Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

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

Powered by Squarespace

Unthreaded

Tomo

A Deep ocean tsunami detection buoy is a two part system.

On the surface is a tethered buoy which receives and retransmits data from sensors on the sea floor. On the sea floor are pressure sensors measuring the height of the water column.

At sea a tsunami is a long, high swell, metres high and kilometres long. A tsunami passing overhead produces a distinctive transient pressure change as the height of the water column increases and then recovers.

The same sensors also record ongoing pressure changes, so they give an ongoing record of sea level at that location.

Sep 10, 2017 at 5:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

EM - thank you

That's a several hours of my Sunday evening spoken for - there's far more filtering and modeling than I'd anticipated.

Why choose the Tsunami pressure sensors for water "height" reference?

Interesting

Sep 10, 2017 at 4:29 PM | Registered Commentertomo

Tomo

The paper is

Detection of sea level fingerprints derived from GRACE gravity data
Authors
Chia-Wei Hsu,
Isabella Velicogna.

You will find it here.

Sep 10, 2017 at 3:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

Sea Level Fingerprints press release from NASA regurgitated at The Daily Mail

Although they volunteer that the ground truthing is apparently reliant on "deep ocean pressure sensors" - I would have expected that at a bare minimum that the geodetic control would include GPS precision located tide gauges which are trivially available to researchers and exist in a reference frame that is very accurate and not subject to the instrument errors associated with high pressure / deep water measurements.

Teasing out the animated effects is quite an achievement involving the filtering out of an awful lot of noise. I'd be better disposed towards the research if the full paper was actually simply and prominently linked somewhere - but that it seems is a step too far.

Sep 10, 2017 at 1:13 PM | Registered Commentertomo

@Pcar That Travers story is a few days old
\\Yesterday, Edinburgh University told The National the claims were simply not true, in that while Travers was being investigated for breaching the student code of conduct, it was not for “mocking Isis”.
It also said there were multiple complaints.//
\\allegations have been received from other students that Mr Travers breached the code of student conduct, and the students concerned have provided a range of supporting evidence.
...This investigation is ongoing // article

Sep 10, 2017 at 11:36 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Whether What Happened—for that is the teasing title of Ms. Hillary’s oeuvre—is worth the admission price is an open question

Rex Murphy: Thinking of dishing out for Hillary's book? I'll save you the expense

Sep 10, 2017 at 3:11 AM | Unregistered Commenterclipe

An interesting read via the Oroville Dam Discussion ... Sep 8, 2017 at 7:39 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher .

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/07/lack-of-technology-left-officials-in-dark-during-dam-crisis

It ends with "“If it wasn’t for one geologist … he is afraid we wouldn’t have even caught the problem,” the notes quote Patrick Whitlock, a dam manager, as saying."

Sep 10, 2017 at 2:47 AM | Unregistered Commenterclipe

Snippet

Colleagues,
I'm very torn between being drawn into endless exchanges outside normal
scientific discourse (e.g. tit-for-tat with the Idsos group) and leaving the field
open to them. They clearly have the resources to do fairly careful literature
searches, even if there are some serious conceptual problems in their writings,
and there is a real audience for their kind of materials, both in print
publication and on the web. I fear that you would find more colleagues and
grad students than you would like to think read their materials and are
influenced by them. Apart from anything else they respond better to the
heavily referenced articles by Idso or Soon than to "ex cathedra" statements
like the recent editorial by Barnett and Somerville. I know this to be the case
in the paleo community, although there the picture is complicated by the
differences in scientific approach of those working on interannual to century
time scales (i.e. folks like us) and those working on millennial and longer
time scales (notably Wally Broecker, Wijbjorn Karlen, but many others too).
One consequence of this intersection of differing sources of scepticism (sensu
stricto) is that an appeal to the NAS could be counterproductive - remember
the poor treatment of high-res paleo in the NAS report requested by the White
House the other year.
Let's learn from these guys. We don't have to strain to publish in the peer-
reviewed literature - it's our normal way of working. We do have to find a
more effective way of publicizing and interpreting these publications, when
appropriate, to a wider audience, including policy makers. How best to do
this?
Cheers, Malcolm

http://di2.nu/foia/foia2011/mail/0276.txt

Sep 10, 2017 at 2:10 AM | Unregistered Commenterclipe

Followed by something we all knew

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/people/didnt-always-vote-conservative-sometimes-went-green-samantha/

'I didn’t always vote Conservative – sometimes I went Green': Samantha Cameron

Sep 9, 2017 at 10:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2

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>