Denier Comment of the Day, November 30, 2012

I have to hand it to Eric Worrall, my new favourite denier, for demonstrating the ability to make idiotic comments that demonstrate not only his silliness but also his laziness. Yesterday, Watching the Deniers posted a short piece reporting on a new heat record for Victoria that saw Mildura and Hopetoun both crack 45 degrees C to eclipse the November record for the state. Eric, true to form raised the spectre,not of the urban heat island but jetwash. Here is his comment.


Well, let’s just take a look at a few things. First, let’s just check out Mildura Airport. Here is a picture courtesy google maps.


As you can clearly see, Mildura is a small airport with two runways. One runs north/south and the other pretty much east/west. The first thing to notice about these runways is that they are different lengths. The shorter runway which runs north/south is 1139m long. The main runway running east/west has recently been lengthened from 1830m to 2100m. Now, the majority of planes that utilise Mildura airport are propeller driven planes like the Saab 340B, Q300, Q400 and the Bombardier Dash 8. These planes pose very little risk of jet wash. Jet driven planes that utilise Mildura airport are Boeing 737’s and Embraer 170 and Embraer 190. All of these planes need more than 1500m of runway for take-off with the  E190 needing 2056m at maximum weight.

So, where does that leave us? ALL jet aircraft utilising Mildura airport are using the main runway which runs from east to west. So, where is the weather station in relation to the runways and the airport in general?

Mildura airport weather station which is located approximately 250 metres, SSE of the short runway.

Hmmm. Not only is the weather station 250m away from the short runway, but it also more than 750m away from one end of the runway that jet aircraft use. Does jet wash travel that far? How much wind would be required to push jet wash that distance? hat direction and speed was the wind travelling when the high temperature was recorded? Well the answer is a WNWer at about 9 knots.

I wonder if Eric bothered to do a little bit of research or if his natural tendency to disagree with everything that points to AGW just takes over? Whatever, keep them coming Eric. You have given me the opportunity to learn a few things about aircraft that I didn’t know. You should try researching things yourself, Eric. You never know, you might come to realise that your inane ideology is incompatible with reality… or is that what you are afraid of?

About these ads


Filed under Classic denier comments

43 responses to “Denier Comment of the Day, November 30, 2012

  1. john byatt

    Follow the fun, geoff may not be able to resist putting my comment up.

    No place in Australia has ever had a record temp of 53.3DegC

    • Geoffrey is a WS 10 which is no mean achievement given the scale only goes to 7. I see he still loves me but is also still afraid to use my name lest people are directed here where they can see his dishonesty displayed.


      • john byatt

        I dont know why he is worried that people will come here and find out what a goose he is, most already would know that,

        deep down he realises that he would get smacked down every time he engaged
        god that cox is a moron,

      • Uncle Buck

        Cox is a lawyer and speaks with a lawyers tongue.

    • he also says- Britain Faces Coldest Winter in 100 Years- which is a newspaper headline based on a private weather company prediction. The Express and Mail do a -coldest winter for 100 years- almost every year and rarely get it right [actually never get it right]. But if it does turn out to be the coldest winter I will be the first to up date him!

  2. Watching the Deniers

    Best. Reply. Ever.

  3. Pingback: Reprint: Denier Comment of the Day, November 30, 2012 « Angels & Armor

  4. john byatt

    john byatt said…
    AS I said , your link does not work re
    was 53.3ºC on 16 January, 1889. (link)

    No where in Australia has ever recorded a temperature of 53.3DegC, that is a pretty clear statement, would you take a bet?

    and it is Nonsense John, no comma or question mark required

  5. john byatt

    I think that his last reply pretty much concedes my comment, I will push him for the $10 every time I go there,


  6. john byatt

    john byatt said…
    “Obviously you have greater knowledge than 125 scientists. What are your qualifications, John?”

    you still cannot work out where the question mark goes, you are asking me if I am John, you do not require the John in a reply,

    where is my $10.

    Notice that you do not claim that I fail in climate science, that is the point here I should think.


    December 1, 2012 7:33 AM

    Please prove you’re not a robot

  7. john byatt

    Local paper this morning

    The Gympie Times November 29 reports on the efforts of Cr Petersen to protect us from government imposed medication, Fluoridation. I hope that I might be able through the letters column to alert Cr Petersen to an even more insidious chemical that has also entered our creeks and dams. That is dihydrogen monoxide and just like carbon monoxide this product can kill you if breathed in.Its vapours are known to have leaked into the atmosphere. An environmental group formed in America “Ban dihydrogen monoxide” has conducted research throughout the USA and have found large quantities within the river systems and dams in every state except Texas.

    While it had caused little problems in Australia up to the early years of the 21st century, that changed in 2010 when it was then responsible for many major problems that year. It is a component of rat poison, similar in structure to chemicals as contained in 1080- tetrahydronapthalen and hydrofluorosilic acid.

