Those Pesky Calculations Again

Post Reply
 
User avatar
coaledsweat
Site Moderator
Posts: 13763
Joined: Fri. Oct. 27, 2006 2:05 pm
Location: Guilford, Connecticut
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Post by coaledsweat » Thu. Nov. 24, 2016 7:23 am


 
User avatar
coaledsweat
Site Moderator
Posts: 13763
Joined: Fri. Oct. 27, 2006 2:05 pm
Location: Guilford, Connecticut
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Post by coaledsweat » Thu. Nov. 24, 2016 7:52 am


 
User avatar
BunkerdCaddis
Member
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun. Jan. 18, 2015 10:26 am
Location: SW Lancaster County
Stoker Coal Boiler: Bairmatic-Van Wert
Hand Fed Coal Boiler: Van Wert VW85H
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Saey Hanover II working when I feel the desire, Waterford 105 out on vacation, Surdiac Gotha hiding somewhere
Coal Size/Type: pea/nut/rice/stove-anthracite, nut/stove bit when I feel the urge
Other Heating: oil fired hydronic

Post by BunkerdCaddis » Thu. Nov. 24, 2016 12:16 pm

Dang Climate Change isn't very predictable... we need more money spent on gov't research to get to the bottom of this... :roll:

 
User avatar
SWPaDon
Member
Posts: 9857
Joined: Sun. Nov. 24, 2013 12:05 pm
Location: Southwest Pa.
Hand Fed Coal Furnace: Clayton 1600M
Coal Size/Type: Bituminous
Other Heating: Oil furnace

Post by SWPaDon » Thu. Nov. 24, 2016 5:37 pm

Heres some 'non-government' figures:

Antarctic Sea Ice Has Not Shrunk In 100 Years

http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/11/24/antarctic-sea-ice-has-not-shrunk-in-100-years/

 
joeblack5
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri. Jan. 16, 2009 9:57 am

Post by joeblack5 » Fri. Nov. 25, 2016 6:39 pm

according to nasa ( goverment) it even got bigger at least Antartica

but the Arctic

Since the late 1970s, the Arctic has lost an average of 20,800 square miles (53,900 square kilometers) of ice a year; the Antarctic has gained an average of 7,300 square miles (18,900 sq km). On Sept. 19 this year, for the first time ever since 1979, Antarctic sea ice extent exceeded 7.72 million square miles (20 million square kilometers), according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The ice extent stayed above this benchmark extent for several days. The average maximum extent between 1981 and 2010 was 7.23 million square miles (18.72 million square kilometers).

http://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/1/

https://www.skepticalscience.com/arctic-antarctic-sea-ice.htm


 
coalnewbie
Member
Posts: 8601
Joined: Sat. May. 24, 2008 4:26 pm
Location: Chester, NY
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: LL AnthraKing 180K, Pocono110K,KStokr 90K, DVC
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Invader 2
Baseburners & Antiques: Wings Best, Glenwood #8(x2) Herald 116x
Coal Size/Type: Rice,
Other Heating: Heating Oil CH, Toyotomi OM 22

Post by coalnewbie » Fri. Nov. 25, 2016 6:51 pm

Those pesky facts again... it'a not man , it's not CO2, it's the sun ... read everything done by Piers Corbyn.

 
joeblack5
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri. Jan. 16, 2009 9:57 am

Post by joeblack5 » Fri. Nov. 25, 2016 7:01 pm

pierce corbin..

thanks for having me look into him

interesting fellow

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

 
grumpy
Member
Posts: 12288
Joined: Sat. Jan. 02, 2010 12:28 am

Post by grumpy » Fri. Nov. 25, 2016 7:14 pm

Why the CO2 'Theory' Fails

Page down to read..

http://www.weatheraction.com/

 
joeblack5
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri. Jan. 16, 2009 9:57 am

Post by joeblack5 » Fri. Nov. 25, 2016 7:42 pm

That is a lot of writing for a one man show

 
User avatar
SWPaDon
Member
Posts: 9857
Joined: Sun. Nov. 24, 2013 12:05 pm
Location: Southwest Pa.
Hand Fed Coal Furnace: Clayton 1600M
Coal Size/Type: Bituminous
Other Heating: Oil furnace

