Page 2 of 135 < 1 2 3 4 ... 134 135 >
Topic Options
#1135538 - 25/10/2012 17:11 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2637
Originally Posted By: Arnost
Quote:
It looks to me that the Southern hemisphere had more cloud cover than the Northern hemisphere which would explain what happened.


Can you please substatiate that?



Sure, from the paper that the SkS article quotes from...

Recent regional surface solar radiation dimming and brightening patterns: inter-hemispherical asymmetry and a dimming in the Southern Hemisphere

Abstract

Recent variations in surface solar radiation (SSR) at the beginning of the 21st century (2000–2007) were determined at scales ranging from local/regional to hemispherical/global, on the basis of radiative transfer computations and information from satellites, reanalyses and surface measurements. Under all-sky conditions, in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) there is no clear dimming/brightening signal after 2000, whereas in the SH there is a more clear dimming arising from both increasing clouds and aerosols. Dimming is observed over land and ocean in the Southern Hemisphere (SH), and over oceans in the NH, whereas a slight brightening occurred over NH land. However, opposite tendencies are found even within the same continent, indicating the need to assess SSR changes at regional/local scales apart from hemispherical/global ones.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asl.361/full
_________________________

Top
#1135543 - 25/10/2012 17:51 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: CeeBee]
Arnost Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 10/02/2007
Posts: 3908
Originally Posted By: CeeBee
Originally Posted By: Arnost
Quote:
It looks to me that the Southern hemisphere had more cloud cover than the Northern hemisphere which would explain what happened.


Can you please substatiate that?



Sure, from the paper that the SkS article quotes from...



Had a quick look - it's model output with cloud parameter input from ISCCP - D2 [the same dataset that the hovmoller graph I posted above comes from].

Therefore - since the ISCCP data shows minimal cloud change between the hemispheres (especially in the study period from March 2000 to June 2007) it can only be aerosols causing the:

Quote:
NH – Land: Δ (SSR) = 0.44 Wm -2
NH – Ocean: Δ (SSR) = -0.75 Wm -2
NH – Land+Ocean: Δ (SSR) = 0.17 Wm -2

SH – Land: Δ (SSR) = -4.35 Wm -2
SH – Ocean: Δ (SSR) = -3.67 Wm -2
SH – Land+Ocean: Δ (SSR) = -2.88 Wm -2


SSR change in the South in the study period. [and that is completely illogical as all the areosols are in the north!].

Look - there has been a reduction in cloud cover to about year 2000 and a flattening from then... Which should lead to a greater amt of warming then stability - and this ties in with the temp datasets:



Aerosols being a significant cause of the temp hiatus just does not make sense!
_________________________
“No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise” ...

And this of course applies to scientific principles. Never compromise these. Never! [Follow the science and you will be shown correct in the end...]

Top
#1135638 - 26/10/2012 07:01 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2637

There are large contributions to aerosols in the southern hemisphere from the burning of forests in the Amazon and Indonesia, as well as industry in south America, south Africa etc. When coupled with the increased cloud cover it well explains the dimming seen in the southern hemisphere.
_________________________

Top
#1135639 - 26/10/2012 07:31 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: CeeBee]
Arnost Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 10/02/2007
Posts: 3908
The Amazon and Indonesia are equatorial for a start. So they shouldn't be a factor one way or the other. wink

And if you beleive that Sth Africa or Sth America contribute more aerosols than Nth America / Eurasia, well there's not much point arguing is there.

And as per the ISCCP - there has been no cloud cover increase in the Southern Hemisphere. Or do you insist otherwise? And if so wha is your proof?
_________________________
“No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise” ...

And this of course applies to scientific principles. Never compromise these. Never! [Follow the science and you will be shown correct in the end...]

Top
#1135654 - 26/10/2012 08:38 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2637

I do not believe that Sth Africa or Sth America contribute more aerosols than Nth America / Eurasia, and I have not claimed as such.

You, on the other hand, claimed that all the aerosols are in the northern hemisphere, which is not correct.

And using just one data set to infer that the study is flawed is not legitimate when you take into account all of the data sources that were used in the study.

