Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - vox_mundi

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 39
1
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 13, 2020, 09:37:51 PM »
As for point 2, I am dismayed.

I am too, Shared Humanity.

Quote from Kassy:

Quote
I think you are wrong on count 2. Neven chose a category in his description. The actual detail was not really important because it was more about the media in general. One problem is that we make a division when someone foregrounds an issue and then people focus on the less important part as intended by the poster.

Kassy, i have no idea what you are trying to say here. The fact is, Neven displayed gross disregard of science, committed victim-blaming, expressed misanthropy, makes this a political issue, deliberately posts fake news, disregards the valid fear of people to become sick or die, and downplays the implications of the virus. This is what people oppose obviously.

All this shouldn't happen on a scientifically oriented forum. He drove away valued community members by doing so. You cannot comment those facts away. Just telling people to not read this thread isn't helping either.

2
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 13, 2020, 08:04:54 PM »
(When I recreated my account 2 days ago, I did it with the intention of explaining more thoroughly my reason for leaving this site. The comment did not pass moderation and I am fine with that. Below is a condensed version.)

1. I was attracted to this site in 2013 by its grounding in science.
2. I am dismayed by persons on this thread for whom I had developed a great deal of respect who have abandoned all science in arguing how inconsequential this disease is.
3. This has caused me to question in a very personal way why I come here.

I hope this comment passes muster.


<I think you are wrong on count 2. Neven chose a category in his description. The actual detail was not really important because it was more about the media in general. One problem is that we make a division when someone foregrounds an issue and then people focus on the less important part as intended by the poster.

If we would all be on voice comms you can ask quick questions to clarify. Here we can´t but we can ask slow questions before jumping to conclusions.

This is a general point not for SH per se.
kassy>


Thank you Kassy for allowing this comment to post.

As for point 2, I am dismayed.

I did not single out Neven and, if I had the time or inclination, (I don't) I could go back into this thread and find numerous persons who have dismissed the data and argued for a ridiculously low IFR and dismissed the science that points to serious health problems for many who recover from the virus, the kinds of health problems you never find from persons who have recovered from the flu.

At any rate, the three numbered points above stand. They accurately and succinctly summarize exactly where I am. While I suspect this is my last comment on this site, I will not hastily delete the account this time. This will allow me to reconsider this decision in the future.

Everyone - Take care and stay safe.


<Another general comment: The main interest for this site is the Arctic ice. You can ignore huge parts of this site and still do things. Or even read AGWiG/C and just ignore covid. kassy>

3
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 13, 2020, 06:34:44 PM »
James Annan has an interesting thread on Twitter this morning where he discusses a new antibody study in the UK. The study, not peer reviewed yet, is reported in the Guardian. The take home is that 6% of the UK population has antibodies. Total COVID-19 deaths reported on Worldometers is 41,329, which would reflect an IFR of just above 1% if both the serology and death numbers are accurate.
https://twitter.com/jamesannan/status/1293811160094068736?s=20

There's that number again but don't worry. Most of those who have died are older or have comorbidities so f'em.

<That was of course what a lot of actual policies came down too. But this probably refers to the earlier debate. Do debate the points and try to interpret things you disagree with in a non personal manner. The latter part is also just a general note. kassy>

Fair enough.

I guess the point is that the true IFR is likely around 1%.

In New York State the fatality rate is currently 1690 deaths per million residents. This would be an IFR of 0.17% if every New York State resident had contracted the disease. Tests, however indicate that about 25% of NYC residents were infected and perhaps as little as 5% of non metro residents. Yet I see people tossing around estimates of 0.1% or 0.2% with absolutely nothing to back that number up. This thing is at least 10 times as deadly as the flu.

And the comparison to the flu from a science perspective is highly dangerous as well. This disease's infectious path may be the respiratory tract but the science has shown it is a vascular disease, able to damage organs throughout the body, wherever there are high concentrations of ACE2 receptors. People have pulmonary embolisms, heart attacks, permanently damaged kidneys, lungs and hearts and as yet unexplained neurological damage. This is not the freakin' flu.

(When I recreated my account 2 days ago, I did it with the intention of explaining more thoroughly my reason for leaving this site. The comment did not pass moderation and I am fine with that. Below is a condensed version.)

1. I was attracted to this site in 2013 by its grounding in science.
2. I am dismayed by persons on this thread for whom I had developed a great deal of respect who have abandoned all science in arguing how inconsequential this disease is.
3. This has caused me to question in a very personal way why I come here.

I hope this comment passes muster.


<I think you are wrong on count 2. Neven chose a category in his description. The actual detail was not really important because it was more about the media in general. One problem is that we make a division when someone foregrounds an issue and then people focus on the less important part as intended by the poster.

If we would all be on voice comms you can ask quick questions to clarify. Here we can´t but we can ask slow questions before jumping to conclusions.