    Dihydrogen Monoxide has become an increasing problem for both the Mary River and Gympie area in recent years, even now found within the plants that we eat. Hopefully Cr Petersen will also take up my cause and urge for an immediate government study into just what this dihydrogen monoxide may be doing to our environment. Cr Petersen can contact me @ Dihydrogen monoxide-insidious-lethal-linked-substance (DILLS)

    John byatt

  8. john byatt

    TCS blog
    john byatt said…
    Hi Gordon, I am more than willing to debate you on your terms of logic and evidence,

    The theory is

    I find your appeal to scamming and propagandists not to be in accord with the scientific method.

    Now please use actual science rather than rhetoric and start again.


    December 1, 2012 9:37 AM

    Please prove you’re not a robot

  9. john byatt


    john byatt said…
    If you wish to disclose your so called hoax without debate then that is your call but please stop the nonsense that no one will debate you

    December 1, 2012 9:53 AM

    • john byatt

      Does not link to the search results, oh well

    • 125 “scientists”. I don’t know if i have the time to check the actual credentials, publishing records etc of the 10 or so that can’t be instantly disregarded. We’ll see.

      • john byatt

        It was my denier comment of the decade

        geoff ” Any more inanities like your last will be binned….in fact, your first inanity saying the 125 scientists are wrong should have been binned”
        irony? hypocrisy? pure denial?.

  10. john byatt

    This gordon Fulks is dumber than eric “no warming for 20 years”

  11. john byatt

    Fulks WUWT june 2012
    “When the climate refuses to warm (as it has for the last twenty years), they just study ‘warming in reverse!’ Most of us call that “cooling,” but they are very careful not to upset their Obama administration contract monitors with politically incorrect terminology.”

    hope he comes back, wish I could get him over here and keep that WS10 moron out of the conversation.

    How about doing a post on him and see if you can get him here,
    would really like to know his definition of warming


    • Gordon J. Fulks, PhD

      I don’t normally respond to climate alarmists who can do no better than call people names. But perhaps you can learn something from the quote of mine that you misused.

      Taken out of context, it appears to be wrong. The trend in the Global Temperature Anomaly from our best satellite data (UAH or RSS MSU) has been roughly flat for about fifteen (not twenty) years. This is widely acknowledged by skeptics and alarmists alike. And it is very hard for alarmists to explain in light of steadily increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide.

      But my comment referred to conditions in the Pacific Northwest USA where I live. The cooling trend here is recognized by both skeptics and alarmists. In fact, alarmist Professor Cliff Mass at the University of Washington was one of the big names who pointed it out, as did former Washington State Climatologist Mark Albright, a skeptic. They differ only slightly on when the cooling trend began, both reaching back about twenty years. You can easily see what they are talking about by going to the NOAA NCDC data available online and plotting your own trend line from the available data.

      My comment also referred to ongoing studies of the effects of climate change at Oregon State University, where they have had to deal with our noticeably cooling climate, including a rather spectacular return of winter snow at lower elevations. How do you study ‘Global Warming’ when ‘Global Cooling’ rules the climate here? Whether you are studying tube worms living in the ocean off of Oregon or butterflies inland (as the OSU researchers are), you just gather data and assume that the effects work either in a warming or cooling climate. That is a likely valid assumption for small changes.

      Incidentally, not all effects of a cooling climate are bad. We have had spectacular salmon runs recently thanks to colder water offshore and a negative Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO).

      As to the talk I (and two other scientists) gave last January to the Oregon Chapter of the American Meteorological Society, that was a huge success. About 500 people attended, making it the best attended meeting in this chapter’s history. And the chapter claims to be the largest in the USA.

      If you want to dabble in science, you need to pay careful attention to the details and not misrepresent others. An appropriate education helps too.

      Gordon J. Fulks, PhD (Physics)
      Corbett, Oregon USA

      • I don’t normally respond to climate alarmists who can do no better than call people names.

        Nothing like beginning with a little hypocrisy, hey Gordon? That said, welcome to my blog. I am sure you have checked out the rules. Now that you are a guest here, I am sure that John Byatt will also adhere to them.

        Personally, I am looking forward to addressing a number of points you have made in your comment but alas, as a working scientist I have to go and do some real work and will be away from technology for the next two weeks, collecting data for my research into invasive species in the Australian Alps. What this means though, is that I am not here to approve any comments that end up in moderation. Now that I have approved your first comment, all your coments will appear automatically unless they have 3 or more links in them. That’s how my spam filter is set. If you wish to direct readers to websites or link them to papers you may have to get creative.


      • john byatt

        The quote from you came from one of your co-singers, Anthony Watts

      • john byatt

        Co singers, classic, signers of course

      • NeilT

        Gordon, you stated that:

        Temperature Anomaly from our best satellite data (UAH or RSS MSU) has been roughly flat for about fifteen (not twenty) years.

        Let me put that another way.

        Temperature Anomaly from our best satellite data (UAH or RSS MSU) has been roughly flat since the 100 year anomaly which began in 1997 and ended in 1998.