The model input data include cloud amounts, cloud scattering/absorption optical depth, cloud-top pressure and temperature, cloud geometrical thickness (cloud data from ISCCP-D2, Rossow and Schiffer, 1999), aerosol optical properties (from MODIS-Terra C005 and the Global Aerosol Data Set) and vertical temperature and specific humidity profiles (from NCEP/NCAR global reanalysis project, Kistler et al., 2001). The model takes into account Rayleigh scattering due to atmospheric gas molecules, as well as absorption by O3, CO2, H2O and CH4. Total O3, column abundance (in Dobson units), is taken from Television Infrared Observation Satellite (TIROS) Operational Vertical Sounder (TOVS) archived in the ISCCP-D2 dataset. For CO2 a fixed total atmospheric amount is taken, equal to 0.54 g cm−2, corresponding to 345 parts per million by volume (ppmv). The water vapour data used are taken from the NCEP/NCAR Global Reanalysis Project. The mixing ratio of CH4 is set equal to 1.774 ppmv, corresponding to 10−3 g cm−2. The radiative transfer equations are solved for 118 separate wavelengths for the ultraviolet–visible part of the spectrum, and for ten bands for the near-infrared part, using the modified Delta-Eddington method of Joseph et al. (1976). The accuracy of the model 2.5° monthly SSR fluxes has been tested (Hatzianastassiou et al., 2005) against measurements from GEBA and BSRN, addressing issues of temporal and spatial resolutions and non-linearities. For a detailed model and data description the reader is referred to Hatzianastassiou et al. (2005, 2007) and Vardavas and Taylor (2007).

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asl.361/full
_________________________

Top
#1135660 - 26/10/2012 09:23 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: CeeBee]
Arnost Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 10/02/2007
Posts: 3908
Cut and paste of methodology for input into a model proves nothing.

There has been no increase in clouds in the Southern Hemisphere - full stop.

In your words explain why aerosol "dimming" has caused the temperature hiatus when any number of data sets show that the largest increase in temps has been where there has been the largest increase in aerosols.
_________________________
“No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise” ...

And this of course applies to scientific principles. Never compromise these. Never! [Follow the science and you will be shown correct in the end...]

Top
#1135724 - 26/10/2012 14:50 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
And this is what the Germans, the major centre of the global warming belief in Europe believes is the state of the global warming / climate change belief now.
From P Gosselin's "NoTricksZone".

“The Air Is Gone” From Climate Change Issue, Says Veteran German Journalist. Ohio Is To Blame Claims Warmist

Quote:
The dead silence we’ve seen on the climate issue during the 2012 Presidential campaign is getting a strong reaction in Germany. Today I’m presenting 2 short views on this. One from a German skeptic, and one from a devout treehugger/climate crisis believer.

Ulli Kulke of DIE WELT

At his DIE WELT site, veteran journalist Ulli Kulke writes a piece titled: Al Gore is used up. In it he states that climate change as an issue is rapidly losing importance internationally.

Al Gore tweeted and tweeted last Monday evening, but it didn’t help. His agitated electronic pulses went unheard in the last TV debate…”

Not only is the issue completely off the radar in the United States, Kulke tells us, it is also now being increasingly challenged in Great Britain, and even the Germans are losing their angst of climate change.

Excerpts of what Kulke writes:

The complete absence of attention to climate change is new in the recent history in the USA since 1988, when James Hansen, Director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) of NASA sounded the huge alarms in Congress and thus drew prestige, attention and state funding.

The air is gone from the issue because of the never-ending signals of the coming end of the world [...] are no longer of any interest for voters.

Alarmism internationally, at least for now, appears to have been braked. Also here the German Academy of Technical Sciences (Acatech) recently presented a position paper on the topic. Its tenor: Climate change would not pose a problem that could not be handled by us. Just a few years ago that would have been an unthinkable statement.”


In summary in Kulke’s view, climate change has become a tiresome broken record among the public and people are far more concerned about jobs, the economy and the financial crisis.

Arne Jungjohann blames the silence on coal-state Ohio

Devout treehugger (and ally of US leftists) Arne Jungjohann at his alarmist website “Climate of Justice is upset about the silence over climate change during this campaign and presents a very plausible explanation.
Just 4 years ago, Obama was presenting himself as a huge proponent of renewable energies and promised to wean the USA off coal. Jungjohann poses and answers the question:

So why is there suddenly all this dead silence on the issue of climate change this election campaign?

Climate change as an issue is silent because it is not on the agenda in swing states. The election is not decided in New York or California, rather it is decided in states like Colorado and Ohio. Because of the particularities of the election system, Ohio has a high chance of tipping the scales. And Ohio gets 78% of its electric power from coal – That’s why Obama is now trying to appear as the better coal politician.”

Top
#1135824 - 27/10/2012 14:33 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
Police suspect two of carbon credit fraud worth CZK 378m (AUD$189 million)

24 October 2012

Prague, Oct 23 (CTK) - The Czech anti-corruption police have accused two men of 378 million crowns (AUD$189 million) worth of tax evasion linked to carbon credits trade, for which they would face up to ten years in prison, if convicted, the police spokesman Jaroslav Ibehej writes on their website.

The two say they bought carbon credits on behalf of a company from two Czech firms in 2010 and subsequently sold them to another company.

