We all would like this machine that creates time.
In the context of Science of Doom all my time has been diverted into work-related activities and I’m not sure when this will ease up.
Unless someone hands me this machine, and for a price well below market worth, I am not sure when my next post will take place.
I have lots of ideas, but like to do research and gain understanding before writing articles.
Normal service will eventually be resumed.
The Science of Doom 
I understand and sympathize.
We may have many mistakes in our ideas, calculations, theories, design and other issues. Try and Error have made human to grow and enhance know-how on everything. So we should not stay until we are fully convinced on one especial subject, we may need help to fix things. So let others share in our idea and make it possible to end it successfully.
Take your time…
Inflation in time balances would be great, but no way to get it right now. Take your time, it is better that you make a good post rather than a quick post. We will keep waiting. Don’t worry. Help??? Bryan can probably promote himself as a “creator of time”, but I suggest that you filter your volunteers, if you want to maintain the quality of your blog.
Your work here is valued. Come back soon.
Hope you get your work pressures sorted out to your satifaction.
Best wishes
Bryan
May life-work balance return quickly to optimum.
Understanding and learning are basic concepts of your blog. I have learned to appreciate it, and I understand this one completely. May time come..
I really like this blog and recommend it to those who sincerely want to learn more about the science. One “skeptic”, a former believer in the cosmic ray theory, admitted reading the posts avidly – well on the way to changin some of his previous opinions.
Be back soon.
awww.. I just found this blog yesterday… .. well there is more than a month’s worth of reading here so maybe you will be back before I finish.
I had an idea about warming. I wanted to ask you what you thought about it.
I somehow understand that any planet in the solar system is in equilibrium with radiation coming in from the sun and radiation emitted out, after adjusting for Earth cooling, tidal heating, or Jupiters radio emissions, etc. Is that true? The Energy Budget is balanced? roughly of course since the amount coming in changes quickly and the amount going out changes slowly.
Further then I see that if CO2 blocks emissions from escaping, there is a mismatch, and I then assume the Earth will heat up until its emission profile is such that enough energy escapes to return to equilibrium. Is that true? Is it that easy?
Ha I suppose not but say we increased CO2 to some level and held it there for some centuries or longer. Would not temps increase up to a point and then stop increasing?
Please just say NO if I should not use this as an example in my climate talks.
thx
kd
and of course I will look for reference in your excellent material here.
Kevin (NYC):
You’re basically right:
– In a steady-state condition, the average radiated power must equal the average absorbed radiation.
– An increase in atmospheric CO2 reduces the emission of infrared radiation without affecting appreciably the power of the absorbed radiation. So the Earth will be out of radiative balance, and will gradually increase in temperature until the new emitted radiative power equals the absorbed power again. If we were to stop adding CO2 today, there would be a delay (about a decade or two, I think) before the Earth would reach the new steady-state temperature, at which point it would stop heating.
thanks.. I guess the point of SoD last post was how much hotter does it have to get to achieve this balance. i.e. how effective will the increased heat be in overcoming the co2 effect.
I like to use this way of looking at the problem because people have a hard time with the details but are able to accept that what comes in must go out…
I think you’re right – you have it pretty much as clear, simple and unambiguous as it’s going to get! Still, a lot of people have trouble getting their heads round the idea that the amount in can still be the same as the amount out, but that the temperature can be much higher (or lower). I don’t know what you find the best analogy for this – I always like the ‘lagging on pipe’.
> how much hotter does it have to get to achieve this balance
see “climate sensitivity” — about which much is still being written. Some:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Arealclimate.org+“climate+sensitivity”
Science and Technology Content for The Science of Doom
Hi,
My name is Ben Chasteen and I am the Science/Technology editor at Before It’s News, a people-powered news site serving over 4 million people a month. We publish over 4,000 user-generated posts each day at BeforeItsNews.com.
I contacted months ago to see if you wanted to syndicate your RSS feed however, but didn’t hear anything back. This time I am contacting you because I was wondering if you would be interested in receiving a short email of our top 5 Science/Technology stories each week? We have a lot of stories that the mainstream media don’t cover. I think you’d find it a great source of unique information. If it’s ok, please just email me back with a YES. You have my iron-clad promise that your email address will not be used for any other purpose or be added to any mailing lists.
I would also be your personal contact at Before It’s News, should you ever have questions or need anything.
By the way, we also offer free WordPress blog hosting, and we can syndicate your RSS feed, if you’re interested. Just let me know.
Thank you,
Ben Chasteen
Science/ Technology Editor
Before It’s News
775 East Blithedale Ave. #362
Mill Valley, CA 94941
http://www.beforeitsnews.com
SoD I am very sorry to hear that. I’ve been following your blog with much interest … I hope your work brings in enough so that more time is freed up.
SoD, I hope your work eases up in the new year. Many thanks for all your efforts to date to shine light on the details of many important areas of climate science. Your careful analyses are valuable and much appreciated, even if I occasionally don’t 100% agree with all your conclusions.