tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post6760783887939386414..comments2024-01-31T04:58:12.328-06:00Comments on Climatesense-norpag: Oklahoma Tornadoes and Sandy type Hurricanes reflect Global Cooling not Warming.Dr Norman Pagehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07481441558527911558noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-74087682749898577382014-04-30T11:00:50.141-05:002014-04-30T11:00:50.141-05:00For the 1000 year quasi-periodicity see Fig 4 at
h...For the 1000 year quasi-periodicity see Fig 4 at<br />http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com/2013/10/commonsense-climate-science-and.html<br />For the detail of the last 1000 year cycle which may be about to repeat see Fig 3 at the same link.Dr Norman Pagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07481441558527911558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-80661866606315042082014-04-30T03:40:53.665-05:002014-04-30T03:40:53.665-05:00I've looked through the material on your site ...I've looked through the material on your site and cannot totally follow your logic. Can you step me through you arguments for the Millennium Cycle, perhaps with a post on your site?<a href="http://goo.gl/fJipdP" rel="nofollow">gambar payudara</a><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13435466334036369992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-50860467069417954982013-10-23T09:11:59.908-05:002013-10-23T09:11:59.908-05:00climateprediction Non of these cycles are going ...climateprediction Non of these cycles are going to repeat exactly as the various cycles come into and out of phase . Generally the nearer in time the more closely they will resemble each other, In Fig 4 the timing of the 1000 year cycle looks good at 2000, 1000, and the present. The 2000 year proxy - Fig three matches Fig 4 well for timing at present and 1000. Also the 1000 - present amplitudes look very good with other records.. I Agree the 2000 BP amplitudes don't match well. with the 1000 and present peaks.. However all proxy record s vary in accuracy at various times and there are other proxies which show a sharper peak at 2000BP +/- <br />Nature is not given to mathematical precision - see my comments on the certainty of the forecast at the end of the last post on the site. Thanks for your commentDr Norman Pagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07481441558527911558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-80549287452068475872013-10-22T15:26:54.234-05:002013-10-22T15:26:54.234-05:00Norpag, what's the reasoning behind your belie...Norpag, what's the reasoning behind your belief that the 1000-2000 period will repeat. I'm looking at your 2000 year chart. The 0-1000 period doesn't appear to be similar to the 1000-2000 period. Temperatures are quite flat for the 0-300. Other than the 2 peaks at 1000 and 2000, there's nothing to indicate this is a continuing cycle that I can see.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-2728901153656111072013-10-20T23:41:07.135-05:002013-10-20T23:41:07.135-05:00climateprediction For the millennial cycle chec...climateprediction For the millennial cycle check the latest post on this site - 10/19/2013 <br />http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com<br />See Figs3 and 4 for the 1000 year cycle. I suggest that the 2003 peak is a peak in both the 1000 year and 60 year cycle and 2000 - 3000 will roughly repeat 1000 - 2000.Dr Norman Pagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07481441558527911558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-55738914364934982752013-10-20T18:09:38.631-05:002013-10-20T18:09:38.631-05:00Dr. Page, you posted on the WUWT website suggestin...Dr. Page, you posted on the WUWT website suggesting that Bob Tisdale include the the Millenium Cycle in his forecast. I've looked through the material on your site and cannot totally follow your logic. Can you step me through you arguments for the Millennium Cycle, perhaps with a post on your site? DuWayne SmithAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-64005166508656695042013-06-03T18:59:43.604-05:002013-06-03T18:59:43.604-05:00Nearly everyone, (including myself until a year ag...Nearly everyone, (including myself until a year ago) is still sucked into the line of thinking first thrust upon the world by the AGW crowd, namely that it is all to do with radiative forcing. Yes, this includes virtually all other PSI members..<br /><br />I have been thinking this through for a long time and am now firmly of the opinion that all these energy budgets are incomplete, mainly because they don't show the missing link. On Venus and Uranus that missing link is a huge amount of energy which must flow downwards in the atmosphere. It's quite a lot on Earth too. Over the life of these planets there has been a build up of thermal energy from the Sun which can't escape. <br /><br />So these planets (Uranus, Venus, Earth) are not still cooling off. It's cold out there where Uranus is because it only receives about 3W/m^2 in the very top of its atmosphere. It could easily have cooled off, but for the one thing that stops it. And that one thing is the gravitationally induced thermal gradient which forms by diffusion at the molecular level,, because molecules in free flight between collisions interchange kinetic energy and gravitational potential energy. In just two lines of calculations, you can derive the <i>-g/Cp</i> value by equating PE and -KE. Kinetic energy will tend towards being homogeneous during collisions, but only at each altitude. Inter-molecular radiation reduces the gradient by up to about a third, but by less than 5% on Uranus where there is just a little methane causing that.<br /><br />The Clausius (hot to cold) statement of the Second Law is not comprehensive and for conduction and diffusion it only applies in a horizontal plane. The process described in the Second Law means that thermodynamic equilibrium evolves spontaneously, and, in the process of maintaining such equilibrium there must evolve a temperature gradient. Most importantly, extra energy absorbed at higher altitudes can actually flow up this gradient because that will help restore the equilibrium. Doug Cottonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08564342660783793003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-18768128279761079382013-06-02T14:01:24.574-05:002013-06-02T14:01:24.574-05:00Fine - Go ahead. Norman Fine - Go ahead. Norman Dr Norman Pagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07481441558527911558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-820570527003668244.post-64257826657917639222013-06-02T13:22:17.712-05:002013-06-02T13:22:17.712-05:00Good Afternoon! Permission to repost your article ...Good Afternoon! Permission to repost your article (the pics will be too much, so just the text), with a link back to this original, of course!<br /><br />Otter (as seen on many Skeptic sites :P )Otternoreply@blogger.com