Science & Technology News

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

“Volcanic eruptions are one of the key forcings driving Earth into its next bout of global cooling.
Today’s worldwide uptick (volcanic AND seismic) is thought to be tied to low solar activity, coronal holes, a waning magnetosphere, and the influx of Cosmic Rays penetrating silica-rich magma.”
Says who, besides Cap Allon?
Who is Cap Allon, and what expertise has he?
Cap Allon’s ‘Electroverse’ is a quackery level, Pseudoscience source, based on the promotion of misinformation, regarding climate change, that does not align with the consensus of science.

Gord we both know I have posted the actual science studies several times so stop with the hyperbole on it .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

Probably unlikely... "Early data from earth observing satellites indicates that total sulfur dioxide emissions are roughly 1 to 2% of Pinatubo and nearly an order of magnitude too small to have any measurable climate impact."

Fine particulate to 98k feet not just the So2 will have a serious effect.

How do they know the so2 discharge for an eruption that is still ongoing .

https://www.volcanodiscovery.com/new...t-reports.html


FVAU01 at 16:39 UTC, 16/01/22 from ADRM VA ADVISORY DTG: 20220116/1639Z VAAC: DARWIN VOLCANO: HUNGA TONGA-HUNGA HA'APAI 243040 PSN: S2032 W17523 AREA: TONGA SUMMIT ELEV: 114M ADVISORY NR: 2022/5 INFO SOURCE: SATELLITE IMAGERY AVIATION COLOUR CODE: RED ERUPTION DETAILS: LARGE ERUPTION OBS VA DTG: 16/1610Z OBS VA CLD: FL400/630 S2536 E16300 - S2807 E15823 - S2613 E15125 - S1959 E14622 - S1333 E14621 - S1134 E14958 - S1536 E16200 - S1730 E16300 MOV W 40KT FCST VA CLD +6 HR: 16/2210Z FL400/630 S2542 E16300 - S2827 E15848 - S2704 E15053 - S2028 E14155 - S1225 E14239 - S1034 E14729 - S1500 E16142 - S1730 E16300 FCST VA CLD +12 HR: 17/0410Z FL400/630 S2542 E16300 - S2931 E15854 - S2814 E15058 - S2303 E13826 - S1134 E13735 - S1013 E14642 - S1500 E16142 - S1730 E16300 FCST VA CLD +18 HR: 17/1010Z FL400/630 S2545 E16301 - S2931 E15854 - S2844 E15030 - S2333 E13614 - S1233 E13442 - S1011 E14646 - S1500 E16140 - S1731 E16259 RMK: VAA LIMITED TO VAAC DARWIN AREA. FOR VA ADVISORIES WITHIN VAAC WELLINGTON AREA SEE WELLINGTON VAA FVPS01 NZKL. VA MOVEMENT TOWARDS THE WEST OVER AUSTRALIAN MAINLAND. NXT ADVISORY: NO LATER THAN 20220116/2210Z=

You all know I do my due diligence.

[GordMay]

If the warming were caused by a more active Sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.

Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases.


The above graph compares global surface temperature changes (red line) and the Sun's energy received by the Earth (yellow line) in watts (units of energy) per square meter since 1880. The lighter/thinner lines show the yearly levels, while the heavier/thicker lines show the 11-year average trends. Eleven-year averages are used to reduce the year-to-year natural noise in the data, making the underlying trends more obvious.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

If the warming were caused by a more active Sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.

Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases.


The above graph compares global surface temperature changes (red line) and the Sun's energy received by the Earth (yellow line) in watts (units of energy) per square meter since 1880. The lighter/thinner lines show the yearly levels, while the heavier/thicker lines show the 11-year average trends. Eleven-year averages are used to reduce the year-to-year natural noise in the data, making the underlying trends more obvious.

The models are wrong . They are based on inaccurate data . Look at the real world numbers they are way below the models.
We have been through all of this before . Wait till September it should be rather interesting to say the least. And no I don't know what the Terran effects of the gas giant alignments will cause . We will have 2 opposing large magnetic fields We will be in the middle of it. Not to mention the gravitational pulls . The last time this alignment happened we had an eruption of Mt vesuvius and destruction of Pompeii.