        Next year it will be roughly 16 years and the year after roughly 17 years. The same old rhetoric will not give your denailist arguments any purchase with people who actually know what is going on.

        Tell me, Honestly, does a decade on decade temperature comparison, between 1990-1999 and 2000 – 2009 show:

        A cooling bias?
        A neutral bias?
        A warming bias?

        Only one thing is certain. That the background temperature has almost reached the 100 year anomaly and when we get another large anomaly your position will be shown for what it is.

        Sadly the world will have lost a decade in which to act. Something which you seem to want to happen.

        Only an impossibly naïve, impossibly disinterested, or blatantly dishonest person could call the reporting of what is happening in our climate, today, as alarmism.

        Would you like to take your pick of which you are?

      • john byatt

        What is frustrating Neil is that here we have a gentleman with a Phd who seems to belive that the total heating of the planet is only reflected in the LA temp, a temperature rise which only accounts for a few percent of the total heat that the planet has been absorbing non stop for many decades,

        I can only shake my head in disbelief at his naivety.

        Just what will it take?

  12. jyyh

    Hey… this is a poor interpretation of the Monty Python skit ‘argument clinic’, it’s not one of my favorits but anyway, this made me laugh. thanks.

  13. Sou

    Deniers are short on logic as well as having a disregard for facts. (If jetwash was a problem, why didn’t it surface last November, or any other November on record?)

    BTW, AFAIK Ouyen also had the hottest November day on record. I’ve never known a jet to land at Ouyen.

    • Exactly. I actually held back the information I had about flight times and traffic volumes for Mildura airport over the last 10 years beause I was running short on time. Both were more nails in the jetwash argument. Ag first I thought Eric was a Poe but I have come to realise he’s too stupid to be that clever.

  14. john byatt

    Hi Gordon,
    this is from NOAA/NDCC

    Do you agree with this realease?

    Global Highlights
    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for May 2012 was 0.66°C (1.19°F) above the 20th century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F). This is the second warmest May since records began in 1880, behind only 2010.

    The Northern Hemisphere land and ocean average surface temperature for May 2012 was the all-time warmest May on record, at 0.85°C (1.53°F) above average.

    The globally-averaged land surface temperature for May 2012 was the all-time warmest May on record, at 1.21°C (2.18°F) above average.

    ENSO-neutral conditions continued during May 2012 and sea surface temperature anomalies in the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean continued to warm. The May worldwide ocean surface temperatures ranked as the 10th warmest May on record.

    For March–May (boreal spring) 2012, the combined global land and ocean surface temperature was 0.59°C (1.06°F) above average—the seventh warmest such period on record.

    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for January–May 2012 was the 11th warmest on record, at 0.50°C (0.90°F) above the 20th century average.

  15. john byatt

    Gordon, do you understand the difference between global warming and the region of the NW pacific, which is interesting in light of the recent problems there for the oyster industry with ocean acidification,

    Here is GISS global Gordon, do you accept this ongoing global warming now after viewing, below?

  16. john byatt

    Sorry to have to put up a few comments Gordon but our time difference may make it easier this way, a response to each separately is fine

    here is the IPCC model and position only a few months ago.

    do you agree that the projections are within the 95% confidence range?
    do you acknowledge the 1998 el nino, the back to back la nina’s at the end of the graph.?
    that 2010 was the warmest year globally, post industrial revolution?,
    that the HADCRUT decadal trend was 0.2DegC 1980/2000 and 0.13DegC 2000/2011 ?

    if you wish to use a label then make it ” You climate people”

  17. john byatt

    Last one for today Gordon,

    I you wish to compare global data sets then you must put them on the same scale

    Grant Foster

    As is obvious all data sets are in basic agreement and all show warming,

    Now the Pacific NW, Why does it seem to show cooling in some months?

    possibilities, The pacific NW is cooling, the data is too sparse, changes to atmospheric circulation,
    can we dismiss one possibility ? that the globe is cooling?

    We can logically dismiss that possibility,

    will return to read all replies

    John Byatt (climate person)

  18. john byatt

    remember the Knorr paper I posted at TCS?, it has been removed, it would appear that Cox could not have anyone reading it so removed it,
    he has commented again at unleashed with his same misunderstanding,
    went to TCS to copy the knorr quote, it was gone, anyhow have put it up at unleashed ,

    Fulk has backed out after seeing the rebuttal of his claim here but apparently decided that I could not be persuaded by his crap so geoff makes excuses for him that he advised him that he was wasting his time spreading his misunderstanding here, basically, he would be crucified in any such debate,

  19. john byatt

    To Gordon Fulks,

    you sign a letter to the IPCC and do not even posses the fortitude to have your nonsense exposed here, You spread lies and misinformation, half truths and when called to account you run and hide,

    john byatt

  20. john byatt

    Gordon, you seem unable to back your claims with any facts,

    please point out when the warming ceased