This is a general point not for SH per se.
kassy>

4
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 13, 2020, 04:04:16 PM »
James Annan has an interesting thread on Twitter this morning where he discusses a new antibody study in the UK. The study, not peer reviewed yet, is reported in the Guardian. The take home is that 6% of the UK population has antibodies. Total COVID-19 deaths reported on Worldometers is 41,329, which would reflect an IFR of just above 1% if both the serology and death numbers are accurate.
https://twitter.com/jamesannan/status/1293811160094068736?s=20

There's that number again but don't worry. Most of those who have died are older or have comorbidities so f'em.

<That was of course what a lot of actual policies came down too. But this probably refers to the earlier debate. Do debate the points and try to interpret things you disagree with in a non personal manner. The latter part is also just a general note. kassy>

5
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 11, 2020, 04:13:47 PM »
Here's the animation from Freegrass, in combo with sea ice concentration

6
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: August 05, 2020, 01:43:45 PM »

7
I voted no. We have a shared common interest, Arctic sea ice and AGW and other long-term trends.
To discover that a valued poster believes vaccines cause autism, the other falls for chemtrails, another for aliens, another falls for moon landing hoax claim, and all the other conspiracy theories, will only serve to drive wedges between us. No one is going to be convinced anyway, the level of anger will only rise, and it will spill over to the rest of the forum.
Even worse if we consider links to such conspiracy sites, this way we will be funding their financial gains and their search engine placement.
Obviously, I voted no.

8
(USA)

Arizona school superintendent: Reopening is a fantasy

"The governor has told us we have to open our schools to students on August 17th, or else we miss out on five percent of our funding"

"high-needs district in middle-of-nowhere Arizona. We’re 90 percent Hispanic and more than 90 percent free-and-reduced lunch."

"I already lost one teacher to this virus. "

"your classic one-horse town"

"We still haven’t received our order of Plexiglas barriers, so we’re cutting up shower curtains and trying to make do"

"last week I found out we had another staff member who tested positive"

"We got back two of those tests already — both positive. We’re still waiting on eight more. That makes 11 percent of my staff that’s gotten covid, and we haven’t had a single student in our buildings since March. Part of our facility is closed down for decontamination, but we don’t have anyone left to decontaminate it unless I want to put on my hazmat suit and go in there. "

"I don’t understand how anyone could expect us to reopen the building this month in a way that feels safe. "

"every time I start to play out what that looks like on August 17th, I get sick to my stomach. "

"it’s a fantasy. Kids will get sick, or worse. Family members will die. Teachers will die."

"A bunch of our teachers have told me they will put in for retirement if we open up this month. They’re saying: “Please don’t make us go back. This is crazy. We’re putting the whole community at risk.” "

"I agree with them 100 percent. "

" why are we getting bullied into opening? This district isn’t ready to open. I can’t have more people getting sick. Why are they threatening our funding? "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/08/01/schools-reopening-coronavirus-arizona-superintendent/

sidd

9
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: August 03, 2020, 07:16:10 PM »
Latest Five Day Forecast
Wind @ Surface + Total Precipitable Water
Large GiF!

Don't forget to click the like button from time to time if you like these forecasts!

10
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: August 03, 2020, 02:25:26 AM »
I stay away from the political threads. I’m posting once and never again. I’m not sure if this is the right thread to post on, but it seems to address the issue that I thought was important.

I live in Indiana in the Midwest US. For those who do not know, that is Mike Pence’s home state. 

I have two high school aged children and one middle school age child.

The interesting thing that I wanted to post is that every kid I know thinks the American flag is a racist symbol. 

The republicans are trying to “make America great again,” but they are making the youth hate America.

I don’t know what you guys will make of that, but in middle America which is a Trump stronghold the kids hate him and our country. 

EDIT: I should also add that none of the kids I know in our town will ever stand for the National Anthem. Again, I wonder what Trump and the GOP think they are accomplishing. The old people might like them, but they will be dead soon.  The youth hate them and they are turning the youth so far away from their message that none of their agenda stands a chance of lasting more than a small number of years.

11
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 02, 2020, 06:50:24 PM »
First post from a long-time lurker on this site.
A site I have always enjoyed because of its collection, portrayal and  rational discussion of data on a topic that is often clouded with paranoid hysteria by those in the denialist community.
I visit this site primarily to look at the daily Arctic Sea Ice numbers, but noticed this COVID-19 thread in passing and was inspired to comment.

I live on Jeju Island, South Korea. This is a tourist island about 100 km south of the Korean mainland.
There has been no total lockdown here. In the last two months 1.2 million South Korean tourists have visited the island. There has been close to zero COVID-19 on the island. Zero deaths. Of the 26 confirmed cases, all but 23 were visitors from outside the island.

The successful strategy here is to test , trace and isolate.
Testing is free. The results are returned quickly, enabling rapid contact tracing and the isolation of all potentially infected persons.

It has been so puzzling to me that much of the rest of the world failed to put in place anything remotely similar.