[GordMay]

I understand, that you feel that everyone, but you [& your very small tribe] is wrong, on everything.

The Temperature vs Solar Activity graph isn't based upon a model. It represents the history, and REALITY.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I understand, that you feel that everyone, but you [& your very small tribe] is wrong, on everything.

The Temperature vs Solar Activity graph isn't based upon a model. It represents the history, and REALITY.

No it doesn't count all solar activity just the irradiance . Which is but a small portion of the total solar effect I have posted it all before .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I understand, that you feel that everyone, but you [& your very small tribe] is wrong, on everything.

.

The actual pure science backs my position. However the politicized MSM version is not really based in science but politics.

Please give an example of even one mmgwc prediction that has actually happened that doesn't have a real natural explanation from actual scientists.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

Probably unlikely... "Early data from earth observing satellites indicates that total sulfur dioxide emissions are roughly 1 to 2% of Pinatubo and nearly an order of magnitude too small to have any measurable climate impact."

Well this satellite view grabbed from windy.com I figure it will have an significant effect

[GordMay]

Living For The Moment
Cognitive differences, in people who are vaccine hesitant.

For fully-vaccinated Canadians, one of the pandemic’s most perplexing aspects is the reluctance of some people to get their COVID-19 shot, or take preventive measures, like wearing a mask.

A new study [1] (preprint - not peer reviewed) offers some clues, adding to evidence that people who accept or reject COVID precautions actually think in different ways.

The research concluded that vaccine hesitancy is associated with being less oriented toward the future, and more likely to choose a smaller reward today, than wait for a better one, down the road.
Eschewing masks or hand washing, was linked to relatively impulsive behaviour.

The study [1], funded in part by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, surveyed just over 2,000 people, divided about evenly between fully vaccinated, and unvaccinated people.
Using standard psychological questionnaires, they were probed on three aspects of cognition.
One looked at so-called “delay discounting,” with questions about whether the person would prefer $500 now, or $1,000 at some point hours or days away.
Another examined the subjects’ “time perspective.” They were asked, for instance, if they agreed that “living for the moment is more important than planning for the future,” or “I spend a lot of time thinking about how my present actions will have an impact on my life later on.”

Vaccine-hesitant people were more likely to opt for the earlier reward, and to indicate they lived in the moment.

The researchers also looked at “executive dysfunction” of the brain, asking subjects how often they felt that “I am likely to do things without considering the consequences” or “I act without thinking.”

There was a weaker connection between people who scored high on the executive dysfunction scale and resistance to the COVID prevention measures, the study found.

Meanwhile, the same group is planning to issue several more papers stemming from the research, which also looked at other possible factors — from emotional status to views about the severity of COVID-19, political orientation and trust in science.

***preprint***
[1] “Cognitive predictors of vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 mitigation behaviors in a population representative sample” ~ by Anna Hudson et al
➥ https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...629v1.full.pdf

“The Canadian COVID-19 Experiences Project: Design and Protocol” ~ by Peter A. Hall et al
➥ https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...387v3.full.pdf

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Living For The Moment
Cognitive differences, in people who are vaccine hesitant.

For fully-vaccinated Canadians, one of the pandemic’s most perplexing aspects is the reluctance of some people to get their COVID-19 shot, or take preventive measures, like wearing a mask.

A new study [1] (preprint - not peer reviewed) offers some clues, adding to evidence that people who accept or reject COVID precautions actually think in different ways.

The research concluded that vaccine hesitancy is associated with being less oriented toward the future, and more likely to choose a smaller reward today, than wait for a better one, down the road.
Eschewing masks or hand washing, was linked to relatively impulsive behaviour.

