Dawlish's explanation of flaws in
Lindzen and Choi's work

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....n+Choi+Dawlish

-----

Relationships between tropical sea surface
temperature and top�of�atmosphere radiation

Kevin E. Trenberth, John T. Fasullo,
Chris O’Dell, and Takmeng Wong

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Staff/Fa...010etalGRL.pdf

-----

On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data
by RS Lindzen, YS Choi
http://www.drroyspencer.com/Lindzen-...i-GRL-2009.pdf

-----

I will comment more later...

I ask for reaction from uk.sci.weather and
plenty of it...

-----

David Christainsen

On May 2, 8:11Â*pm, Meteorologist wrote:
Dawlish's explanation of flaws in
Lindzen and Choi's work

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....1ffc74113?hl=e....

-----

Relationships between tropical sea surface
temperature and top�of�atmosphere radiation

Kevin E. Trenberth, John T. Fasullo,
Chris O’Dell, and Takmeng Wong

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Staff/Fa...010etalGRL.pdf

-----

On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data
by RS Lindzen, YS Choihttp://www.drroyspencer.com/Lindzen-and-Choi-GRL-2009.pdf

-----

I will comment more later...

I ask for reaction from uk.sci.weather and
plenty of it...

-----

David Christainsen

I'll look forward to your comments, Crunchy. See if you can come up
with anything to defend Lindzen and Choi. Please be specific about his
use of only 40% of the earth's surface in his 2009 paper, won't you?
And his cherry picking of time periods from *within* the last 30
years' data, won't you? And do talk about Kirchoff's law and his
flagrant disregard for it and its corollory that emissivity is equal
in all directions, won't you? If I were you I'd comment now, as this
is a meteorology newsgroup, with a few people who have an interest in
climatology and only a few with an interest in physics. All have an
interest in meteorology, however and that's a subject you very seldom
seem to mention, "Meteorologist".

In article 1761f1d7-02aa-4a0a-9bf2-7a00552640d1
@l32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, says...

I ask for reaction from uk.sci.weather and
plenty of it...


I guess I was hoping beyond hope that just this once you could have kept
yourself a little lower and not risen to the bait.

[sigh]

--
Alan LeHun

On May 2, 11:05*pm, Alan LeHun wrote:
In article 1761f1d7-02aa-4a0a-9bf2-7a00552640d1
@l32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, says...

I ask for reaction from uk.sci.weather and
plenty of it...

I guess I was hoping beyond hope that just this once you could have kept
yourself a little lower and not risen to the bait.

[sigh]

--
Alan LeHun

*)) Crunchy posted only to USW this time. He's also, for once in his
cross-posting life asked a relevant question. I ignore almost all of
his cross-posts because they are unecessary and ridiculous, but if he
wants to discuss only here, I might just decide to reply. I won't
reply to his cross posts, except on another group and if I do, I'll
remove USW from my reply. Reasonable?

I want to see what he says in this instance. Lindzen and Choi's 2009
work is currently a seminal paper for the denialist brigade.
Unfortunately for them, it has quite obvious flaws. The strength of
Crunchy's defence, or lack of it, will be interesting for me. There's
something a bit odd in providing a history of comments, but they are
all kosher. talk.origins was a cross-posted group, the post from which
I replied to on a different newsgroup! I'm not interested in talking
with religious nutcases, honest!

On May 2, 5:06Â*pm, Dawlish wrote:
On May 2, 8:11Â*pm, Meteorologist wrote:





Dawlish's explanation of flaws in
Lindzen and Choi's work

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....1ffc74113?hl=e....

-----

Relationships between tropical sea surface
temperature and top�of�atmosphere radiation

Kevin E. Trenberth, John T. Fasullo,
Chris O’Dell, and Takmeng Wong

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Staff/Fa...010etalGRL.pdf

-----

On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data
by RS Lindzen, YS Choihttp://www.drroyspencer.com/Lindzen-and-Choi-GRL-2009.pdf

-----

I will comment more later...

I ask for reaction from uk.sci.weather and
plenty of it...

-----

David Christainsen

I'll look forward to your comments, Crunchy.