I read Neven's linked 'Facts about Covid-19' and saw item 30.
Quote
A 2019 WHO study on measures against pandemic influenza found that from a medical perspective, “contact tracing” is “not recommended in any circumstances”.
This statement seemed so bizarre to me that I read the linked WHO guidelines (It's not a WHO study)
WHO : Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza
The evidence against contact tracing is from four simulation studies. The conclusion
Quote
There is a very low overall quality of evidence that contact tracing has an unknown effect on the transmission of influenza.
. It seems odd to jump from this to  “not recommended in any circumstances”.
The most likely reason I can guess for the WHO to come out so firmly against contact tracing is this
Quote
contact tracing may not be an equitable intervention, because its successful implementation relies on availability of resources and technology.

Reading the WHO guidelines more fully I realise that the successful strategy chosen by South Korea, 'test , trace and isolate'. goes against advice in all 3 cases.
Why did the WHO get it so wrong? These are 2019 guidelines so have nothing to do with WHO subservience to China in 2020.

PS The verification questions are superb - Which river flows into the Laptev Sea !!! Great question. No wonder there are so few deniers on this site.

PPS After posting I got this message Warning - while you were typing 3 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post. Did I need to repost?

 

12
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: August 01, 2020, 08:23:38 AM »
Feels really strange, but I had to put Neven on my ignore list after the really really bad comment about Herman Cain and his cancer. I had cancer myself two years ago and according to Neven it is OK if I die in case I get Covid 19 - as I will die with Covid and not of Covid.
Somehow I have a different opinion.

I can't stand his comments any more.

For me he is a lost case.....

.

13
Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: July 31, 2020, 07:58:07 AM »
Quote
Brandolini's law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle, is an internet adage which emphasizes the difficulty of debunking bullshit: "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."

Link >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law

We have this a lot here. I wish we wouldn't have this.

Walrus, i have homework for you. Read this:

On Bullshit is a 2005 book (originally a 1986 essay) by philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt which presents a theory of bullshit that defines the concept and analyzes the applications of bullshit in the context of communication. Frankfurt determines that bullshit is speech intended to persuade without regard for truth. The liar cares about the truth and attempts to hide it; the bullshitter doesn't care if what they say is true or false, but rather only cares whether their listener is persuaded.

Free to read here >> http://www2.csudh.edu/ccauthen/576f12/frankfurt__harry_-_on_bullshit.pdf

14
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 31, 2020, 07:12:18 AM »
I just want to make a comment here for no particular reason.
I live in Melbourne, Australia. We are in the middle of an outbreak of Covid 19, and it isn't even something that registers on the global stage.
The initial outbreak early this year was easily controlled through social distancing, isolation and relatively good management.

Everyone thought we did well, and we did. CV19 looked to be something that, for most people, was not a big deal. But for some it meant hospital and ICU and then death.

My take on it is that CV19 is relatively bad in itself, and bad enough to warrant the shut down given we don't know enough to simply ignore it. Most people will be okay. Most people who die from it have pre existing conditions and are old.... but only if the hospital systems are functioning. If that fails, then the game changes somewhat to kill healthier and younger people.

In this second outbreak, one that is not driven from overseas arrivals but community spread that is untraceable, and it isn't even that bad in global sense, my take is this.

In a few weeks we went from 10s per day to 600 plus per day. Our hospitals are full even at those "low" numbers. Most people in hospital with CV19 are very sick, and the ICU wards are almost full. Nurses and doctors are coming down with CV19 in spite of having protective equipment and training and the human resources we have are stretched already. It has made it into aged care facilities now (25% of them are infected now) and that situation is about to become a nightmare very soon.

This has happened in a city with very good health care, good resourcing, well trained staff, a proactive State Govt and supportive Federal Govt. All it has taken to bring our health care system to breaking point is an average 400 cases per day over the last week, but 1300 in the last two days.

Testing has been huge, something like 1.3 million tests for a population of 5 million people.

CV19 is a problem. Sure, it doesn't severely affect most people, but when it does, it does it hard and over a long period of time... and we are only now learning more about the longer term effects it has.

Melbourne is in week 3 of a fairly tight lockdown with mask wearing compulsory and it is looking like we are losing the fight a bit.

The economy is hurting, people are stressed, it is not nice at all.
While I would like to think that we can just open everything up and let this thing rip through, it isn't the right decision. So many people would die doing that and it wouldnt just be CV19 cases.

Because the hospitals are stressed, elective surgery has been cancelled, administrating meds to very ill people is difficult and they are catching CV19 while in hospital and dying from it.

I am unsure as to why people think CV19 isn't a big deal, or play it down or undermine the severity. Just look at Melbourne, well tested, resourced etc, we know fairly well how many cases we have and the numbers are not all that big, yet we are in trouble in the health services already. If we keep up this 600 plus day stuff for a few more days things are going to start breaking down and the death toll will begin to include people of all ages, not just the over 50s. Younger very sick CV cases do well because of the hospitals, not because the disease isn't all that bad for younger people.

That is my take on this....

https://au.news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-emergency-doctors-plea-as-victoria-cases-soar-020007459.html

15
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 31, 2020, 06:28:58 AM »
Quote
Herman Cain dies at 74

(...)

