ew>

 

[Martin Brown]

On 04/05/2022 03:35, rbowman wrote:

On 05/03/2022 03:12 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Martin Brown <\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 28/04/2022 18:47, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
On 2022-04-28 18:26, boB wrote:
[...]
I would love to have a super computer to run LTspice.

boB
In fact, what you have on your desk *is* a super computer,
in the 1970\'s meaning of the words. It\'s just that it\'s
bogged down running bloatware.

Indeed. The Cray X-MP in its 4 CPU configuration with a 105MHz clock and
a whopping for the time 128MB of fast core memory with 40GB of disk. The
what is fast core memory?

A very expensive item:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic-core_memory

Fortunately by the X-MP\'s time SRAMs had replaced magnetic core.

But at the time it was still often called core (bulk) memory as opposed
to faster cache memory. ISTR the memory chips were only 4k bits of SRAM.

Keeping the thing compact and cool was a major part of the engineering.

There is a rather nice article about its design online here.

http://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/ccd/supercomputers/p005.htm

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Cydrome Leader]

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On 05/03/2022 03:12 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Martin Brown <\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 28/04/2022 18:47, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
On 2022-04-28 18:26, boB wrote:
[...]
I would love to have a super computer to run LTspice.

boB
In fact, what you have on your desk *is* a super computer,
in the 1970\'s meaning of the words. It\'s just that it\'s
bogged down running bloatware.
Indeed. The Cray X-MP in its 4 CPU configuration with a 105MHz clock and
a whopping for the time 128MB of fast core memory with 40GB of disk. The
what is fast core memory?


A very expensive item:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic-core_memory

Fortunately by the X-MP\'s time SRAMs had replaced magnetic core.

I\'m not aware of any cray systems that used core memory. It just makes no
sense for the speeds they ran at.

 

[rbowman]

On 05/04/2022 12:35 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:

I\'m not aware of any cray systems that used core memory. It just makes no
sense for the speeds they ran at.

I believe the CDC 7600 was the last Cray design to use magnetic core. He
then left CDC and the Cray-1 was SRAM.

The CDC 7600 was no slouch for its time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDC_7600

Control Data was ahead of its time and started the Committee for Social
Responsibility shorty before Cray left (no correlation). Like many of
the early giants time did not treat them well.

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/01/07/archives/how-control-data-turns-a-profit-on-its-good-works-making-it-work.html

https://gallery.lib.umn.edu/items/show/5867

 

[Les Cargill]

Martin Brown wrote:

On 28/04/2022 18:47, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
On 2022-04-28 18:26, boB wrote:
[...]
I would love to have a super computer to run LTspice.

boB

In fact, what you have on your desk *is* a super computer,
in the 1970\'s meaning of the words. It\'s just that it\'s
bogged down running bloatware.

Indeed. The Cray X-MP in its 4 CPU configuration with a 105MHz clock and
a whopping for the time 128MB of fast core memory with 40GB of disk. The
one I used had an amazing for the time 1TB tape cassette backing store.
It did 600 MFLOPs with the right sort of parallel vector code.

That was back in the day when you needed special permission to use more
than 4MB of core on the timesharing IBM 3081 (approx 7 MIPS).

Current Intel 12 gen CPU desktops are ~4GHz, 16GB ram and >1TB of disk.
(and the upper limits are even higher) That combo does ~66,000 MFLOPS.

Spice simulation doesn\'t scale particularly well to large scale
multiprocessor environments to many long range interractions.

If you search for \"circuit sim and CUDA\" it\'s out there. There\'s a
Github of \"CUDA SPICE Circuit Simulator\" .

No clue if it\'s worthwhile.

--
Les Cargill

 

[Martin Brown]

On 17/06/2022 02:23, Les Cargill wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

Spice simulation doesn\'t scale particularly well to large scale
multiprocessor environments too many long range interractions.

If you search for \"circuit sim and CUDA\" it\'s out there. There\'s a
Github of \"CUDA SPICE Circuit Simulator\" .

No clue if it\'s worthwhile.

My instinct is that it will generate a lot more heat to solve the
problem a little bit quicker than a conventional system (unless you are
able to split the problem into a large number of distinct separate
simulations with different starting parameters.

