The Westbound Arctic Tern and Novara are still not yet clear Novara talks about "navigating through the Bellot Strait, then the rush south!"
i have already given you details of a satellite phone on artic tern giving positions regularly. They approach cambridge bay having left gjoa. Novara left bellot many hours before Arctic tern. Novaras blog position report which is often many days out of date gives their position as west of gjoa.
I think under all that he is saying that the previous paper was using metrics of Amplitude modulation to look for a linear relationship with temperature when they should have been using metrics for Frequency modulation and looking for multiple non-linear relationships with temperature.
The Schtick reports: New paper finds a non-linear relationship between sunspots and global temperatures
A new paper by Dr. Nicola Scafetta published in Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications rebuts the assertion that sunspots and global temperatures are not related.
Dr. Scafetta instead finds a non-linear relation between sunspots and temperatures
"can be recognized only using specific techniques of analysis that take into account non-linearity and filtering of the multiple climate change contributions" and "Multiple evidences suggest that global temperatures and sunspot numbers are quite related to each other at multiple time scales. Thus, they are characterized by cyclical fractional models. However, solar and climatic indexes are related to each other through complex and non-linear processes." A simple linear model based upon the "sunspot integral" and ocean oscillations explains 95% of climate change over the past 400 years.
Dr. Scafetta's model [black line] based upon solar and anthropogenic forcing is performing much better than the IPCC models [green band] which dismiss the role of the Sun in climate change.
Abstract Recently Gil-Alana et al. (2014) compared the sunspot number record and the temperature record and found that they differ: the sunspot number record is characterized by a dominant 11-year cycle while the temperature record appears to be characterized by a “singularity ” or “pole ” in the spectral density function at the “zero ” frequency. Consequently, they claimed that the two records are characterized by substantially different statistical fractional models and rejected the hypothesis that the Sun influences significantly global temperatures. I will show that: (1) the “singularity” or “pole” in the spectral density function of the global surface temperature at the “zero” frequency does not exist—the observed pattern derives from the post 1880 warming trend of the temperature signal and is a typical misinterpretation that discrete power spectra of non-stationary signals can suggest; (2) appropriate continuous periodograms clarify the issue and also show a signature of the 11-year solar cycle (amplitude View the MathML source), which since 1850 has an average period of about 10.4 year, and of many other natural oscillations; (3) the solar signature in the surface temperature record can be recognized only using specific techniques of analysis that take into account non-linearity and filtering of the multiple climate change contributions; (4) the post 1880-year temperature warming trend cannot be compared or studied against the sunspot record and its 11-year cycle, but requires solar proxy models showing short and long scale oscillations plus the contribution of anthropogenic forcings, as done in the literature. Multiple evidences suggest that global temperatures and sunspot numbers are quite related to each other at multiple time scales. Thus, they are characterized by cyclical fractional models. However, solar and climatic indexes are related to each other through complex and non-linear processes. Finally, I show that the prediction of a semi-empirical model for the global surface temperature based on astronomical oscillations and anthropogenic forcing proposed by Scafetta since 2009 has, up to date, been successful.
Ok, how many errors can most detect in this following op-ed piece. There is one REALLY doozy one....and several others. This helps explain why those with a liberal bend are so screwed up in their thought process/information gathering.
The boats who abandoned a chance for a northwest passage this year are going to be a bit upset! Nasa has provided a very high resolution 24Meg TIFF picture of the more or less ice free passage upon which Doug Pohl is claiming you can see the boats underway!
The version below is ordinary resolution.
Logs of the boats that turned around explained the decision. Most waited as long as they dared to attempt the crossing.
These boats are dependent upon sail and have to provide allowances for wind conditions and direction. Their calculations showed that if the passage did not open until late August the odds were getting poor to make it to the Pacific Ocean before the ice closed in again.
Their decision to quit was based on the increasing possibility of having to winter their boats in the passage and not as you imply.
Yesterday, my dad said something that strikes me as a very good idea.
Lets go in together, and erect a polished granite monument. Possibly 30 or 40 feet tall. Or whatever we could afford. This obelisk will have etched into it the names, and the irresponsible quotes of the AGW pseudo-scientists, govt administrators, high-level politicians, and media. Name-quote, name-quote, all the way up the face of it. It will be a monument to the folly of human hubris and our capacity to be misled.
Put it on a 5 or 10 acre park. Don't let these people scatter like cockroaches when the light switch is flipped on.
I see the base period is 1979-2006, avoiding 2007 ...... why not thirty years? Am I too suspicious?
Not at all. Had they gone back to 1974 they would have had no anomaly now as the amount of ice then was considerably lower than the peak Arctic ice year of 1979 which totally coincidentally (cough) was chosen as their start year.