Calabrese said doctors were hopeful as recently as five days before his death that Cain would make a recovery. However, because Cain previously beat liver cancer, he was considered at high-risk for complications related to COVID-19.

(...)

On the campaign trail, he spoke about being diagnosed in 2006 with stage 4 liver cancer and his doctors giving him slim hope for long-term survival.

It sounds like this...... a person with stage four cancer got hit by a bus and died. But because he had stage four cancer, death by bus doesn't count.

It seems like that person would probably still be alive today if he hadn't caught Covid 19. So Covid killed him.

16
Consequences / Re: The Holocene Extinction
« on: July 31, 2020, 06:22:26 AM »
Let me summarize your claims, copied from your posts above. My text is in bold:
* The article is "just a repeat of inaccurate information." Any specifics?
* Polar bear hibernation period decreases by 30% or more thanks to warmer winter temperatures. Polar bears do not hibernate. And where does this 30% number come from? Source?
* No decrease of polar bear numbers helps diffuse this kind of misinformation. Polar bear numbers have rebounded following bans and regulation of hunting. Regardless of that, the article makes calculations of future declines of bear populations, not of present declines, so this is irrelevant.
* Polar bears do much worse when there is more sea ice, as there is no place to hunt for seals. This is just flagrant misinformation. Polar bears do most of their hunting in winter. The seals have to breath and thus are to be found somewhere. According to Wikipedia, their preferred habitat is the annual sea ice covering the waters over the continental shelf and the Arctic inter-island archipelagos. These areas, known as the "Arctic ring of life", have high biological productivity in comparison to the deep waters of the high Arctic. The polar bear tends to frequent areas where sea ice meets water, such as polynyas and leads, to hunt the seals that make up most of its diet. Polar bears are able to produce water through the metabolism of fats found in seal blubber, and are therefore found primarily along the perimeter of the polar ice pack, rather than in the Polar Basin close to the North Pole where the density of seals is low. So as can be seen the bears follow the seal population. They hunt seals in breathing holes, seals resting on the ice, and raid the birth lairs that female seals create in the snow.
* When asked "Which assumptions do they make that are not supported by the data?" You respond by twisting some sentence from the article that says there cannot be any data linking low ice extremes with population declines because such extremes have not happened yet, therefore they made estimates of calories. But you do not list any wrong assumptions.
* When confronted with "bears do not hibernate" you admit it, but then explain about "waking hibernation", a state which does not exist, and which you confuse with denning which only applies to females with newborn cubs.
* As the winter temperature warms, less nutrition is required to maintain body temperature. This effect, if it exists, applies only to denning females. And does the effect exist? How strong is it? I guess we just have to take your word for it.
* Polar bears do not fatten up in winter, as the solid sea ice prevents hunting.  Rather, they catch seals in spring and early summer. when the ice begins to break up and seals emerge from their dens. This is unbelievable flagrant misinformation. Polar bears have their main hunting season in winter, again except for denning females. Seals have breathing holes or they die.
* I am not sure than anyone truly knows how much ice is optimal.  We do know that no ice or all ice makes seal hunting nearly impossible. This is in your imagination. There is no such thing as all ice, but if there were there would be no seals in that location. The bears follow seal populations and can hunt them in >90% ice concentrations.
* Since the bears are known to travel large distances for food and are not territorial, the theory is that they will simply move to optimal hunting grounds. Specific bears are not territorial but the subpopulations display seasonal fidelity to particular areas, though DNA studies show that they are not reproductively isolated. In addition, the individuals in a subpopulation tend to reuse the same denning areas each year.
* Speculation is that Greenland and the Canadian archipelago would be the top choice, as ice remains there year-round, and melting could open up more water holes.  The issue would then become how many bears the area could support. If the area can support more polar bears, why aren't there more polar bears there now? As Wikipedia says, the relationship between ringed seals and polar bears is so close that the abundance of ringed seals in some areas appears to regulate the density of polar bears, while polar bear predation in turn regulates density and reproductive success of ringed seals. But in any case the study estimates most regional subpopulations will disappear, you suddenly seem to agree with it.

To summarize, you are sowing misinformation while accusing scientific studies of misinformation. It has taken me over an hour to go over your claims and read up on the subject. The innocent reader may take you word for it, not knowing your history on the forum and especially considering that you filled up the thread with your posts on the subject, thus achieving local numerical superiority. I think this has gone far enough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear
https://arctickingdom.com/its-polar-bear-week-profiling-their-seasonal-habits-challenges/

17
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 25, 2020, 05:06:02 PM »
World Covid-19 Graphs - Data from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

And trends from very latest daily data also up - 24 July 290k new cases, 6.2k dead.

18
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 24, 2020, 03:01:52 PM »
Translates to: "Why is he hurting me? He's supposed to be hurting other people."

‘I may have signed my own death warrant’: Teacher regrets her Trump vote as schools pushed to reopen during COVID-19 pandemic

Link >> https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/i-may-have-signed-my-own-warrant-teacher-regrets-her-trump-vote-as-schools-pushed-to-reopen-during-19/

19
Policy and solutions / Re: Nuclear Power
« on: July 22, 2020, 12:05:02 AM »
Remember when Ohio passed a law to subsidize those two nuclear reactors that can't compete against cheap renewables?

