Saint Paul C

How about a version of this?

The Daily Mail story which broke cover the day after the club released the Les video, quoted sources saying that he handed it in on the 30th May... I think that because it was only made public yesterday, by whom?, that it's an easy assumption to make it was done yesterday. Nothing quite like checking facts etc....

Interesting that reports suggest that Lovren handed in his request at the end of May, and that the story co-incidentally breaks cover again the day after the club release positive sounding news to the world. The timing and repeating of this suggests a strong possibility that someone, somewhere is worried about this club, that we're becoming a threat and are deliberately trying to undermine our efforts to build on the successes of last season. Who is responsible for this and why?

What's on that list of departments etc to the left of "Maurrico " ? Looks like a list of tenanted companies or departments to me. Is that in a private hospital or university research building?

Lies, damned lies and statistics

Yep. I'm one. I'd like to see a little more character in our team. We've got some great players but a touch on the grey side if you get what I mean. Players like Dani and Artur add some much needed colour to the side. I think we need to put what happened behind us and work out how we can get him to fit better. The guy gas talent and hopefully a desire to show the world what he can do.

I'd willingly sacrifice Shaw to keep Lallana.

Must Have Last Word.....

No screaming and crying from me. Never once complained to the mods.. I need no protection from you, as you offer me no threat. You do however deliberately trash this site , which is my issue, to make you feel better about yourself and your minuscule existence as highlighted by your excessive posting and immature "debating" skills. You can LMFAO all you like, but you know, as do most of the sane people on here, that this place and the people on it bother you and your alter egos way, way too much. My advice to you, as an experienced citizen if the world, is to get a life. It's not that hard, open the door from your crappy bedsit, go out in the world, meet real live people and do something worthwhile. In a few days you'll thank me.

Only where it's deservedly earned and in this instance it certainly is. I've been a site regular for many years, probably too many, but your and your alter egos deliberate derailing of discussions is pointless and should be halted by the mods. I really couldn't care less about you, but I do care for my team, what they do and for my decent fellow saints fans, which you are clearly not. TBH, you remind me of a cuckold man desperately wanting others to think that you're the big I am whilst knowing deep inside that your life is utterly pointless.

And that's why most people believe that you should be chucked off if this site you odious ..nt.

That's the bit after the Asda roundabout going towards Westbourne.... https://goo.gl/maps/Nv9vy

What We Don't Know About CO2 There is no question that CO2 levels are increasing due to human activity. But predicting the impact of this is less straightforward. Will our understanding of the world's climate system remain mired in complexity until it is too late? Or is apocalyptic thinking confusing the science? The Panel - Cambridge atmospheric physicist Michael McIntyre, author of Lives of the Planets, Richard Corfield and palaeontologist Robert Carter try to clear up the future of the atmosphere. http://iai.tv/video/what-we-dont-know-about-co2#

I'd be interested to see a version if that graph, GM, with the source of CO2 omitted overlayed. I'm fairly certain that electricity generation and transport sources would sit much lower than that of food production for the ever expanding population.

Hey, I'm seriously worried about our chances next season. From reading the papers over the past few months we're barely going to have a 1st eleven to put out. According to the "press" we're selling Calum, Dejan, Jos, Luke, Maya, Guly, Morgan, Jack, Adam, Jay, Rickie, Gaston, Sam and Dani. Added to that, we'll need 2 new keepers to replace our 2nd & 3rd choices, get rid of Mayuka and upgrade Jose'... Who the fc k is going to be on our team?

Bogan = Chav. :-)

This is why..

Ohh, Saints in Melbourne.. I'm going to that. Anyone else?

For those that believe that humans run the earths climate, this may add some perspective on just how insignificant we really are in the BIG scheme of things. http://www.onemorelevel.com/game/scale_of_the_universe_2012

For anyone willing to read further on the modelling issues relating to GW, MMGW, MMCC, CC.. then the link below discusses some of the issues around modelling techniques and climate and possible reasons for model oversensitivity http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/oversensitive-final.pdf