That is what happens on the system I am working on (not Spice). My bit
of it is strictly single threaded but it runs a on every CPU. The next
tier up manages the whole thing to keep them busy doing useful work.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[a a]

On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

Lawrence Berkeley Lab announced the results from a new supercomputer
analysis of climate change. They analyzed five west coast \"extreme
storms\" from 1982 to 2014.

The conclusion from a senior scientist is that \"it rains a lot more
during the worst storms.\"



--

Anybody can count to one.

- Robert Widlar
Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.

Freon is another fake.

Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.

So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.

Removing trees within city limits, you can turn any city in heat island swith rising temperatures.=, since removing trees, grass, you destroy rainwater retension mechanism.

Water absorbs heat from the sun by evaporation.

So if no water in the ground, no water evaporated and heat accumulates, making local temperatures to rise.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 2:47:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:

On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Lawrence Berkeley Lab announced the results from a new supercomputer
analysis of climate change. They analyzed five west coast \"extreme
storms\" from 1982 to 2014.

The conclusion from a senior scientist is that \"it rains a lot more
during the worst storms.\"

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.

What a load of nonsense. Al Gore\'s 1992 book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_in_the_Balance

was a remarkably expert bit of science popularisation. He got the science right, not that the denialist propaganda machine is willing to admit it.
The book did make money, but not all that much. A decade later it did put Al Gore in a position to make money out of climate change, but that didn\'t mean that he wrote it with that in mind.

> Freon is another fake.

In what sense? Chlorofluorocarbons do damage the ozone layer. We know exactly how - and we know that reducing their concentrations in the atmosphere is letting the ozone layer get denser again. The fakery here lies in your lie.

> Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.

And the amount of CO2 and other green-house gases in the atmosphere. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, if they weren\'t there the temperature of the surface of the Earth would be -18C. The difference between ice ages (atmospheric CO2 levels around 180 ppm) and interglacials (atmospheric CO2 levels around 270 ppm) also depends on the more extensive ice cover during interglacials, but the CO2 levels do account for a lot of the difference.

> So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.

Except that you can\'t. Solar activity doesn\'t explain the ice age to interglacial transitions, and only an ignorant idiot could imagine that they did

> Removing trees within city limits, you can turn any city in heat island with rising temperatures, since removing trees, grass, you destroy rainwater retention mechanism.

Total nonsense.

> Water absorbs heat from the sun by evaporation.

But the water vapour retains the heat at the bottom of the atmosphere.

> So if no water in the ground, no water evaporated and heat accumulates, making local temperatures to rise.

So what?

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[a a]

On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 15:13:10 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 2:47:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Lawrence Berkeley Lab announced the results from a new supercomputer
analysis of climate change. They analyzed five west coast \"extreme
storms\" from 1982 to 2014.

The conclusion from a senior scientist is that \"it rains a lot more
during the worst storms.\"

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
What a load of nonsense. Al Gore\'s 1992 book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_in_the_Balance

was a remarkably expert bit of science popularisation. He got the science right, not that the denialist propaganda machine is willing to admit it.
The book did make money, but not all that much. A decade later it did put Al Gore in a position to make money out of climate change, but that didn\'t mean that he wrote it with that in mind.

Freon is another fake.

In what sense? Chlorofluorocarbons do damage the ozone layer. We know exactly how - and we know that reducing their concentrations in the atmosphere is letting the ozone layer get denser again. The fakery here lies in your lie.
Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
And the amount of CO2 and other green-house gases in the atmosphere. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, if they weren\'t there the temperature of the surface of the Earth would be -18C. The difference between ice ages (atmospheric CO2 levels around 180 ppm) and interglacials (atmospheric CO2 levels around 270 ppm) also depends on the more extensive ice cover during interglacials, but the CO2 levels do account for a lot of the difference.
So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
Except that you can\'t. Solar activity doesn\'t explain the ice age to interglacial transitions, and only an ignorant idiot could imagine that they did

Removing trees within city limits, you can turn any city in heat island with rising temperatures, since removing trees, grass, you destroy rainwater retention mechanism.

Total nonsense.
Water absorbs heat from the sun by evaporation.
But the water vapour retains the heat at the bottom of the atmosphere.
So if no water in the ground, no water evaporated and heat accumulates, making local temperatures to rise.
So what?