Post by SWPaDon » Sat. Nov. 26, 2016 12:55 am

joeblack5 wrote:according to nasa ( goverment) it even got bigger at least Antartica

but the Arctic

Since the late 1970s, the Arctic has lost an average of 20,800 square miles (53,900 square kilometers) of ice a year; the Antarctic has gained an average of 7,300 square miles (18,900 sq km). On Sept. 19 this year, for the first time ever since 1979, Antarctic sea ice extent exceeded 7.72 million square miles (20 million square kilometers), according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The ice extent stayed above this benchmark extent for several days. The average maximum extent between 1981 and 2010 was 7.23 million square miles (18.72 million square kilometers).

http://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/1/

https://www.skepticalscience.com/arctic-antarctic-sea-ice.htm
Here's a little trivia for you:
Are Undersea Volcanoes a Cause of Melting Sea Ice?

http://www.maritime-executive.com/features/Are-Undersea-Volcanoes-a-Cause-of-Melting-Sea-Ice-2014-09-11

I'm certain there's a few things in there that they 'forgot' to mention. Oh......wait, the actual technology to research it has only been available for a few years..........yet they know everything there is to know about the Earth and warming/cooling :roll:


 
User avatar
SWPaDon
Member
Posts: 9857
Joined: Sun. Nov. 24, 2013 12:05 pm
Location: Southwest Pa.
Hand Fed Coal Furnace: Clayton 1600M
Coal Size/Type: Bituminous
Other Heating: Oil furnace

Post by SWPaDon » Sat. Nov. 26, 2016 2:16 am

Here's some more interesting info:

Seismic monitor:
http://ds.iris.edu/seismon/

Now lets compare that to a picture of known volcanoes around the world. Look closely around Alaska, most of the volcanic activity is undersea.
volcanoes.jpg

From Bing Pictures

.JPG | 10.9KB | volcanoes.jpg
And if you look closely at the seismic monitor above, you will notice that the area in question has been active for the past 2 weeks and the past 5 years.
Another thing to take note of, is the line in the picture I posted, just happens to be the Pacific Tectonic Plate.

 
joeblack5
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri. Jan. 16, 2009 9:57 am

Post by joeblack5 » Sat. Nov. 26, 2016 8:04 am

Nice info,

And indeed the researchers mentioned that this would contribute to the melting of the arctic ice but also that the effect has to be better studied and that that by itself is not enough to explain the melting.

Regarding the hope of clobal cooling.

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

If my reality would see future cooling for a very long time... iceage.... then I certainly would not burn my fire wood today.. might run out before winter is over.
So better leave it in the ground and start insulating your house.

 
User avatar
SWPaDon
Member
Posts: 9857
Joined: Sun. Nov. 24, 2013 12:05 pm
Location: Southwest Pa.
Hand Fed Coal Furnace: Clayton 1600M
Coal Size/Type: Bituminous
Other Heating: Oil furnace

Post by SWPaDon » Sat. Nov. 26, 2016 10:24 am

joeblack5 wrote:And indeed the researchers mentioned that this would contribute to the melting of the arctic ice but also that the effect has to be better studied and that that by itself is not enough to explain the melting.
Your right in that undersea volcanoes 'may not' be the only cause. But one needs to consider the wind along with that because the wind can pick up the heated air and carry it inland for a long ways.

The point is, there is too much that we humans 'don't know', to definitively say one way or another. Seems like almost every week now, reports come out about things the scientists never knew before. Just like with satellite observations, while it's great that we have them, we have only had them for a very short time span. The antarctic expedition that I posted earlier is a good example, it's the best information that we actually have, because NASA and NOAA are constantly 'changing the data' to try and prove something, therefore they can't be trusted as they've become politicized.

 
User avatar
Sunny Boy
Member
Posts: 25567
Joined: Mon. Nov. 11, 2013 1:40 pm
Location: Central NY
Hand Fed Coal Boiler: Anthracite Industrial, domestic hot water heater
Baseburners & Antiques: Glenwood range 208, # 6 base heater, 2 Modern Oak 118.
Coal Size/Type: Nuts !
Other Heating: Oil &electric plenum furnace

Post by Sunny Boy » Sat. Nov. 26, 2016 10:40 am

Some of the "scientists" that predict glo-bull warming are the same ones that were pushing the coming of another ice age back in the 1970's.

And that's not all they failed at. Of all the dire consequence deadlines and calamities predicted, not one has happened. Not, "no more snow in England", not, "an increase in hurricanes and tornados in the USA" and Gore's "climate tipping point" came and went years ago. In fact just the opposite of their predictions has happened - we've had fewer hurricanes and tornados since they made those "settled science" predictions. :roll:

Seems the only thing they get right is causing fear and anxiety to help them keep their government and UN funded jobs.

Paul

Post Reply

Return to “Coal News & General Coal Discussions”