You know that the proof is in the pudding.
Yet, you must immediately change your
usenet manners and stop your irritating tactics.

IOW focus only on the climate science. You
would do this out of burning curiosity. I have
burning curiosity. Do you?

See if you can come up
with anything to defend Lindzen and Choi.

I already know Lindzen's attitudes very, very
well. Remember - Lindzen lives in Newton, Mass
USA and so do I.

Do you really have both eyes open now?

Please be specific about his
use of only 40% of the earth's surface in his 2009 paper, won't you?

Yes.

And his cherry picking of time periods from *within* the last 30
years' data, won't you?

IMHO it is an issue HOW bad their cherry picking is,
such as it is.

And do talk about Kirchoff's law and his
flagrant disregard for it and its corollory that emissivity is equal
in all directions, won't you?

With relish.

If I were you I'd comment now, as this
is a meteorology newsgroup, with a few people who have an interest in
climatology and only a few with an interest in physics.

But, you are NOT me.

So, it will be later when I am good and ready;
not now. Sorry.

All have an
interest in meteorology, however and that's a subject you very seldom
seem to mention, "Meteorologist".

I don't have to mention "it"; "it" is a given. Wake up.
You were always out of touch with reality yours truly.

David Christainsen

oh nice
now that ****head dawlish is trashing other newsgroups.

Dawlish wrote:

On May 2, 8:11 pm, Meteorologist wrote:
Dawlish's explanation of flaws in
Lindzen and Choi's work

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....1ffc74113?hl=e...

-----

Relationships between tropical sea surface
temperature and top�of�atmosphere radiation

Kevin E. Trenberth, John T. Fasullo,
Chris O’Dell, and Takmeng Wong

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Staff/Fa...010etalGRL.pdf

-----

On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data
by RS Lindzen, YS Choihttp://www.drroyspencer.com/Lindzen-and-Choi-GRL-2009.pdf

-----

I will comment more later...

I ask for reaction from uk.sci.weather and
plenty of it...

-----

David Christainsen

I'll look forward to your comments, Crunchy. See if you can come up
with anything to defend Lindzen and Choi. Please be specific about his
use of only 40% of the earth's surface in his 2009 paper, won't you?
And his cherry picking of time periods from *within* the last 30
years' data, won't you? And do talk about Kirchoff's law and his
flagrant disregard for it and its corollory that emissivity is equal
in all directions, won't you? If I were you I'd comment now, as this
is a meteorology newsgroup, with a few people who have an interest in
climatology and only a few with an interest in physics. All have an
interest in meteorology, however and that's a subject you very seldom
seem to mention, "Meteorologist".

On May 3, 3:05Â*pm, Meteorologist wrote:
On May 2, 5:06Â*pm, Dawlish wrote:





On May 2, 8:11Â*pm, Meteorologist wrote:

Dawlish's explanation of flaws in
Lindzen and Choi's work

http://groups.google.com/group/talk....1ffc74113?hl=e...

-----

Relationships between tropical sea surface
temperature and top�of�atmosphere radiation

Kevin E. Trenberth, John T. Fasullo,
Chris O’Dell, and Takmeng Wong

http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Staff/Fa...010etalGRL.pdf

-----

On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data
by RS Lindzen, YS Choihttp://www.drroyspencer.com/Lindzen-and-Choi-GRL-2009.pdf

-----

I will comment more later...

I ask for reaction from uk.sci.weather and
plenty of it...

-----

David Christainsen

I'll look forward to your comments, Crunchy.

You know that the proof is in the pudding.
Yet, you must immediately change your
usenet manners and stop your irritating tactics.

IOW focus only on the climate science. Â*You
would do this out of burning curiosity. Â*I have
burning curiosity. Â*Do you?

See if you can come up
with anything to defend Lindzen and Choi.

I already know Lindzen's attitudes very, very
well. Â*Remember - Lindzen lives in Newton, Mass
USA and so do I.

Do you really have both eyes open now?

Please be specific about his
use of only 40% of the earth's surface in his 2009 paper, won't you?

Yes.

And his cherry picking of time periods from *within* the last 30
years' data, won't you?