However, they in fact did not buy them in the Czech Republic but from a foreign company for a price not including VAT. They eventually paid the tax on the sum corresponding to the difference between the price for the fictitious purchase in the Czech Republic and the subsequent selling price, i.e. not for the really completed deal.

"They presented a fictitious transaction with the purpose to reduce the tax duty," Ibehej writes.

Moreover, the Czech firms from which the suspects bought the carbon credits, were not listed in the registry of carbon credit traders, the police found out.

Within the prosecution the police have blocked the suspects' real estate worth 11 million crowns (AUD$550,000) plus bank accounts with about 2.5 million crowns (AUD$125,000), Ibehej said.


link

from The Reference Frame :

One U.S. dollar is worth 19 Czech crowns (CZK) so the amount these two men earned was nice, $20 million (AUD$19,284,000).

Also on The Reference Frame:

A solar fraud for US$100 million

You may think that the two men above are just bad apples and exceptions. Well, one day after the information about $20 million carbon fraud above, we were told about another success in the Czech anti-corruption police's campaign against assorted environmental and renewable fraudsters that was celebrated just one day later, namely three hours ago.

Anti-corruption police accussed 9 people, foiled a $100 million solar fraud

Among the 9 accused people, three are pretty interesting because they're employees of the National Energy Market Regulation Office which supervises the photovoltaic industry in my country.

In 2010, the fraudsters managed to get stamps on all the paperwork proving that two solar power plants in Northern Bohemia began operation. The advantage was that this achievement guaranteed subsidies – well, guaranteed much-higher-than-market price for the produced electricity to be purchased by the state – for the next 20 years. The subsidies for power plants started after 2010 have already been substantially lower.

There was only one problem with these two solar power plants in 2010: they didn't exist in the reality yet.
_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1135885 - 27/10/2012 18:12 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: snafu]
Andy Double U Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 28/10/2006
Posts: 1829
Loc: Mundoolun, SE QLD, 129m ASL
Aghgh, and the brains trust currently running this country has decided that it would be 'wise' to trade our carbon credits in the EU.

Top
#1135978 - 28/10/2012 12:07 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Andy Double U]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
Earlier this year former hard line warmist and now luke warmer tending skeptic, Prof. and head of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the USA's Georgia State Uni and owner of the highly regarded "Climate Etc" blog, Judith Curry made a remark in an interview The IPCC May Have Outlived its Usefulness that
Quote:
The IPCC might have outlived its usefulness. Lets see what the next assessment report comes up with. But we are getting diminishing returns from these assessments, and they take up an enormous amount of scientists’ time.

It caused quite stir in the climate blogs at the time.

The next IPCC Assessment Report, the fifth in the series [ AR5 ] is due in 2013 / 14.

It is already under a serious cloud as far as both the science and the ethics and the impartiality on global warming / climate change behind it are concerned.

A special committee was set up a year or so ago to report on and make recommendations on the restructuring of the IPCC process, the structure which under Pachauri made very extensive use of both non peer reviewed articles and opinion articles from the magazines and articles from and by authors from the various radical green and environmental organisations in the 2007 AR4.
And this after Pachauri had categorically claimed that the IPCC used only peer reviewed papers.

As well it was also revealed that the IPCC appointed and used very junior and completely unqualified so called researchers as lead authors in some sections of the AR4.
Pachauri chose to completely ignore the recommendations of the committee as he claimed that as the AR5 process had begun, the committees recommendations did not apply to the AR5 but only came into force for the AR6.

And so we now have a situation where a very recently withdrawn paper by Gergis and Karoly on Australiasian temperatures based on proxies, a paper which was rapidly shown by a number of skeptic bloggers to be very badly flawed and was subsequently and supposedly withdrawn to be rewritten but now seems to have been completely withdrawn is to now be apparently incorporated into the upcoming AR5 science section.

From Steve McIntyre's "Climate Audit"

IPCC Check Kites Gergis

Quote:
A few days ago, WUWT pointed out that the American Meteorological Society webpage showed that the Gergis et al paper had been officially “withdrawn”. However, readers should know better than to presume that this would have any effect on IPCC use of the reconstruction.
The withdrawal of the Gergis article hasn’t had the slightest impact on IPCC usage of the Gergis reconstruction, which continues to be used in the recently released AR5 Second Order Draft, thanks to academic check kiting reminiscent of Ammann and Wahl. Tim Osborn of CRU is a Lead Author of the AR5 chapter (as he was in AR4) and would be familiar with the technique from AR4.
Although David Karoly had denied that Gergis et al had been withdrawn, the AMS finally admitted this at their website here.




The second reason to no longer have any further trust in the IPCC's science is due to a very similar situation to that prevailing in the 2007 AR4.