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/21/893493224/ohio-house-speaker-arrested-in-connection-to-60-million-bribery-scheme

Quote
Ohio House Speaker Arrested In Connection With $60 Million Bribery Scheme

July 21, 2020

FBI agents arrested Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder on Tuesday morning at his rural farm. Householder was taken into custody in connection with a $60 million bribery scheme allegedly involving state officials and associates.

Four others were also arrested: former Ohio Republican Party Chairman Matt Borges, Householder adviser Jeffrey Longstreth and lobbyists Neil Clark and Juan Cespedes.

The charges are linked to a controversial law passed last year that bailed out two nuclear power plants in the state while gutting subsidies for renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Quote
Federal prosecutors say that between March 2017 and March 2020, entities related to an unnamed company — but that would appear to be nuclear power company FirstEnergy Solutions — paid approximately $60 million to Householder's Generation Now.

"Make no mistake, this is Larry Householder's 501 (c)(4)," U.S. Attorney David DeVillers told reporters on Tuesday. The money from the scheme was spent to the detriment of other political candidates and the people of Ohio, DeVillers said.

Members of Householder's enterprise used those payments for their own personal benefit and to gain support for Householder's bid to become speaker, prosecutors say.

Quote
In exchange for payments, prosecutors say, Householder and his associates helped pass House Bill 6, then worked to ensure it went into effect by defeating a ballot initiative.

The plan worked. The complaint says Householder-backed candidates that benefited from money from Generation Now helped to elect Householder as the Speaker. House Bill 6 was introduced three months into his term – legislation worth $1.3 billion to Company A.

Regular payments to Householder's secret company from Company A began in March 2017, a couple months after he took a trip on Company A's private jet, according to the federal complaint. But the payments got much bigger after the legislation was introduced: In May 2019, while the bill was pending before lawmakers, Company A allegedly wired $8 million to Generation Now.

Quote
In total, Company A allegedly paid the Householder enterprise $60 million over a three-year period, in exchange for the billion-dollar-bailout.

Prosecutors say the payments were "akin to bags of cash – unlike campaign or PAC contributions, they were not regulated, not reported, not subject to public scrutiny—and the Enterprise freely spent the bribe payments to further the Enterprise's political interests and to enrich themselves."

Quote
Last year's nuclear bailout law tacked on a charge to residents' power bills, sending $150 million a year to the nuclear power plants. They are owned by the company Energy Harbor, which was previously known as FirstEnergy Solutions.

The law also included a subsidy for two coal plants.

NPR member station WOSU reported that FirstEnergy contributed more than $150,000 to Ohio House Republicans in the run-up to the 2018 election — including over $25,000 in donations to Householder's campaign.

20
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 19, 2020, 11:03:02 AM »
Close up of roughly 135°-150°E, . 74 hour loop, edit: oops, 59 hour loop. Contrast boosted.
Click to run.

21
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: July 18, 2020, 11:26:54 PM »

Just the delete the trollperson who is blatantly intent on sowing discord. 

22
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 18, 2020, 07:15:28 PM »
Apologies if someone already mentioned it, but I thought it worth noting that the sea ice extent as measured by NSIDC on July 17th (6.954 million km2) is already lower than the September minimum extents from 1980 (7.533), 1982 (7.16), 1983 (7.204), 1986 (7.122), 1988 (7.048), 1992 (7.159), and 1996 (7.147).

23
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 14, 2020, 09:00:49 PM »

Actually, hospitals can't do much for you, they give you oxygen and infusion and possibly antibiotics for secondary infections. 25-50% of those who end up in hospitals die.

Data from Britain disagrees with you.

Quote
Around the height of the outbreak, on 8 April, there were 15,468 people in hospital in England with coronavirus of whom 899 died (6%).

By 21 June there were 2,698 hospitalised coronavirus patients, 30 of whom died (1%), according to the most recent data compiled University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Hospital case fatality is a measure used since the beginning of the outbreak, providing consistent figures and enabling researchers to look for trends.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53192532

But now we are once again arguing about percentage points. I don't want get there.

My point was, that the political discussion about Health or Economy is baseless. The virus, not lockdowns, are wrecking the economy. Sweden and her laissez-faire strategy is a case in point. It did not save Swedish economy.

The US has cca 1 mln hospital beds. At worst "if you let it run wild" you would have 200 mln infected, 4-6 mln in hospitals (during 3-6 months), so only 1-2 mln at the same time. That is still unmanagable and undesirable though.

All politicians screwed up: Europe just like the US (just look at all the open cinemas, shopping centers, theatres, concerts, holidaymakers, etc etc in Europe, it is complete madness). Summer is our only saviour. This thing will most certainly come back with a vengeance in autumn, or sooner
No, not all politicians screwed up. Some certainly did. Trump and his minions did big time, turning an epidemic into politics. Without any US bashing one does wonder how the hell there were armed demonstrators demanding to end lockdowns?!?

