User talk:Steve1941

Welcome!

Hello, Steve1941, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I wonder if you would like to confess your secret identity? See WP:COI. As a hint - if you really want to be secret, don't use your birthdate in your username William M. Connolley (talk) 08:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello William, It would seem that the jury is still out on Schwartz JGR 07, 08. One might note the increasing acceptance of a short climate response time, for example Murphy, D. M., S. Solomon, R. W. Portmann, K. H. Rosenlof, P. M. Forster, and T. Wong (2009), An observationally based energy balance for the Earth since 1950, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D17107, doi:10.1029/2009JD012105, "Autocorrelation analyses of global temperatures suggest that the surface ocean portion of the Earth’s climate response has a time constant of about 8–12 years [Scafetta, 2008; Schwartz, 2008]." Steve1941 (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Atmoz re Schwartz

Hi Steve,

I agreed with your request to Atmoz for an explanation of his deletion, and added my two cents (pre-inflation). Atmoz bluntly told me not to post on his talk page and to raise the issue at Talk:Stephen_E._Schwartz. This made sense; do you want to go first and I'll follow up? Otherwise people visiting that talk page won't be aware the issue has now been raised by two people already.

I get the feeling that atmospheric warming is the phenomenon of climatology attracting more heated debates than it used to. I used to think only the AGW deniers were at fault in that regard, but the Second law of thermodynamics seems to be kicking in lately. --Vaughan Pratt (talk) 22:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're uncomfortable doing so in light of WMC's remark about WP:COI I will understand. --Vaughan Pratt (talk) 07:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]