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
You are exactly \"Total nonsense. \"

Sydney is low science city, so we don\'t care

Call prof. Mann and tell him, there has been no sea level rise at Pacific islands at all, on the Maledives, for the last 1,000 years

If Kremlin funds hundreds of so called pseudo scientists world-wide to sell more natural gas,
so call Greta and ask her, where is she with the Global Warming fake today

where is UNFCC Bonn agency, where is UN New York SIDS agency today
(Small Island Developing States)

If $Bs are pumped into your bank account, so you sell every paranoia as a genuine science

Global Warming is an old fake funded by Putin to sell more natural gas

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 3:36:04 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:

On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 15:13:10 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 2:47:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Lawrence Berkeley Lab announced the results from a new supercomputer
analysis of climate change. They analyzed five west coast \"extreme
storms\" from 1982 to 2014.

The conclusion from a senior scientist is that \"it rains a lot more
during the worst storms.\"

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
What a load of nonsense. Al Gore\'s 1992 book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_in_the_Balance

was a remarkably expert bit of science popularisation. He got the science right, not that the denialist propaganda machine is willing to admit it.
The book did make money, but not all that much. A decade later it did put Al Gore in a position to make money out of climate change, but that didn\'t mean that he wrote it with that in mind.

Freon is another fake.

In what sense? Chlorofluorocarbons do damage the ozone layer. We know exactly how - and we know that reducing their concentrations in the atmosphere is letting the ozone layer get denser again. The fakery here lies in your lie.
Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
And the amount of CO2 and other green-house gases in the atmosphere. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, if they weren\'t there the temperature of the surface of the Earth would be -18C. The difference between ice ages (atmospheric CO2 levels around 180 ppm) and interglacials (atmospheric CO2 levels around 270 ppm) also depends on the more extensive ice cover during interglacials, but the CO2 levels do account for a lot of the difference.
So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
Except that you can\'t. Solar activity doesn\'t explain the ice age to interglacial transitions, and only an ignorant idiot could imagine that they did

Removing trees within city limits, you can turn any city in heat island with rising temperatures, since removing trees, grass, you destroy rainwater retention mechanism.

Total nonsense.

Water absorbs heat from the sun by evaporation.

But the water vapour retains the heat at the bottom of the atmosphere.

So if no water in the ground, no water evaporated and heat accumulates, making local temperatures to rise.

So what?

You are exactly \"Total nonsense. \"

You may like to think so, but you haven\'t explained why you think that. It\'s blindingly obvious that you couldn\'t, even if you were silly enough to try.

> Sydney is low science city, so we don\'t care.

https://www.fqt.unsw.edu.au/news/top-physics-prizes-awarded-to-unsw-researchers

I got in on a tour of that lab. I was impressed by their Raith electron beam microfabricator, which is a pretty impressive kind of lab tool.

> Call prof. Mann and tell him, there has been no sea level rise at Pacific islands at all, on the Maledives, for the last 1,000 years.

The Maledives are in the Indian Ocean, not too far south of Ceylon. I\'d prefer not to get jeered at as an ignorant idiot. And they do seem to be worried about
sea level rise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maldives#Sea_level_rise

> If Kremlin funds hundreds of so called pseudo scientists world-wide to sell more natural gas, so call Greta and ask her, where is she with the Global Warming fake today.

It\'s not the Kremlin that\'s funding the lying that is going on. Exxon-Mobile does a lot of that, but they are funding the climate change denial propaganda that seems to be fooling you.

> where is UNFCC Bonn agency, where is UN New York SIDS agency today (Small Island Developing States)

Why should I care?

> If $Bs are pumped into your bank account, so you sell every paranoia as a genuine science.

If only.

> Global Warming is an old fake funded by Putin to sell more natural gas.

https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

It\'s been around for rather longer than Putin, and it\'s not great way of selling natural gas. We\'ll have to stop burning that as fuel as well as coal and oil if we are going to stop raising the CO2 level in the atmosphere, which is getting to be urgently necessary, even if ignorant idiots like you don\'t understand why.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[a a]

On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 16:27:36 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 3:36:04 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 15:13:10 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 2:47:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Lawrence Berkeley Lab announced the results from a new supercomputer
analysis of climate change. They analyzed five west coast \"extreme
storms\" from 1982 to 2014.

