politics

Walking the Planck: Parts 1& 2

43 Comments

The goings on have inspired Josh.

Here is the malevolent captain Lucia forcing Monckton off her ship:


Here is Monckton, walking off thinking he is unscathed

I’ve been giving a hint about part 3; you’ll have to guess.

Update: Josh sent the 3rd panel.

I knew it involved the third panel involved the angry octopus. I see Josh worked in a reference to Trenberth there!

I hope Monckton enjoys the octopus ride home! 🙂

43 thoughts on “Walking the Planck: Parts 1& 2”

  1. Your cartoonist is very good indeed.

    It brings to mind the wise words of a British Football manager, Brian Clough. When asked about his relationship with the press Brian said something like this

    “I could walk across that swimming pool and tomorrow the headline would be

    “Brian Clough cannot swim”

  3. So far, Josh is allowing multiple interpretations. Even encouraging them.

    I know what my Part III would depict (assuming I could draw).

  6. > What would you depict?

    Somebody would find that they are all wet.

    The maritime equivalent of what Wile E. Coyote kept discovering when he would race past the cliff’s edge and stay suspended in air… for a few seconds.

  12. Ah Hoi there! So you did. Great minds think alike, I hope. My outing was delayed a whole week by discussions 😉
    – oh I see Lucia got there before me. Yes, what she said!

  14. bugs–
    I don’t know how you concluded it’s all Trenberth’s fault from the cartoon.

    I think if that Octopus is Trenberth, Monckton isn’t going to last very long out at sea. I’m not entirely sure Mosher and I are safe in your ship. But the octopus’s googly eyes sure are glowering at Monckton!

  15. Ah yes, my bad I can’t draw like you Josh. The follow up in the 2nd cartoon was genious though.

  20. Doc–
    I asked Josh to cast Keira Knightly as Lucia, and he complied.

    My hair is short. When I was younger, it was long, and very curly. Oddly enough, his verision of cartoon Keira Knightly isn’t that far off from me at 20-30. That said… I was never beautiful like Keira Knightly.

  23. Don

    Hasn’t this gotten a little bit silly?

    Sure. I think the silly factor went stratospheric with Monckton’s comment about all my errors posted over at WUWT. I don’t see the cartoons making it any sillier than that did.

  24. lucia (Comment #83023),

    I don’t know; my experience is that an awful lot of lasting beauty sits between the ears.

    Keira Knightly? IMO, just kinda weird looking, with the jutting lower jaw and all… Don’t know if she is smart.

  25. lucia,

    You made your point and the Lord took his ball and went home. You won, yet you keep dancing in the end-zone. (I am trying not to mix metaphors). Your considerable talents could be better spent on other endeavors. For example: Please help Bruce!

    I will say that Josh’s portrait of Lord Monckton is rather flattering, in the physical sense. How the Lord Dude has the nerve to say someone else looks like an overcooked prawn is what we really should be focusing on. I still like you, lucia. Are you Italian?

  28. Every time I see that bar shot I chuckle at the evident malevolent splendour of the denial machine in all its glory! 🙂

  31. Don–
    I am not Italian. My first name come from my Cuban grandmother. The name is pretty common in El Salvador, where I was born.

    Most my DNA background is Irish/Scots/English but there is other stuff mixed in there.

    Josh drews cartoons. Of course the cartoons lag the “incident”. But really, do you think I’m not going to show them? They are cute. Plus Josh was nice enough to make me look like Keira Knightly! (Even if SteveF thinks she’s not so hot!)

    I am going to be buying a Pirate mug today. I think Mosher should too.

  32. lucia,

    Thanks. It doesn’t matter. You are lovely in any language.
    I was just trying to change the subject. We are eagerly awaiting the solar oven post. Bruce is sad and lonely over on that other thread. Even Mosher has given up on him. Can’t we all just get along?

  33. Lucia,

    On a sheet of paper, draw two dots 3.9 inches apart at the bottom, At the top draw two dots 2.4 inches apart, near the tropopause level draw two points about 2.2 inches apart, draw a coke bottle curve to connect the dots. That is the rough upwelling infrared shape. 🙂

    How do I get that?

  34. This is fun,

    print out a copy of the water vapor spectra and a copy of the ice spectra. Then ask yourself, how many molecules are required for ice?

  36. Adaptation will always be as it has always been, regional and local, as will be the politics. If CO2 is problematic, then mitigation may have to be somewhat centrally directed. However, higher CO2 leads to a warmer, more diverse and more sustainable life for all. I certainly hope that the CO2 effect is strong enough to oppose a globe cooling naturally, but I haven’t seen any, repeat any, evidence that that is so.
    =================

  37. Kim, That is the question of the century, can CO2 oppose global cooling. It appears to be close. The strength of the interglacial attractor could tighten up a bit shifting to longer interglacial periods than glacial periods. I don’t think a stable glacial is possible, but it is not out of the realm of possibility. My chaos math sucks worse than my calculus though.

  38. Dallas,
    Anthropogenic CO2 as the cure for natural global cooling – Is it the question of the “century”? Perhaps it is the question of the holocene. Or more simply “The Question”.

  39. Yep, Bender the result I have so far is that CO2 impacts are cooling and heating with a fairly good feedback, The thermostat, like the new paper over at Dr.Curry’s says. I am show a little more complex relationship. I have hit a wall though. Changing the visualization of a system from top down to bottom up ain’t easy, so I am really stuck.

    What started me on this subject was I was toying with an idea for a Sci-fi short story on the Coming Ice Age. The CO2 lags in the Ice cores match my theory, but how does a fishing captain get the scientific elite to answer email? Especially, when the theory is counter intuitive. But it fairly well explains the CO2 temperature relationships. Neat stuff for a novel until it starts getting too weird for sci-fi.

  40. Captain Dallas,
    May I suggest you raise the topic at Climate Etc with Drs. Curry and Lacis? I would dearly like to see an intelligent discussion of this hypothesis.

  41. bender, So would I, at Curry’s all I got was “prove the relationship” and “you have to use down welling = 321” Now they are on the new CO2 thermostat paper, with used the same type of pulse perturbation I used, only on water vapor where I pulsed emissivity. The only relationship I can half way prove is radiant, because of the “benchmark” 3.3Wm-2 for doubling, 3.3Wm-2/4Wm-2=0.825 unit less.

    Dr. Curry has stirred clear, Lucia, justifiable wants to steer clear and Dr. Spencer is rather busy, plus my theory appears to be at odds with his, though it really more of a supliment. Maybe Tamino will attempt to disprove it, instead of dismiss it, but if they don’t follow the energy, they will get garbage. Don’t know.

  42. bender, the only part of all this that may be mine is the conduction coefficient, That is probably not mine either, but it does mystifies me that a simple equation that works, can create so much commotion. All it is a simplified version of Relativistic Heat Conduction, the emissivity is a piece of cake to calculate, but some how, 321Wm-2 is supposed to be the number, 3.3 appears to be the “Benchmark” for only the GHG spectrum.

    Some times instead of demanding proofs, people should just try things and see if they work, instead of arguing about why it may not work.

Comments are closed.