Donna Laframboise, the owner of the"No Frakking Consensus" blog and a Canadian investigative journalist along with a number of volunteers completely dissected the structure and the personnel and the origin of all the reports in the IPCC's AR4 of 2007.
What she revealed simply destroyed the claims of Pachauri that all the IPCC's science was based on peer reviewed papers.
She also was able to reveal the complete lack of any qualifications in some of the supposed IPCC lead author as well as their intimate affiliations or memberships of radical green and environmental groups.

Her reports on the IPCC structure and authors have now been incorporated into a book on the IPCC and it's science.
Meanwhile, Laframboise is keeping track of the IPCC's performance and who and what are the affiliations of the IPCC's AR5 authors and their status.
So we get this;

IPCC Author Becomes Green Party Apparatchik

A lead author of the IPCC’s ‘hard science’ section is a Green Party candidate and deputy leader.

Quote:
Let’s time travel back to August 2010 when the InterAcademy Council issued its damning report about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). That’s the report which declared that there were “significant shortcomings in each major step of IPCC’s assessment process” (see the first paragraph on page 31 of this 123-page PDF).
Among it’s specific recommendations was the following:

The IPCC should develop and adopt a rigorous conflict-of-interest policy that applies to all individuals directly involved in the preparation of IPCC reports, including…Lead Authors… [p. 71 of this 123-page PDF]

The IPCC claims to be conducting a scientific assessment of climate research. That assessment surely needs to be done by people who are dispassionate – rather than by those who already have strong opinions. If a potato chip manufacturer is on trial, it isn’t appropriate for anti-junk-food activists to be members of the jury. We all understand that their preconceptions will taint the result, that any guilty verdict will appear unfair.

If you want the public to trust you, appearances matter. Most of us understand this. But despite the fact that the IPCC will celebrate its 25th anniversary next year, it’s among the slowest learners on the planet.

First, its conflict-of-interest policy is utterly toothless. Second, IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri has made it clear that it was adopted so recently it doesn’t apply to the assessment currently underway.

Which explains why climate modeler Andrew Weaver thinks it’s perfectly OK to be a candidate for the Green Party of British Columbia (one of Canada’s provinces) at the same time that he’s serving as a lead author for the IPCC. Indeed, as Hilary Ostrov reports, Weaver has gone a step further – he has now become the party’s Deputy Leader.

On its website this party’s platform is outlined in the Green Book 2013 (backed up here). It advises that a “key goal” is to “Get the province off oil and gas” (p. 12 of the PDF). In the section titled Climate Change and Mental Health, the party promises to:
implement a full range of direct and supportive programs for people to help mitigate the impact of climate change on mental health and psychosocial well-being… [p. 18]

The document talks about “environmental debt” (p. 27) and promises to declare the province a “Plastic-Shopping- Bag- Free Zone” (p. 29). It describes the utopian concept of “zero waste” as being a “major part” of the Green Party’s”economic strategy” (p. 28). Among its other claims (all direct quotes from p. 29):

Climate change is the critical issue of our time.
Run away global warming will damage our economy.
Climate change is also a social justice issue…
But nothing beats the following for sheer hubris and self-delusion:
[British Columbia] can become a beacon of leadership in an otherwise irresponsible world. We can shame other governments into action.

What more needs to be said? One of the lead authors of the ‘hard science’ section of the upcoming IPCC report is deputy leader of a political party that fancies itself a beacon of leadership in an otherwise irresponsible world. This man sees himself as a messiah.


Both of the above examples indicate the type and level of "hard" science that we can now expect to be the basis of the climate science in the IPCC's AR5.

And it is on climate science at the level of these abysmal standards and biases that the entire global warming beliefs are founded on.

Top
#1136126 - 29/10/2012 10:28 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
Arnost Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 10/02/2007
Posts: 3908
Originally Posted By: Greg Sorenson
Originally posted by Arnost in the Interesting articles about AGW

I am this first to admit that a temperature differential is the driver of storms - so I have been [obviously] following the development of Hurricane Sandy with great interest given the pending interaction with the cold front.

BUT! [Not wanting to clogg up the Weather Thread on this] How can we get news articles saying things like this:

Quote:
Sandy, which could make landfall as the largest storm to hit the United States, bringing battering winds, flooding and even heavy snow.

...