The study [1], funded in part by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, surveyed just over 2,000 people, divided about evenly between fully vaccinated, and unvaccinated people.
Using standard psychological questionnaires, they were probed on three aspects of cognition.
One looked at so-called “delay discounting,” with questions about whether the person would prefer $500 now, or $1,000 at some point hours or days away.
Another examined the subjects’ “time perspective.” They were asked, for instance, if they agreed that “living for the moment is more important than planning for the future,” or “I spend a lot of time thinking about how my present actions will have an impact on my life later on.”

Vaccine-hesitant people were more likely to opt for the earlier reward, and to indicate they lived in the moment.

The researchers also looked at “executive dysfunction” of the brain, asking subjects how often they felt that “I am likely to do things without considering the consequences” or “I act without thinking.”

There was a weaker connection between people who scored high on the executive dysfunction scale and resistance to the COVID prevention measures, the study found.

Meanwhile, the same group is planning to issue several more papers stemming from the research, which also looked at other possible factors — from emotional status to views about the severity of COVID-19, political orientation and trust in science.

***preprint***
[1] “Cognitive predictors of vaccine hesitancy and COVID-19 mitigation behaviors in a population representative sample” ~ by Anna Hudson et al
➥ https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...629v1.full.pdf

“The Canadian COVID-19 Experiences Project: Design and Protocol” ~ by Peter A. Hall et al
➥ https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...387v3.full.pdf

Any study done by a government agency or government supported organization is obviously subject to bias. With threat of job loss for honesty, survey personal are compromised. Will a government that promotes and coerces injections publish a study that knocks them? That is like asking if a man will grasp a knife in one had to slash his other hand. This survey includes so much content that is unrelated to the realities of COVID and injections, that it is quite pointless.



Wait until that spike protein takes its tole on the brain cells of cocky jab recipients. Such a study on them may find results that they will not boast.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Dieseldude

Any study done by a government agency or government supported organization is obviously subject to bias. With threat of job loss for honesty, survey personal are compromised. Will a government that promotes and coerces injections publish a study that knocks them? That is like asking if a man will grasp a knife in one had to slash his other hand. This survey includes so much content that is unrelated to the realities of COVID and injections, that it is quite pointless.



Wait until that spike protein takes its tole on the brain cells of cocky jab recipients. Such a study on them may find results that they will not boast.

I can just hear the television ads in about 10 or so years.

' if you or a loved one took the ( insert vaccine maker) experimental vaccine and suffered severe side effects or they died from it. Please call _________ & _________ law firm you may be entitled to financial compensation for your injuries. "

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by newhaul

I can just hear the television ads in about 10 or so years.

' if you or a loved one took the ( insert vaccine maker) experimental vaccine and suffered severe side effects or they died from it. Please call _________ & _________ law firm you may be entitled to financial compensation for your injuries. "

Sorry, it won't happen. The jab makers were all given immunity to liability for their products. Perhaps that is the only immunity offered in the whole scheme. Beats me why anyone would trust their life to a product that can be so dangerous that the user is not allowed to sue the maker for damages. What good is money to a bed ridden person? And is it likely that anyone will launch a law suit from six feet under anyway?

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by GordMay

If the warming were caused by a more active Sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.

Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases.


The above graph compares global surface temperature changes (red line) and the Sun's energy received by the Earth (yellow line) in watts (units of energy) per square meter since 1880. The lighter/thinner lines show the yearly levels, while the heavier/thicker lines show the 11-year average trends. Eleven-year averages are used to reduce the year-to-year natural noise in the data, making the underlying trends more obvious.

What? Climate data in a virus discussion? Real data indicates that the upper atmosphere temperatures have been holding quite steady.

[pt49]

This stupid thread has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with sailing.

Please close this thread, it is a total waste of space.

[Dieseldude]

Was not this thread about "Canadian COVID news"? Funny it should have been started. This subject has absolutely nothing to do with sailing. Except perhaps it effects one's freedom to sail to other places, purchase supplies, access services, etc. If one does not like it, one does not have to read it. Simple solution. Closing the thread would be censoring free expression, just as some big name social media have been doing. Would be quite a blight on the forum to stoop to such tactics.