Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Unthreaded

What point in giving you data which you feel able to arbitrarily reject?
Made me giggle, given the provenance.

Feb 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

National Trust set to waste even more money in court.
Yes the trustees don't like fracking, but Ineos has a right to do seismic testing and NT refusing permission at Clumber Park
So Ineos are dragging them to court.

Feb 22, 2018 at 5:12 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

When the going gets tough electricity generators get coal going. Looking at the data for time of posting Coal is providing 18.17%, Nuclear 18.05% of demand and both at virtually maximum, wind supplying 8.52% and no where near capacity the French and Dutch inter connectors are on maximum too. No mention on the BBC though.

Feb 22, 2018 at 4:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterUibhist a Tuath

EM - I have used your figures for the mass of Schiehallion and GIS, and your distances of 560km and 3km respectively.

I get the resulting lateral force from these masses on a 1kg bob to be 0.000031 Newtons and 0.0009045 Newtons respectively.

Assuming that when you write your results of 0.1g and 0.9g you are expressing this force as a fraction of Earth gravity, (and not grammes), if so you are off by four orders of magnitude.

My answers expressed as a fraction of Earth gravity (using 9.81ms-2) are: 3.174 x 10^-6 g for Schiehallion and 9.22 x 10-5 g for the GIS.

I think you have forgotten to convert the 560km distance into metres.

I reiterate that if you think this miniscule lateral force is enough to create a 30m rise in local sea-level around Greenland you are beyond help.

In future please read my comments before dismissing them. I did not say the paper you linked to was bollocks, I said the paper clearly identified the gravitational anomalies as being due to differeing densities in the Earth's magna core (I said your explanation/reason for the apparent 30m sea level increase around Greenland being due to the mass of the ice sheet was bollocks). And don't insult my intelligence again. And go and get help, your delusions appear to be giving you a severe case of confrimation bias.

Feb 22, 2018 at 4:03 PM | Registered Commenterlapogus

EM. Indeed not. In my time I have collected dozens of sediment cores in Florida Bay where walking in places is nigh near impossible (you sink in the mud up to your hips). Taking cores in these settings is relatively easy, once you get to the site, because the sediments offer so little resistance to the penetration of the metal tube. A full ten foot core is taken in a matter of seconds. The quicker the better. The faster you drive the tube down, the less timec water has to move, and so the less compaction. The impregnating resin is introduced after the core is taken, under pressure, in an autoclave, and replaces most of the water.
I was using these techniques in 1983 [and Hal Wanless who showed them to me had been using them for many years before that]. When I came back to the UK in 1989, I found no-one here using this methodology.

I did try impregnating a marine peat, from Biscayne Bay, once, but for some reason, there was a reaction between the peat and the resin.
My Slapton "peat" was actually an almost liquid organic sludge at the surface, quickly compacting to a "peat"at depth, not a sphagnum peat.

Feb 22, 2018 at 3:52 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll

tomo, forgot to add......

The US has Musk, and Tesla, financed by US Taxpayers and still losing money, whilst achieving nothing.

The Chinese leadership is not that stupid. This would not stop them replicating the viable technical developments.

Feb 22, 2018 at 3:17 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Local papers aren't really local, but rather many stories are made at the same time in a remote office by creating a template and plugging local details in.
"North Lincolnshire joining the green revolution as electric car ownership soars"
Right they mean that there were 2 cars and now there are 3 ?
Alright the council and virtue signalling orgs have a few cars.
So yes 52 were bought last year adding to existing 82
At that rate in 100 years time they'll be 5,000 electric cars
..then you get to bottom that 5,000 would be 5%
Cos our area has almost 100,000 cars.
There's another trick it says "plug in vehicles", so that's not 100% electric , but includes hybrid cars.

Feb 22, 2018 at 3:16 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Feb 21, 2018 at 11:26 PM | tomo

The Chinese Government may claim to be Communist on the outside, but on the inside, they are anything but Communist!

The Leadership does not need to make decisions for short, medium or long term political gain. They are building the power and wealth of China as a worldwide business, on the basis that they will become very rich themselves, and the population are also benefitting.

The Chinese colonisation of countries with neglected arable land, mineral resources etc, allows Chinese entrepreneurs to get richer, with tax and backhanders paid to the Leadership.

China does not have enough coal. It is dependent on Australia. It does not have spare agricultural land to waste time with Biofuels. It has totally dominated solar panel production, so could provide limited domestic power for its new Colonies, quickly and cheaply, whilst coal powerstations are constructed.

China has no oil, and does not like (who does?) being at the mercy of other countries and world events.

China needs to find its own oil, or colonise a country with oil reserves. If a Government combined with private enterprise has an incentive to develop hydrogen fuel cells etc, with hydrogen generated by solar, it is China. With State intervention, they could control the home market to create economies of scale, and then export.

Feb 22, 2018 at 3:09 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Supertroll

We are talking about lake sediments. The photographs accompanying Marsicek at al show the same sort of sampling tubes you and I used for peat. Peat cores are solid all that way to the surface, so the problem I described does not apply.

I'm sure you did not inject resin into peat cores. 🙂

Remember the last time you walked into a lake with a muddy bottom? One loses wellies that way. You cannot collect soft mud by coring.

Injecting resin into a lake or sea sediment core would blow the soft surface layers apart, rather than preserving them. I assume you were using the technique to sample the deeper sediments and not trying to sample the most recent few centuries.

Feb 22, 2018 at 1:21 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

Lapogus

The hell with you attitude! On last try.

Schiehallion is a ridge 1000M high and 6000M long.. It has a mass of 4.2*10^9 tons and produced a measured deflection of 11.6" , equivalent to 0.003 degrees. The force generated by the mountain was about 1/10,000 of Earth's gravity.
A 1kg pendulum Bob 3km from Schiehallion would experience a vertically force of 1kg and a lateral force of 0.1g

The Greenland ice sheet has an area of 1.7millionsq. km, averages 2.5km twhich and masses 3.8*10^17 tons.

Using F=Gm1m2/D2 the attraction force on a 1kg pendulum 500km from the centre and 60km offshore is 0.9g. He pendulum deflection would be about 0.027 degrees.

I picked 60 km offshore for a reason. The pendulum deflection is also the change in angle of the local vertical, and the sea surface follows the local vertical. If you tilt a disc 60km in radius by 1 degree the raised rim rises by 1000M. Tilt the local vertica 60 miles offshore by 0.027 degrees towards the ice sheet and the the water level at the shore rises by 1000*0.027=27M.

I can show numerically that my 30M estimate is approximately correct. Until someone comes up with better numbers I shall stick with it.

Feb 22, 2018 at 1:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>