It could be the largest storm to hit the United States, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.


http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/10/28/us-storm-sandy-hurricane-idUKBRE89N16J20121028

When these are the latest advisories from the Hurricane Centre:

FORECAST POSITIONS AND MAX WINDS

INIT 28/2100Z 33.4N 71.3W 65 KT 75 MPH
12H 29/0600Z 35.0N 70.6W 65 KT 75 MPH
24H 29/1800Z 37.7N 71.8W 70 KT 80 MPH
36H 30/0600Z 39.5N 74.8W 65 KT 75 MPH...POST-TROPICAL
48H 30/1800Z 40.2N 76.7W 50 KT 60 MPH...POST-TROP/EXTRATROP
72H 31/1800Z 42.7N 76.8W 35 KT 40 MPH...POST-TROP/EXTRATROP
96H 01/1800Z 44.7N 75.5W 30 KT 35 MPH...POST-TROP/EXTRATROP
120H 02/1800Z 45.6N 71.4W 25 KT 30 MPH...POST-TROP/EXTRATROP

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCDAT3+shtml/282056.shtml?


Mike Come Back and tell me what I'm missing...


I've moved this to the 2012 Atlantic & Caribbean hurricane Season http://forum.weatherzone.com.au/ubbthreads.php/topics/1100087/12/2012_Atlantic_Caribbean_hurric where it's better suited tot he topic at hand.

Cheers,

Greg


Edited by Greg Sorenson (29/10/2012 10:49)
_________________________
“No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise” ...

And this of course applies to scientific principles. Never compromise these. Never! [Follow the science and you will be shown correct in the end...]

Top
#1136185 - 29/10/2012 13:21 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
There is a great deal of hilarity around the skeptic and not so skeptic blogs at the moment over Michael Mann, the author of the infamous and thoroughly discredited "Hockey Stick" graph of past global temperatures.
Mann has a very strong propensity to try and sue anybody at any time when he thinks they have cast aspersions on his person or his global warming theology or his so called "science".

In the latest debacle for Mann, he sued as follows from the GWPF.
Quote:
Mann’s suit targets blog posts in July from Mark Steyn of the National Review, a self-described conservative magazine, and Rand Simberg of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a free-market think tank that has questioned humans’ role in climate change. Simberg wrote that Mann “could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science,” referring to the former Penn State assistant football coach who was convicted of child sexual abuse. Steyn called Mann “the man behind the fraudulent climate-change ‘hockey-stick’ graph”—the moniker for the graph that shows a spike in average global temperatures in the past 1000 years.

But the really biggest laugh for all concerned was Mann's claim in both the court action papers and in a number of other of Mann;'s self promoting publications was that he was "awarded" the "Nobel Peace Prize" for his work with the IPCC.
And he prominently displayed the appropriately labeled charter supposedly from the Nobel Prize committee.

[ Mann is certainly not the only IPCC participant to claim they have been "awarded" the Nobel Prize.
Here is another example from one of our local self promoters who was invited to give a presentation to one of our local schools.]




The Nobel Prize Committee on the other hand in a reply to a request on verifying Mann's award said ;

Quote:
Geir Lundestad, Director, Professor, or The Norwegian Nobel Institute emailed me back with the following:

1) Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
2) He did not receive any personal certificate. He has taken the diploma awarded in 2007 to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (and to Al Gore) and made his own text underneath this authentic-looking diploma.
3) The text underneath the diploma is entirely his own. We issued only the diploma to the IPCC as such. No individuals on the IPCC side received anything in 2007.


(NOTE: on point 3, another example here (PDF) suggests that the IPCC added that text, not Mann – Anthony)

Lundestad goes on to say that, “Unfortunately we often experience that members of organizations that have indeed been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize issue various forms of personal diplomas to indicate that they personally have received the Nobel Peace Prize. They have not.”


There is lots more on WUWT; and a more thoughtful and analytical approach from warmist Roger Pielke Jr's site, luke warmer JudithCurry's "Climate Etc" and etc and etc.

Curry in her "Week in Review" comments has included a very interesting comment from a very recent very pro warmist hour long special on the American Public Broadcasting Service.

It refers to the so called "consensus" on global warming;

PBS climate of doubt

Quote:
After interviewing ‘skeptics’ Richard Muller and Anthony Watts (with a very brief cameo by JC), now it is the consensus turn to trash the skeptics, with a Climate of Doubt. Heartland, Climate Depot, etc trash the PBS special. All this is so predictable that it is boring, and I don’t have much to say about it.

One interesting article emerged: PBS Frontline cites bogus consensus. This is well worth reading. Excerpt:

When one eliminates reviewers with clear vested interest, we end up with a grand total of “just seven who may have been independent and impartial”, according to Australian climate data analyst, John McLean (see his report). And, two of those are known to vehemently disagree with the statement. Prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider Dr. Mike Hulme even admits that “only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies”, not thousands as is commonly asserted by the IPCC and others, “reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate” (p. 10, 11 of Hulme’s April 12, 2010 paper in “Progress in Physical Geography” at http://tinyurl.com/2b3cq3r). It is travesty that the UN permits this misunderstanding to continue uncorrected.