IMHO it is an issue HOW bad their cherry picking is,
such as it is.

And do talk about Kirchoff's law and his
flagrant disregard for it and its corollory that emissivity is equal
in all directions, won't you?

With relish.

If I were you I'd comment now, as this
is a meteorology newsgroup, with a few people who have an interest in
climatology and only a few with an interest in physics.

But, you are NOT me.

So, it will be later when I am good and ready;
not now. Â*Sorry.

All have an
interest in meteorology, however and that's a subject you very seldom
seem to mention, "Meteorologist".

I don't have to mention "it"; "it" is a given. Â*Wake up.
You were always out of touch with reality yours truly.

David Christainsen- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, there's a start, Lindzen lives in the same state. More? I'm
happy to wait until you are "good and ready".

On May 3, 1:06*pm, Dawlish wrote:
On May 3, 3:05*pm, Meteorologist wrote:
...

Well, there's a start, Lindzen lives in the same state. More? I'm
happy to wait until you are "good and ready".

Prof. Lindzen lives in the same city and state
as I. We were acquainted with one another thru
the MIT connection.

I say Prof. Lindzen is a big deal for climate science.

Moreover, I look forward to a real conversation with
you about climate science at long last.

Until then be well,
David Christainsen

On May 3, 6:34*pm, Meteorologist wrote:
On May 3, 1:06*pm, Dawlish wrote:

On May 3, 3:05*pm, Meteorologist wrote:
...

Well, there's a start, Lindzen lives in the same state. More? I'm
happy to wait until you are "good and ready".

Prof. Lindzen lives in the same city and state
as I. *We were acquainted with one another thru
the MIT connection.

I say Prof. Lindzen is a big deal for climate science.

Moreover, I look forward to a real conversation with
you about climate science at long last.

Until then be well,
David Christainsen

You mean you say you went there and Lindzen is Sloan Professor of
Meteorology there. Nice connection. Gustav Holst went to my old
university and I think he's a musical genius and a "big deal" in
music.

When you've got time in your busy schedule, do enlighten us about
Linzen's 2009 paper, written in collaboration with Yong-Sang Choi.

On May 3, 3:20*pm, Dawlish wrote:
On May 3, 6:34*pm, Meteorologist wrote:





On May 3, 1:06*pm, Dawlish wrote:

On May 3, 3:05*pm, Meteorologist wrote:
...

Well, there's a start, Lindzen lives in the same state. More? I'm
happy to wait until you are "good and ready".

Prof. Lindzen lives in the same city and state
as I. *We were acquainted with one another thru
the MIT connection.

I say Prof. Lindzen is a big deal for climate science.

Moreover, I look forward to a real conversation with
you about climate science at long last.

Until then be well,
David Christainsen

You mean you say you went there and Lindzen is Sloan Professor of
Meteorology there.

You never went to MIT and you don't know
what I mean when I say Prof. Lindzen and
I were once acquainted with one another.
(I was not a MIT student at that time.)

Nice connection.

You don't know the connection because I withheld
the details.

Gustav Holst went to my old
university and I think he's a musical genius and a "big deal" in
music.

When you've got time in your busy schedule, do enlighten us about
Linzen's 2009 paper, written in collaboration with Yong-Sang Choi.

That's right; my schedule is busy; I am writing
a book with an ordained Christian minister. I
myself am a non-mainstream Christian minister.
Moreover, I have had a connection with sci.arch
since 2002. My daughter worked on an archaeological
dig once upon a time. So, I have unfinished business
with sci.archers, which also keeps me busy -

a) Tom McDonald
b) Eric Stevens
c) Peter Alaca
d) Ross Clark

Bottom line - Lindzen and Choi's work

I expect a conversation about it with
usenetters. You have led me to expect
only a few on uk.sci.weather are interested.
BTW I never said I was defending their work;
you said that. So, the operative words are -

a) climate science
b) conversation
c) burning curiosity

NOT -

a) polemics
b) irritating tactics
c) boorish manners

So, I recommend you keep an open mind
when our conversation gets going...

Best,
David Christainsen