The conclusion from a senior scientist is that \"it rains a lot more
during the worst storms.\"

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
What a load of nonsense. Al Gore\'s 1992 book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_in_the_Balance

was a remarkably expert bit of science popularisation. He got the science right, not that the denialist propaganda machine is willing to admit it.
The book did make money, but not all that much. A decade later it did put Al Gore in a position to make money out of climate change, but that didn\'t mean that he wrote it with that in mind.

Freon is another fake.

In what sense? Chlorofluorocarbons do damage the ozone layer. We know exactly how - and we know that reducing their concentrations in the atmosphere is letting the ozone layer get denser again. The fakery here lies in your lie.
Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
And the amount of CO2 and other green-house gases in the atmosphere. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, if they weren\'t there the temperature of the surface of the Earth would be -18C. The difference between ice ages (atmospheric CO2 levels around 180 ppm) and interglacials (atmospheric CO2 levels around 270 ppm) also depends on the more extensive ice cover during interglacials, but the CO2 levels do account for a lot of the difference.
So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
Except that you can\'t. Solar activity doesn\'t explain the ice age to interglacial transitions, and only an ignorant idiot could imagine that they did

Removing trees within city limits, you can turn any city in heat island with rising temperatures, since removing trees, grass, you destroy rainwater retention mechanism.

Total nonsense.

Water absorbs heat from the sun by evaporation.

But the water vapour retains the heat at the bottom of the atmosphere..

So if no water in the ground, no water evaporated and heat accumulates, making local temperatures to rise.

So what?

You are exactly \"Total nonsense. \"
You may like to think so, but you haven\'t explained why you think that. It\'s blindingly obvious that you couldn\'t, even if you were silly enough to try.

Sydney is low science city, so we don\'t care.

https://www.fqt.unsw.edu.au/news/top-physics-prizes-awarded-to-unsw-researchers

I got in on a tour of that lab. I was impressed by their Raith electron beam microfabricator, which is a pretty impressive kind of lab tool.

Call prof. Mann and tell him, there has been no sea level rise at Pacific islands at all, on the Maledives, for the last 1,000 years.

The Maledives are in the Indian Ocean, not too far south of Ceylon. I\'d prefer not to get jeered at as an ignorant idiot. And they do seem to be worried about
sea level rise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maldives#Sea_level_rise

If Kremlin funds hundreds of so called pseudo scientists world-wide to sell more natural gas, so call Greta and ask her, where is she with the Global Warming fake today.

It\'s not the Kremlin that\'s funding the lying that is going on. Exxon-Mobile does a lot of that, but they are funding the climate change denial propaganda that seems to be fooling you.
where is UNFCC Bonn agency, where is UN New York SIDS agency today (Small Island Developing States)
Why should I care?

If $Bs are pumped into your bank account, so you sell every paranoia as a genuine science.

If only.

Global Warming is an old fake funded by Putin to sell more natural gas.

https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

It\'s been around for rather longer than Putin, and it\'s not great way of selling natural gas. We\'ll have to stop burning that as fuel as well as coal and oil if we are going to stop raising the CO2 level in the atmosphere, which is getting to be urgently necessary, even if ignorant idiots like you don\'t understand why.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
==. And they do seem to be worried about sea level rise.

since Global Warming fake is long lasting fake, funded by Kremlin

It was my excellent long-year job to move UN agencies from Global Warming fake to Climate Change

Climate Change is pure tautology by Heraclitus
Everything flows - Panta rhei

BTW
Australia, Sydney is low on science due low population, not attracting foreign scientists, researchers
and low AUD exchange rate

 

[a a]

On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 16:27:36 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 3:36:04 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 15:13:10 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 2:47:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Lawrence Berkeley Lab announced the results from a new supercomputer
analysis of climate change. They analyzed five west coast \"extreme
storms\" from 1982 to 2014.

The conclusion from a senior scientist is that \"it rains a lot more
during the worst storms.\"

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
What a load of nonsense. Al Gore\'s 1992 book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_in_the_Balance

was a remarkably expert bit of science popularisation. He got the science right, not that the denialist propaganda machine is willing to admit it.
The book did make money, but not all that much. A decade later it did put Al Gore in a position to make money out of climate change, but that didn\'t mean that he wrote it with that in mind.