But I have to ask, what exactly do you expect politicians to do? Have magical god-like powers to cure disease and see the future? Close everything until nobody gets ill or dies?

People need to remember we are in the midst of a pandemic. Treating it is a balancing act with only bad options.

24
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 12, 2020, 01:03:10 PM »
A major reason why reactions are different to Covid versus car accidents, malaria, diabetes, cancer etc is exponential growth. Many are back to thinking linearly now that the danger has passed for them.
Covid exponential growth becomes apparent only after it is fairly widely disbursed in the society. The increase in IFR is a knock on effect of out of control Covid and has been shown several times (morgues unable to deal with the inflow of dead bodies - Wuhan, Lombardy, NYC.) Covid isn't a problem and doesn't deserve the lockdowns or overreaction etc until it is a problem.

25
Arctic sea ice / Re: HYCOM
« on: July 11, 2020, 04:35:43 PM »
and the rest
note white bar is the sea ice over 4 years old.

26
Arctic sea ice / Re: HYCOM
« on: July 11, 2020, 04:33:40 PM »
HYCOM- as I stated couple of times before- switched from ArCc to Glb (whatever it should mean) I think back in 2017. They simply ripped off huge Portions of 2m + thick Ice.
I'd have the previous Models' from 2016, but had to make some space available on hard drive.
I don’t have many of the old ones but I was able to find some. From what I can see in those areas where thickness was reduced in the new model it was not reduced by a set amount everywhere. The change mostly seemed to affect ice thicker than 2.8 meters.  Some of the thicker ice was left unchanged.
It is my understanding that ice can grow to around 2 meters thick at most in one year. After that growth slows way down. If none of that ice melts how much ice would be added next season? A meter? Maybe but I doubt it. That wouldn’t be ice growth slowing way down. I don’t know the answer. In previous years the oldest ice known as perennial ice could get to 9 years old or older. It took about that long to get to 4 meters thick. https://earthsky.org/earth/decline-of-arctics-thickest-sea-ice The amount of ice that is 4 years old or older is almost non existent as shown by graphic below. https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4750
They updated the model for a reason and the data they got after the update was more accurate than the data they got before. Otherwise they would have stuck with the older model.
Looking at the area from 80N in the quadrant facing Europe and not near an island Hycom shows thickness up to about 2 meters on April 15. The same area on Piomas shows not less than 3 meters. The buoy data I have seen showed in that area at that time ice up to about 2.1 to 2.2 meters thick. Frankly Piomas shows about 2/3rds of the arctic thicker than 2.75 meters in April. It also shows a quarter of the central arctic thicker than 3.5 meters thick. There is almost no ice 4 years old or older and I doubt much if any ice younger than 4 years gets that thick. I think Piomas become an inaccurate model about the time the older ice all melted.
 
Primarily Piomas uses an Ice growth equation based on temperature and time and location when the ice moves. Solar flux ice extent and concentration are also factored in. Recently they added surface ocean temperatures on ice free areas to the mix. Salinity is fixed. A fixed current is used. Sea water under the ice is assumed to be a uniform layer in each grid element. No atmospheric or ocean modeling is done. Near as I can figure it is an academic pursuit probably put together by a professor and grad student around 2003.  It does get updated from time to time but there is no dedicated staff. 
The Hycom model is built from first principles. The atmosphere and ocean are modeled globally.  Currents change as conditions change. It also has more than one full time staff member and a budget. I have written more about in this thread and you can dig into it if you really want to know. The Hycom model is frequently updated so comparisons should be made with the same version. They also do not produce a volume total. Which I find disappointing because we like our spreadsheets on ASIF.     

27
The rest / Re: Archaeology/Paleontology news
« on: July 10, 2020, 04:05:52 PM »
A figure of a face found in 1989 in Vantaa, near Helsinki, has finally been dated. While not very old compared to central European finds, this is one of the oldest human figures found in Finland. Dated to about 3500 BC

https://www.is.fi/hs-vantaa/art-2000006567929.html

28
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 10, 2020, 03:14:43 PM »
@TrumpClassics via Twitter:

Quote
Man, all these doctors and
nurses and microbiologists and
immunologist and
epidemiologists and other
researchers keep saying COVID
is dangerous but all these dudes
went to high school with and
barely passed science say its
not dangerous. Its hard to know
who to believe anymore.

29
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 10, 2020, 02:36:01 PM »
desperately trying to believe the absurdities of the official narrative

Neven, i stopped the contact with three friends of mine because all three, independent from each other are now in the conspiracy myths camp. One thinks Bill Gates wants to enslave people with microchipping and this virus is a hoax. The other one believes in a higher unnamed power all of a sudden that gives the WHO orders. And the third thinks the Corona-App was only programmed to surveil people.

Believe me, the absurdity is only increasing if you leave what you call the 'official narrative'. I would call that sanity BTW and i am very concerned about you.