To meaningfully assert that there is a consensus in any field, we need to actually have convincing evidence. And the best way to gather this evidence is to conduct unbiased, comprehensive worldwide polls. Since this has never been done in the vast community of scientists who research the causes of global climate change, we simply do not know what, if any, consensus exists among these experts. Lindzen concludes: “there is no [known] consensus, unanimous or otherwise, about long-term climate trends and what causes them.” Frontline did a disservice to the public telling them otherwise.





Edited by ROM (29/10/2012 13:23)

Top
#1136274 - 29/10/2012 18:28 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
__PG__ Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 08/02/2010
Posts: 706
Following on from the recent PBS documentary, Roy Spencer wrote this tirade on his blog
here

"As I recall, I spent at least an hour with the PBS film crew outlining the skeptics case and why we speak out. None of it was used…except the small clip above, with the apparent intent to deceive the viewer.

Shame on PBS. They have now joined, along with BBC, my blacklist of news organizations to never do an interview with again. Fool me once…."

In the comments section, the following post soon appeared:
Catherine at PBS/Frontline says:
October 24, 2012 at 8:27 PM

fyi, Dr. Spencer, we did not record an interview with you for Frontline. Not sure who you were referring to that interviewed you but it was not us.

Roy has had to 'update' his initial post including the following:
"While John Christy and I seemed to recall a visit from PBS, we get a lot of film crews come through our offices (almost always freelancers who are hired for the job), and so I will have to check my old calendars (which are at home) to make sure whether someone claiming to represent PBS was here or not. "

I wonder if he'll issue an apology to PBS.



Edited by __PG__ (29/10/2012 18:33)

Top
#1136351 - 29/10/2012 22:28 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: __PG__]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
While my deepest thoughts and best wishes go to all the people on the East Coast of the US due to the huge storm that Sandy is, there was no doubt that 'climate change' was going to be (partly) the blame.

Joe Romm - Oct 26th:

"As the East Coast braces for a possible direct hit from Hurricane Sandy, meteorologists are closely watching the storm’s “freak” formation. They’re calling it “unprecedented and bizarre”.

Bryan Norcross - wunderground

Oct 25th:

"Isn't it strange that a hurricane in the Bahamas would somehow turn into a monster mega-storm and slam into the Northeast at the end of October? Aren't hurricanes supposed to weaken as they move north over cold water? What the hell is going on?

The answers are... yes, yes, and we're not completely sure. This is a beyond-strange situation. It's unprecedented and bizarre. Hurricanes almost always bend out to sea in October, although there have been some exceptions when storms went due north, but rarely. No October tropical systems in the record book have turned left into the northeast coast."


Oct 28th:

"Sandy the super-unusual, combo hurricane/nor'easter on the unheard-of track is coming together as forecast".

Oct 29th:

"And so it begins. Mega monster Sandy, with 40+ mph winds 900 miles across and embedded hurricane-force winds is going to hang a left and smash into the Northeast on Monday - a maneuver we've never seen before from system that originated in the tropics".

History lesson #1 - Hurricane Nine, Oct 12 - 20, 1891. Cat 1, 85mph.



History lesson #2 - Hurricane Frances, Sept 30 - Oct 9, 1961. Cat 3, 125mph.



History lesson #3 - Hurricane Daisy, Sept 29 - Oct 8, 1962. Cat 2, 110mph.

_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1136368 - 29/10/2012 22:57 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
George M Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 98
Re #1136185 Here's another way of looking at individuals making false claims:

There was and is a great deal of hilarity around the AGW and not-so-AGW blogs at the moment, and in the past, over Christopher Monckton, the author of the infamous and thoroughly discredited "Monckton Powerpoint Presentation" that is skeptical of AGW theory.

Monckton has a very strong propensity to try and sue anybody at any time when he thinks they have cast aspersions on his person or his skeptic version of global warming theology or his so called "science".

In another debacle for Monckton, he claims to have won £50,000 in a defamation case against Geroge Monbiot.

But the really biggest laugh for all concerned was Monckton's claim in his numerous appearances and in a number of other of Monckton's self promoting publications was that he was "awarded" the "Nobel Peace Prize" for his work with the IPCC. And he prominently displays a gold pin supposedly from the Nobel Prize committee. Monckton claimed that his Nobel prize pin, made of gold recovered from a physics experiment, was presented to him by the Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Rochester, New York, USA.

When Christopher Monckton visited Australia in early 2010 he conceded that it was "it was a joke, a joke" and "never meant to be taken seriously". The Sydney Morning Herald noted that despite this, he had made the same claim with a "straight face" on the Alan Jones show one day prior, and the claim remained on the SPPInstitute website where it could still be found six months later.