Freon is another fake.

In what sense? Chlorofluorocarbons do damage the ozone layer. We know exactly how - and we know that reducing their concentrations in the atmosphere is letting the ozone layer get denser again. The fakery here lies in your lie.
Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
And the amount of CO2 and other green-house gases in the atmosphere. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, if they weren\'t there the temperature of the surface of the Earth would be -18C. The difference between ice ages (atmospheric CO2 levels around 180 ppm) and interglacials (atmospheric CO2 levels around 270 ppm) also depends on the more extensive ice cover during interglacials, but the CO2 levels do account for a lot of the difference.
So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
Except that you can\'t. Solar activity doesn\'t explain the ice age to interglacial transitions, and only an ignorant idiot could imagine that they did

Removing trees within city limits, you can turn any city in heat island with rising temperatures, since removing trees, grass, you destroy rainwater retention mechanism.

Total nonsense.

Water absorbs heat from the sun by evaporation.

But the water vapour retains the heat at the bottom of the atmosphere..

So if no water in the ground, no water evaporated and heat accumulates, making local temperatures to rise.

So what?

You are exactly \"Total nonsense. \"
You may like to think so, but you haven\'t explained why you think that. It\'s blindingly obvious that you couldn\'t, even if you were silly enough to try.

Sydney is low science city, so we don\'t care.

It\'s been around for rather longer than Putin, and it\'s not great way of selling natural gas. We\'ll have to stop burning that as fuel as well as coal and oil if we are going to stop raising the CO2 level in the atmosphere,

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
----Sydney is low science city, so we don\'t care.

CO2 is welcome
CO2 is Plant Food
Plants are Animal Food
Animals are Human Food

More CO2 more Human Food
to end the world hunger

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:46:59 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:

On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 16:27:36 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 3:36:04 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 15:13:10 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 2:47:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Lawrence Berkeley Lab announced the results from a new supercomputer
analysis of climate change. They analyzed five west coast \"extreme
storms\" from 1982 to 2014.

The conclusion from a senior scientist is that \"it rains a lot more
during the worst storms.\"

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
What a load of nonsense. Al Gore\'s 1992 book

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_in_the_Balance

was a remarkably expert bit of science popularisation. He got the science right, not that the denialist propaganda machine is willing to admit it.
The book did make money, but not all that much. A decade later it did put Al Gore in a position to make money out of climate change, but that didn\'t mean that he wrote it with that in mind.

Freon is another fake.

In what sense? Chlorofluorocarbons do damage the ozone layer. We know exactly how - and we know that reducing their concentrations in the atmosphere is letting the ozone layer get denser again. The fakery here lies in your lie.
Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
And the amount of CO2 and other green-house gases in the atmosphere.. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, if they weren\'t there the temperature of the surface of the Earth would be -18C. The difference between ice ages (atmospheric CO2 levels around 180 ppm) and interglacials (atmospheric CO2 levels around 270 ppm) also depends on the more extensive ice cover during interglacials, but the CO2 levels do account for a lot of the difference..
So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
Except that you can\'t. Solar activity doesn\'t explain the ice age to interglacial transitions, and only an ignorant idiot could imagine that they did

Removing trees within city limits, you can turn any city in heat island with rising temperatures, since removing trees, grass, you destroy rainwater retention mechanism.

Total nonsense.

Water absorbs heat from the sun by evaporation.

But the water vapour retains the heat at the bottom of the atmosphere.

So if no water in the ground, no water evaporated and heat accumulates, making local temperatures to rise.

So what?

You are exactly \"Total nonsense. \"

You may like to think so, but you haven\'t explained why you think that. It\'s blindingly obvious that you couldn\'t, even if you were silly enough to try.

Sydney is low science city, so we don\'t care.

https://www.fqt.unsw.edu.au/news/top-physics-prizes-awarded-to-unsw-researchers

I got in on a tour of that lab. I was impressed by their Raith electron beam microfabricator, which is a pretty impressive kind of lab tool.

Call prof. Mann and tell him, there has been no sea level rise at Pacific islands at all, on the Maledives, for the last 1,000 years.