30
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2020 Sea ice area and extent data
« on: July 09, 2020, 04:45:35 PM »
But NSIDC data is here...

NSIDC Total Area as at 08-Jul-2020 (5 day trailing average) 5,998,358 KM2         
         
Total Area         
 5,998,358    km2      
-456,436    km2   <   2010's average.
 2,775    km2   >   2019
-1,176,927    km2   <   2000's average.
         
Total Change   -52    k   loss
Peripheral Seas   -42    k   loss
Central Seas___   -10    k   loss
         
Peripheral Seas         
Okhotsk______   -0    k   loss
Bering _______    0    k   gain
Hudson Bay___   -22    k   loss
Baffin  Bay____   -11    k   loss
St Lawrence___   -0    k   loss
Greenland____   -6    k   loss
Barents ______   -3    k   loss
         
Central Arctic  Ocean Seas         
Chukchi______   -12    k   loss
Beaufort_____   -1    k   loss
CAA_________    8    k   gain
East Siberian__   -24    k   loss
Central Arctic_    35    k   gain
Laptev_______   -7    k   loss
Kara_________   -9    k   loss
         
Sea ice area loss on this day 52 k, 49 k less than the 2010's average loss of 101 k         
         
- 2020 area is at position #2 in the satellite record.         
- 2020 Area is 456 k less than the 2010's average         
- 2020 Area is 1,177 k less than the 2000's average         
- 2020 Area is 260 k less than 2016         
- 2020 Area is 3 k more than 2019          
- 2020 Area is 131 k less than 2012
         
___________________________________________         
Area may be now at #2, but NSIDC Extent & JAXA Extent are still at #1.
And as Jack Nicholson, in the role of US President in "Mars Attacks", remarks after the Martians have zapped Congress " We've still got the Judiciary, we've still got the Executive, and 2 out of 3 ain't bad".

Note how the Central Arctic Sea has switched from large area losses to large area gains.


31
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 09, 2020, 01:06:07 PM »
As a consequence of the idiocy found daily on fb I posted this today ..

IMPORTANT NOTICE :
               
                 The means of Corona virus spread has finally been identified .

                           It is caused by the love farts of flying pigs

 any scientific arguement against this SELF-EVIDENT TRUTH will be met with laughter

32
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 09, 2020, 01:32:42 AM »
The graph shows Texas with 98 new covid deaths today.
(Not today's final tally; now it stands at 107.)

Since Monday, deaths are also rising sharply in several other states. It will soon dominate the news: deaths of politicians, business leaders, actors, artists. And of healthcare staff of course.

33
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 08, 2020, 09:42:35 PM »

34
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 08, 2020, 03:23:46 PM »
Or ignore because it´s Facebook...

Examples always limp I know but if facebook contains a video that is explaining let's say the event horizon of blackholes in a correct way, why would you have to ignore it.

This kind of generalization is never a good idea, it's fragmenting society and and at the end have the verious "religious" groups clash.

If you dislike the video, then why, if it's fitting into this thread and understood the way it is meant, please refreain from ridiculing either facebook or other users with such replies.

Posting a link i received via email that links to facebook does neither make the content wrong here, wrong at all, nor does it make me a facebook fanboy or regular user.

35
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 08, 2020, 11:25:02 AM »
Polling from a divided country:

Trump's overall approval sits at 38%, 3% above his lowest on record of 35%, and 8% lower than in Jan to May this year.  And there's a massive partisan gap within these figures - his approval stats among Republican voters sit at 91%, vs 33% among Independent voters and 2% among Democrat voters.  "The current 89-point difference between Republicans' and Democrats' ratings of Trump is the largest partisan gap Gallup has ever measured for a presidential approval rating in a single survey."

https://news.gallup.com/poll/313454/trump-job-approval-rating-steady-lower-level.aspx

36
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 04, 2020, 12:29:09 PM »
Quote
White House Looks to Make 'We Need to Live With It' the New Tone On Coronavirus: Report

Exactly the same game plan as with climate change

Step 1: Deny that it is a problem until the problem is too big to deny

Step 2: Once the problem is too big to deny, don't deny. Accept it, but pretend it can't be solved.

It is equally stupid because the outcome is bad for everyone, but it is effective because action is mostly eliminated.


37
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 02, 2020, 06:34:20 PM »
In case anyone is interested in an on-the-ground perspective on this year's melting season, I put together a time-lapse video using still images from the observatory's webcam here in Alert.  The video covers 12 days from June 18-30, which includes the record-breaking June high temperature of 18.6°C recorded on the 28th.


38
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: June 29, 2020, 12:20:24 AM »
But, as an environmental attorney, I also know that no scientist in their right mind would ever post on a forum that is political like this one.  It would forever tarnish their reputation for impartiality.
I'm a scientist. And as far as I know, in my right mind. My reputation can't be tarnished by posting here, because I'm posting under an alias, as most forum members do.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "impartiality". Most of the scientists I've known in my career are very partial - towards evidence and truth. The BBC inviting Nigel Lawson  to argue against climate change:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/10/bbc-climate-change-deniers
That sort of impartiality?