Causes and implications of the growing divergence between climate model simulations and observations For the past 15+ years, there has been no increase in global average surface temperature, which has been referred to as a ‘hiatus’ in global warming. By contrast, estimates of expected warming in the first several decades of 21st century made by the IPCC AR4 were 0.2C/decade. This talk summarizes the recent CMIP5 climate model simulation results and comparisons with observational data. The most recent climate model simulations used in the AR5 indicate that the warming stagnation since 1998 is no longer consistent with model projections even at the 2% confidence level. Potential causes for the model-observation discrepancies are discussed. A particular focus of the talk is the role of multi-decadal natural internal variability on the climate variability of the 20th and early 21st centuries. The “stadium wave” climate signal is described, which propagates across the Northern Hemisphere through a network of ocean, ice, and atmospheric circulation regimes that self-organize into a collective tempo. The stadium wave hypothesis provides a plausible explanation for the hiatus in warming and helps explain why climate models did not predict this hiatus. Further, the new hypothesis suggests how long the hiatus might last. Implications of the hiatus are discussed in context of climate model sensitivity to CO2 forcing and attribution of the warming that was observed in the last quarter of the 20th century. Significance of the pause Under conditions of anthropogenic greenhouse forcing: • •Only 2% of climate model simulations produce trends within the observational uncertainty • Modelled pauses longer than 15 years are rare; the probability of a modelled pause exceeding 20 yrs. is vanishing small Questions raised by the discrepancy • Are climate models too sensitive to greenhouse forcing? • Is climate model treatment of natural climate variability inadequate? • Is the IPCC’s ‘extremely likely’ confidence level regarding anthropogenic attribution since 1950 justified? • Are climate model projections of 21st century warming too high? • How confident are we of the observations? I. Where is the missing heat? Hypothesis I: It MUST be hiding in the ocean • Evidence of deep ocean sequestration is indirect; few observations of deep ocean temperature prior to 2005 • Ocean models do not transfer heat in the vertically anywhere near as efficiently as inferred from the ECMWF reanalyses •Concerns about the heat returning to the surface seem unrealizable if the heat is well mixed – 2nd law constraints Hypothesis II: There is NO missing heat; changes in clouds have resulted in more reflection of solar radiation • Global cloud satellite dataset only goes back to 1983; calibration issues complicate trend analyses • Global energy balance analyses are associated with significant uncertainties II. Maybe the models are OK, the problem is the external forcing There is significant disagreement among different forcing data sets CMIP5 simulations were forced by single ‘best estimate’ data sets There has been no systematic effort to assess uncertainty in these data sets or the sensitivity of climate models to forcing uncertainty These uncertainties have not been factored into the 20th century attribution assessments III. ENSO (natural internal variability) is masking the greenhouse warming IV. Multidecadal modes of natural internal variability A.Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), etc. are superimposed on the anthropogenic warming trend, and should be included in attribution studies and future projections B.Climate shifts hypothesis: synchronized chaos framework for natural internal variability (shift ca. 2001) C.Stadium wave hypothesis: spatio-temporal pattern of signal propagation through a synchronized network of climate indices; quasi-periodic 50-80 yr tempo, with amplitude and tempo modified by external forcing Implications for the future: I. IPCC AR5 view The hiatus will end soon, with the next El Nino Implications for the future: II. View emphasizing natural internal variability • The ‘hiatus’ will continue at least another decade • Climate models are too sensitive to external forcing • Hiatus persistence beyond 20 years would support a firm declaration of problems with the climate models • Incorrect accounting for natural internal variability implies: o Biased attribution of 20th century warming o Climate models are not useful on decadal time scales Summary of major uncertainties • Deep ocean heat content variations and mechanisms of vertical heat transfer between the surface and deep ocean • Uncertainties associated with external forcing data and implications for attribution analysis and future projections • Sensitivity of the climate system to external forcing • Clouds: trends, forcing, feedbacks, and aerosol – cloud interactions • Nature and mechanisms of multidecadal natural ‘internal’ variability • Unknowns – solar indirect effects, magnetic and electric field effects, orbital (tidal and other) effects, core-mantle interactions, etc. http://judithcurry.com/2014/03/04/causes-and-implications-of-the-pause/

All fair points. Following on from that, I found this reposte to Easterbrooks article which you may like http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/06/on-don-easterbrooks-updated-projection/

Dr. Don Easterbrook – a climate scientist and glacier expert from Washington State who correctly predicted back in 2000 that the Earth was entering a cooling phase – says to expect colder temperatures for at least the next two decades. Easterbrook’s predictions were “right on the money” seven years before Al Gore and the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for warning that the Earth was facing catastrophic warming caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide, which Gore called a “planetary emergency.” “When we check their projections against what actually happened in that time interval, they’re not even close. They’re off by a full degree in one decade, which is huge. That’s more than the entire amount of warming we’ve had in the past century. So their models have failed just miserably, nowhere near close. And maybe it’s luck, who knows, but mine have been right on the button,” Easterbrook told CNSNews.com. “For the next 20 years, I predict global cooling of about 3/10ths of a degree Fahrenheit, as opposed to the one-degree warming predicted by the IPCC,” said Easterbrook, professor emeritus of geology at Western Washington University and author of 150 scientific journal articles and 10 books, including “Evidence Based Climate Science,” which was published in 2011. (See EasterbrookL coming-century-predictions.pdf) In contrast, Gore and the IPCC’s computer models predicted “a big increase” in global warming by as much as one degree per decade. But the climate models used by the IPCC have proved to be wrong, with many places in Europe and North America now experiencing record-breaking cold. Easterbrook noted that his 20-year prediction was the “mildest” one of four possible scenarios, all of which involve lower temperatures, and added that only time will tell whether the Earth continues to cool slightly or plunges into another Little Ice Age as it did between 1650 and 1790. … On the PDO: “What I did was I projected this same pattern forward to see what it would look like. And so in 1999, which was the year after the second warmest year on record, the PDO said we’re due for a climate change, and so I said okay. It looks as though we’re going to be entering a period of about three decades or so of global cooling. “And so in 2000, I published a paper with the Geological Society of America in which I predicted that we were going to stop warming and begin cooling for about 25 or 30 years, on the basis of taking the temperature records that go back a century or more and simply repeating the pattern of warming and cooling, warming and cooling, and so on. PDO fluctuations and projections to 2040 based on past PDO history. - See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/climate-scientist-who-got-it-right-predicts-20-more-years-global#sthash.jTgQD6lj.dpuf

Your comments on Heuristic modelling are valid. A risky approach but when applied in the right scenarios a useful tool. In my field, working with CSG companies to enable them to understand the characteristics of reservoirs including gas saturation, porosity etc.. we typically rely on multivariant, multivariate, multidimensional and stochastic methods. However, is some cases the use of correctly applied heuristic principles enables us to jump the gap to an accurate yield forecast for wells/stages etc. If you have access take a look at an SPE (Society of Petroleum Engineers) paper 135523 I had involvement in which describes a practical application of these. Looks like Kotov has no been overly prolific with his output as the paper I linked was approx 10yrs old and nothing of note since 2007.