The Maledives are in the Indian Ocean, not too far south of Ceylon. I\'d prefer not to get jeered at as an ignorant idiot. And they do seem to be worried about
sea level rise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maldives#Sea_level_rise

If Kremlin funds hundreds of so called pseudo scientists world-wide to sell more natural gas, so call Greta and ask her, where is she with the Global Warming fake today.

It\'s not the Kremlin that\'s funding the lying that is going on. Exxon-Mobile does a lot of that, but they are funding the climate change denial propaganda that seems to be fooling you.

where is UNFCC Bonn agency, where is UN New York SIDS agency today (Small Island Developing States)

Why should I care?

If $Bs are pumped into your bank account, so you sell every paranoia as a genuine science.

If only.

Global Warming is an old fake funded by Putin to sell more natural gas.

https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

It\'s been around for rather longer than Putin, and it\'s not great way of selling natural gas. We\'ll have to stop burning that as fuel as well as coal and oil if we are going to stop raising the CO2 level in the atmosphere, which is getting to be urgently necessary, even if ignorant idiots like you don\'t understand why.

==. And they do seem to be worried about sea level rise.

Since Global Warming fake is long lasting fake, funded by Kremlin

You seem to to want to thinks so, but who cares what an idiot wants to think?

It was my excellent long-year job to move UN agencies from Global Warming fake to Climate Change

Climate Change is pure tautology by Heraclitus Everything flows - Panta rhei

This particular flow is having inconvenient consequences. Happily, it is potentially reversible, even if idiots like you prefer not to recognise the fact.

BTW
Australia, Sydney is low on science due low population, not attracting foreign scientists, researchers and low AUD exchange rate.

https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/206167/sydney/population

5,057,000 people is a respectable population. Sydney University, the University of New South Wales, Macquarie University, UTC and the University of Western Sydney all attract foreign researchers - I\'ve been out to dinner with some of them.

Sydney University is #28 on at least one world ranking, not that that means very much.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

You seem to be pig-ignorant in a whole range of areas, not just climate science.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:52:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:

On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 16:27:36 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 3:36:04 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 15:13:10 UTC+2, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 2:47:09 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 April 2022 at 17:44:53 UTC+2, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

<snip>

> ----Sydney is low science city, so we don\'t care.

Or so a a likes to think. He\'s an idiot, so nobody else cares.

> CO2 is welcome

Only by people as pig-ignorant as a a.

> CO2 is Plant Food

It\'s one of them. There are others, all equally necessary.

Plants are Animal Food
Animals are Human Food

More CO2 more Human Food to end the world hunger.

If only it were that simple. A a is much too stupid to cope with all the rest of the stuff that is going on, so he misses the point that not all plants are animal food,
and superfluity of weeds isn\'t going to do much towards ending world hunger.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[whit3rd]

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:

> Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.

False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for \'make money\',
all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team\'s fees reimbursed
by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
were found to be \'barratry\', rather than being serious complaints.

> Freon is another fake.

Not so; that\'s a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
due to ozone depletion.

> Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.

\'clocked by\'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
average temperature isn\'t proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
So, your identification of \'solar activity\' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
\'solar activity\' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun\'s center, many thousands of miles away from
the photosphere where we see sunspots.

> So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.

Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn\'t a rational plan to deal with it.

 

[a a]

On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for \'make money\',
all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team\'s fees reimbursed
by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
were found to be \'barratry\', rather than being serious complaints.

Freon is another fake.

Not so; that\'s a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
due to ozone depletion.
Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.
\'clocked by\'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
average temperature isn\'t proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
So, your identification of \'solar activity\' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
\'solar activity\' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun\'s center, many thousands of miles away from
the photosphere where we see sunspots.
So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.
Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn\'t a rational plan to deal with it.
you are completely wrong

We all Love Carbon
We all Love CO2

The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and in plant litter at the soil surface (50 GtC). This compares to 780 GtC in the atmosphere, and 600 GtC in all living organisms. The oceanic pool of carbon accounts for 38,200 GtC.
Soil carbon - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_carbon

Forest soils

Forest soils constitute a large pool of carbon. Anthropogenic activities such as deforestation cause releases of carbon from this pool, which may significantly increase the concentration of greenhouse gas (GHG) in the atmosphere.[24] Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), countries must estimate and report GHG emissions and removals, including changes in carbon stocks in all five pools (above- and below-ground biomass, dead wood, litter, and soil carbon) and associated emissions and removals from land use, land-use change and forestry activities, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change\'s good practice guidance.[25][26] Tropical deforestation represents nearly 25 percent of total anthropogenic GHG emissions worldwide.[27] Deforestation, forest degradation, and changes in land management practices can cause releases of carbon from soil to the atmosphere. For these reasons, reliable estimates of soil organic carbon stock and stock changes are needed for Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and GHG reporting under the UNFCCC.