39
(USA) household pulse weekly survey:

"almost one-third of all households expect to experience a loss of employment income over the coming four weeks. Fully 10 percent of American families—that’s 25 million, half of which have children at home—did not have enough food to eat in the prior week. Even more disturbing, one in five households—over 50 million in total—are doubtful that they will be able to afford sufficient food in the coming month. And of the nation’s 65,000,0000 renters, almost 20 percent were unable to pay their rent last month and an even higher percentage—close to 30 percent—doubt that they will be able to pay their rent in the coming month."

https://www.census.gov/householdpulsedata
https://prospect.org/coronavirus/true-financial-pulse-of-americas-families/

sidd


40
Walking the walk / Re: Gardening
« on: June 27, 2020, 08:48:09 AM »
Re: trees which like water

river birch, sycamore, beech, willow are some

trees that like their toes wet contol water something awesome, pumping it up into the air and down thru their roots as they see fit. You can trace water under the gound by following where those trees grow, and if they go away the water goes away or a different path too.

I like trees.

sidd

41
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: June 24, 2020, 03:23:41 PM »
Global Deaths Due to Various Causes and COVID-19 [VISUALISATION]

Link >> https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/2562261/

42
The rest / Re: Arctic Café
« on: June 23, 2020, 06:25:33 AM »
Made a thingy, of course it's not ready yet. http://erimaassa.blogspot.com/2020/06/periodic-clock.html?m=1

The clock face now looks like this. A bit messy looking, perhaps. The Carbon Group and Noble Gases singled out since one pairs with almost everything and the other with almost nothing.

43
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: June 22, 2020, 10:14:52 AM »
Some anecdotal story about the first cases in Germany:
in the house of my brother a woman was admitted to hospital on January 1st with breathing problems. He knows the date as the ambulance was in front of the house when he left the house to visit me on that day as we had lunch together. So we are quite sure about the date.
In the hospital she showed ALL the Covid 19 problems including a lengthy stay in the ICU. Of course at that time nobody new about Covid 19 so they treated it as a viral pneumonia. Now they did an antibody test and this one is positive. So it could by that we already had the first case in my city at the very beginning of 2020. 

44
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: June 22, 2020, 12:11:48 AM »
I think there is a sealion swimming around our forums.

I learned about them from following Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt on Twitter.

It is annoying as hell, and disruptive to the members who want to have honest discourse.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning


45
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: June 21, 2020, 06:18:05 PM »
Coo coo ca choo

46
The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: June 21, 2020, 05:00:09 PM »

47
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: June 20, 2020, 08:13:07 PM »
I can't bear to construct the Brazil data file - Bolsonaro has killed so many people following the Trump Plavbook.

I am sure we will all be watching the USA data - the 7 day average of new cases has nudged up but not enough to definitely confirm a trend.

UK can wait -"Tomorrow is another day" - Scarlett O'Hara

48
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: June 19, 2020, 11:18:23 PM »
Let me try to lighten up this thread before it goes down the drain.

Airborne SARS-CoV-2 is Rapidly Inactivated by Simulated Sunlight

https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiaa334/5856149

Quote
Aerosols represent a potential route of transmission of COVID-19. This study examined the effect of simulated sunlight, relative humidity, and suspension matrix on the stability of SARS-CoV-2 in aerosols. Both simulated sunlight and matrix significantly affected the decay rate of the virus. Relative humidity alone did not affect the decay rate; however, minor interactions between relative humidity and the other factors were observed. Decay rates in simulated saliva, under simulated sunlight levels representative of late winter/early fall and summer were 0.121±0.017 min-1 (90% loss: 19 minutes) and 0.379±0.072 min-1 (90% loss: 6 minutes), respectively. The mean decay rate without simulated sunlight across all relative humidity levels was 0.008±0.011 min-1 (90% loss: 125 minutes). These results suggest that the potential for aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2 may be dependent on environmental conditions, particularly sunlight. These data may be useful to inform mitigation strategies to minimize the potential for aerosol transmission.

49
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: June 17, 2020, 11:14:58 AM »
Following up on the screenshots above here is worldview, Laptev, jun17, 2000-2020 (2001 not available). Light contrast on all images to help show the ice edge through clouds, https://go.nasa.gov/2N2CK3t
click to run

50
https://www.nytimes.com./2020/06/15/climate/climate-science-trump.html

A War Against Climate Science, Waged by Washington’s Rank and File

Efforts to block research on climate change don’t just come from the Trump political appointees on top. Lower managers in government are taking their cues, and running with them.

"survey in 2018 of more than 63,000 federal employees across 16 agencies identified the E.P.A. and Department of Interior as having the least trustworthy leadership in matters of scientific integrity.

Findings published in the peer-reviewed journal PLOS ONE in April on a subset of those agencies found that 631 workers agreed or strongly agreed that they had been asked to omit the phrase “climate change” from their work. In the same paper, 703 employees said they avoided working on climate change or using the phrase."

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 39