Other chortles, include Monckton's following claims:

He was "chief policy advisor" to former British prime minister Margeret Thatcher, and is/was frequently introduced as her "chief science advisor" when interviewed by the conservative media.

However, John Gummer, who was Environment Minister under Thatcher, has said that Monckton was "a bag carrier in Mrs Thatcher's office. And the idea that he advised her on climate change is laughable." Writing in The Guardian, Bob Ward of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment notes that Thatcher's memoirs, The Downing Street Years, do not mention Monckton and credit George Guise with the role of science advisor.

He is "a member of the Upper House of the United Kingdom legislature". More recently he has claimed that he is a member "without the right to sit or vote"

However, the 1999 House Of Lords Act strips hereditary peers of instant admission to the House Of Lords. The House Of Lords themselves state that "Christopher Monckton is not and has never been a Member of the House of Lords. There is no such thing as a 'non-voting' or 'honorary' member." When Monckton persisted with the lie, the House of Lords took the unprecedented step of publishing an open letter to him, demanding that he cease and desist.

He had won £50,000 as a result of an article George Monbiot allegedly wrote.

As this was clearly untrue, George Monbiot wrote to Monckton asking why somebody claiming "who identifies himself as [Monckton]" was adding fictitious details to his Wikipedia page. A typically evasive Monckton refused to answer directly, and eventually wrote to Monbiot's editors demanding Monbiot cease emailing him pertinent questions

He has claimed that President Obama's birth certificate is fraudulent.

President Obama has produced his Hawaiian birth certificate to answer these allegations made by others in the US.

In the BBC documentary, "Meet the Sceptics" (2011), he said he had cured himself of Graves' disease (an auto-immune disease thought to have been triggered either by a one-time virus or bacterial infection) and said he was researching a "broad-spectrum cure" for infectious diseases. UKIP's CV for Monckton claims that his methods have produced cures for multiple sclerosis, influenza, and herpes, as well as reducing the viral load of an HIV patient.

But on Australian radio, Monckton refrained from claiming any cures when asked about his directorship of Resurrexi Pharmaceutical.

Sources: Sourcewatch: Christopher Monckton, Wikipedia: Christopher Monckton and Nobleman is No Nobel Man

In reference to the "consensus" on global warming, Monckton claims that:

He has written a peer-reviewed research paper and there is a conspiracy to cover this up.

Monckton wrote a controversial article for the American Physical Society's newsletter refuting the IPCC's conclusion that climate change is a largely human produced phenomenon. The APS, however, headlined the article with the disclaimer that "its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article's conclusions." and "The following article has not undergone any scientific peer review, since that is not normal procedure for American Physical Society newsletters".

Top
#1136371 - 29/10/2012 23:00 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: snafu]
Seabreeze Offline
Weatherzone Moderator

Registered: 18/09/2005
Posts: 10118
Loc: South West Rocks, NSW
They would be talking about the northeast coast of the USA. All the three examples above show those hurricanes/storms made landfall in Canada. Example #1 made landfall in Newfoundland. Examples #2 & #3 made landfall in Nova Scotia (both quite close to Maine, but technically they made landfall on Canadian soil).
_________________________
South West Rocks, NSW Mid North Coast:
August 2017 Rainfall: 1.2mm (Aug Avg. 80.4mm) // August 2017 Raindays: 1 (Aug Avg. 8.1 raindays)
Year-to-date Rainfall: 1244.6mm (Jan-Aug Avg. 1097.9mm) // Year-to-date Raindays: 104 (Jan-Aug Avg. 93.6 raindays)

Top
#1136385 - 29/10/2012 23:19 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Seabreeze]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
Originally Posted By: Seabreeze
but technically they made landfall on Canadian soil.

"No October tropical systems in the record book have turned left into the northeast coast."

"a maneuver we've never seen before from [a] system that originated in the tropics"

Whether it be the US or Canada, you can't deny they didn't turn left towards the coast, unlike the above statements.
_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1136392 - 29/10/2012 23:33 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: snafu]
Seabreeze Offline
Weatherzone Moderator

Registered: 18/09/2005
Posts: 10118
Loc: South West Rocks, NSW
None of the above turned turn left into the Northeast Coast of the USA though ('into' implies you enter something, or in this case, make landfall). But I suppose the rather vague langauge used does kind-of leave it open to individual interpretation. cool
_________________________
South West Rocks, NSW Mid North Coast:
August 2017 Rainfall: 1.2mm (Aug Avg. 80.4mm) // August 2017 Raindays: 1 (Aug Avg. 8.1 raindays)
Year-to-date Rainfall: 1244.6mm (Jan-Aug Avg. 1097.9mm) // Year-to-date Raindays: 104 (Jan-Aug Avg. 93.6 raindays)

Top
#1136449 - 30/10/2012 09:16 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: Seabreeze]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
The models fail once again with another of their predictions....note australian authors on this one...