The government of Tanzania—together with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations[28] and the financial support of the government of Finland—have implemented a forest soil carbon monitoring program[29] to estimate soil carbon stock, using both survey and modelling-based methods.

West Africa has experienced significant loss of forest that contains high levels of soil organic carbon.[30][31] This is mostly due to expansion of small scale, non-mechanized agriculture using burning as a form of land clearance [32]

--
I am really sorry, you represent low science - no science
but

GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy

but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines

Water H2O in its gaseous state, or water vapor, is the only greenhouse gas because of its high heat of vaporization

--

Climate Change is my agenda, developed and injected into UN agencies to let them nicely switch from Global Warming fake
into Climate Changes tautology by Heraclitus, everything flows, Panta rhei

It took me years to contact eco fools, funded by Putin and Kremlin to give up Global Warming fake

Putin and Kremlin injected $Bs into pockets of eco fools to boost sales of natural gas as green fuel

Today not a single $ slips into pockets of eco fools, so


my
Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.

If you still love Global Warming fake by Al Gore, UNFCC team, Prof. Mann,
I have nothing to say

But call Prof. Mann one day to learn, there is not a single piece of support for Global Warming fake in his Report, published by UNFCC and awarded with Nobel Prize

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:

On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for \'make money\',
all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team\'s fees reimbursed
by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
were found to be \'barratry\', rather than being serious complaints.

Freon is another fake.

Not so; that\'s a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
due to ozone depletion.

Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.

\'clocked by\'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
average temperature isn\'t proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
So, your identification of \'solar activity\' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
\'solar activity\' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun\'s center, many thousands of miles away from
the photosphere where we see sunspots.

So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.

Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn\'t a rational plan to deal with it.

you are completely wrong

Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.

We all Love Carbon

That\'s an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.

> We all Love CO2

Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.


> The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ...

and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth\'s
crust, because they can go either up or down (they\'re inbetween, available to burn or get buried).

> GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy

There\'s an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
as have other nations; 192 of \'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.

but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines

It wasn\'t an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
say they\'re developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.

Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.

Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does \'clocked\' mean? And, where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

 

[Anass Luca]

Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:46:59 PM UTC+2, a a wrote:
BTW
Australia, Sydney is low on science due low population, not
attracting foreign scientists, researchers and low AUD exchange
rate.

...

You seem to be pig-ignorant in a whole range of areas, not just
climate science.

Given a a\'s nature since its first appearance here, and its absolute
stupidity, I suspect a a is actually one of John Doe\'s nym-shift names.
The two have about the same low IQ level and both are off-topic
disruptive trolls.

 

[a a]

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:

On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for \'make money\',
all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team\'s fees reimbursed
by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
were found to be \'barratry\', rather than being serious complaints.

Freon is another fake.

Not so; that\'s a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
due to ozone depletion.

Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.

\'clocked by\'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
average temperature isn\'t proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
So, your identification of \'solar activity\' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
\'solar activity\' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun\'s center, many thousands of miles away from
the photosphere where we see sunspots.

So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.

Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn\'t a rational plan to deal with it.

you are completely wrong
Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.

We all Love Carbon

That\'s an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.

We all Love CO2

Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.


The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ....

and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth\'s
crust, because they can go either up or down (they\'re inbetween, available to burn or get buried).
GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy
There\'s an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
as have other nations; 192 of \'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.
but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines
It wasn\'t an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
say they\'re developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.
Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.
Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does \'clocked\' mean? And, where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

every troll is free to contact NASA Solar Lab directly to get data on
- solar storn
- solar flares
- solar radiation
- sunspots


What is NASA\'s Parker Solar Probe?
NASA’s Parker Solar Probe will be the first-ever mission to \"touch\" the Sun. The spacecraft, about the size of a small car, will travel directly into the Sun\'s atmosphere about 4 million miles from the surface. Parker Solar Probe launched aboard a Delta IV-Heavy rocket from Cape Canaveral, Aug. 12, 2018 at 3:31 a.m. Eastern time.


==we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
---are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?


https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/

https://science.gsfc.nasa.gov/heliophysics/solar/

Overview

The Solar Physics Laboratory works to understand the Sun as a star and as the primary driver of activity throughout the solar system. Our research expands knowledge of the Earth-Sun system and helps to enable robotic and human exploration.

We develop innovative instruments and mission concepts, theoretical models, and techniques to access and analyze data. The Laboratory provides project scientists for NASA missions, assists with strategic planning and mission definition, and communicates research results to the international scientific community and the public.
Contact Us

General inquiries about the scientific programs at NASA\'s Goddard Space Flight Center may be directed to the Office of Communications at 1.301.286.8955.

 

[a a]

On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 03:58:30 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:

On Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 1:39:46 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 19:48:01 UTC+2, whit3rd wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:47:09 AM UTC-7, a a wrote:

Climate Change is an old fake by Al Gore, Prof. Mann and their team to make money fast.
False, of course. Al Gore had some election-year lies aimed that way, and as for \'make money\',
all Mann got was some frivolous lawsuits. The court had his legal team\'s fees reimbursed
by the jackals that brought the suit against him. The court did that because the suits
were found to be \'barratry\', rather than being serious complaints.

Freon is another fake.

Not so; that\'s a DuPont tradename for fluorocarbon products, under worldwide ban
due to ozone depletion.

Climate is clocked by solar activity and by fluctuations in solar activity.

\'clocked by\'??? Climate is affected by solar heat (influx of heat dominates during the day) and
radiative cooling (heat dissipates into space, dominates the heatflow at night). The steady-state
average temperature isn\'t proportional to anything the Sun does, but is set by the difference of
those two heat flows (the difference is zero when steady-state temperature is achieved).
So, your identification of \'solar activity\' is only a half-truth at best, and in most literature,
\'solar activity\' only means sunspot fluctuations, not solar heat output. Indeed, the solar
heat output is set by fusion rates in the sun\'s center, many thousands of miles away from
the photosphere where we see sunspots.

So it\'s a waste of time and money to study Climate Change, living on the Earth, if you can easily study fluctuations in solar activity to get science on what really controls the Climate.

Utterance of nonsense is detected. Agriculture, forestry, water resources, sea life are all being hurt
by climate change, and gazing at Mr.Sun isn\'t a rational plan to deal with it.

you are completely wrong
Okay, where? Zero details? It sounds like a lame excuse for a lack of criticism.

We all Love Carbon

That\'s an odd perversion; diamonds are pretty, though.

We all Love CO2

Live with it, yes; also a few other gasses.


The balance of soil carbon is held in peat and wetlands (150 GtC), and ...

and temporary surface repositories are not part of the carbon cycle in the atmosphere versus Earth\'s
crust, because they can go either up or down (they\'re inbetween, available to burn or get buried).
GHG - greenhouse gas emissions is an old fake and political agenda developed by US politicians to kill China economy
There\'s an agenda around it, nowadays, and politicians. The US can (and has) developed bits,
as have other nations; 192 of \'em if I remember the Paris Accords count.
but China mirorred the attack and turned himself into reduced emissions Global Factory
in green technologies like solar panels, wind turbines
It wasn\'t an attack. China is one of the 192 that joined the Paris Accord, and as you
say they\'re developing bits of their own agenda, as well as exporting bits.
Climate Change is clocked by fluctuations in solar activity Agenda
is backed today by NASA (Solar Lab) and others with public money, not coming from Russia.
Not true. Studied by solar scientists, yes; but what does \'clocked\' mean? And, where\'s
the citation we\'d expect of a result from the NASA Solar Physics laboratory, and (for that matter)
are you really convinced sunspot activity is relevant?

read first
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sdo/main/index.html

We All love Carbon
We All Love CO2

CO2 is Plant Food
Plants are Animal Food
Animals are Human Food