Source:
Geophysical Research Letters, doi:10.1029/2012GL053369, 2012
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053369

"Title:
Changes in the variability of global land precipitation

Authors:
Fubao Sun and Graham D. Farquhar: Research School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia, and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia;

Michael L. Roderick: Research School of Biology and Research School of Earth Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia, and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia."



"Global precipitation variability from 1940 to 2009 contradicts models

Posted on October 29, 2012 by Anthony Watts


Media release received from the American Geophysical Union on October 29, 2012:

Global precipitation variability decreased from 1940 to 2009

One of the strongly held assumptions of climate change is that the variability of precipitation will grow with an increase in temperature. Storms will become heavier but less frequent. Flash floods and droughts will increase. Regions that see extensive rainfall will get even more while arid regions will dry out. These projections stem from the way temperature affects precipitation patterns in global models.

However, drawing on seven databases representing global monthly mean precipitation values, Sun et al. find that from 1940 to 2009 global overland precipitation variability actually decreased. In addition, they find that the changes in precipitation patterns that did occur led to a redistribution of rainfall such that on average wet areas and seasons got drier, and dry areas and seasons got wetter..."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/29/gl...els/#more-73254



Edited by bd bucketingdown (30/10/2012 09:17)

Top
#1136453 - 30/10/2012 09:47 Re: Interesting Articles about AGW [Re: bd bucketingdown]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14151
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics
Announcement: WUWT-TV to counter Al Gore’s ’24 Hours of Climate Reality’ with live webcast

Posted on October 29, 2012by Anthony Watts

(1) http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/29/an...5th/#more-73274

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 10/29/12

WUWT-TV to debut on November 14th to counter Al Gore’s “Dirty Weather Telethon” on November 14th and 15th

Al Gore is forming another 24 hour media event on November 14th, focusing on “dirty weather”, which you can read about here. It is yet another example of what has been called “Tabloid Climatology”.

Gore’s program is another transparent attempt to link climate and weather, and to make people fearful of common weather events that we’ve seen all throughout history. WUWT hosted a 24 hour event last year, thanks to the talents of our contributing cartoonist, Josh. You can review that here.

Last year during his “24 Hours of Climate Reality”, Mr. Gore created a video called “Climate 101” in which he purported to show a laboratory experiment showing the warming effects of CO2. Unfortunately it was discovered that Mr. Gore fabricated the experimental results using video post production techniques. You can read about it and see the evidence here:

Video analysis and scene replication suggests that Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project fabricated their Climate 101 video “Simple Experiment”

and

Replicating Al Gore’s Climate 101 video experiment shows that his “high school physics” could never work as advertised

Due to Mr. Gore broadcasting fabricated and impossible science experiments, and then failing to correct the video even when glaringly obvious falsifications were pointed out, and partly due to WUWT’s founder Anthony Watts recent interview (and backlash) on PBS Newshour, a donor has stepped forward and offered to equip WUWT for professional Live TV over the Internet and has purchased a complete web enabled TV studio setup for use this year, seen here:

http://www.newtek.com/products/tricaster-40.html

It includes two cameras, live video over net input, and live graphics/slideshow input.

It has been tested and has succeeded a 24 hour live web broadcast burn in period. When in production, the WUWT-TV web channel will have all of the elements of a professional TV production.

During the event, WUWT-TV will be able to conduct live video interviews via Skype online video, plus will feature simultaneous PowerPoint presentations run in high quality HD to go with the live interview, while the guest narrates. These can be full screen or split screen depending on the setting.

PowerPoint presentations will be pre-loaded into the system, and to facilitate remote control, WUWT has engineered a remote ‘clicker’ that allows guest presenters to control the presentation from their end, using a web page with a forward and back button on it.

WUWT-TV has invited a number of individuals to give presentations, here is the list so far.

SCHEDULED TO APPEAR:

Andrew Montford (Author of The Hockey Stick Illusion)
Richard Lindzen (Alfred P. Sloan professor of Meteorology, MIT)
Marc Morano (Climate Depot)
John Coleman (Founder of the Weather Channel, now at KUSI-TV)
Chris Horner (Senior Fellow, Center for Energy and Environment, CEI)
Steve McIntyre (editor of ClimateAudit.org)
Dr. Ross McKitrick (University of Guelph)
John Christy (Alabama State climatologist, co author of UAH dataset)
Joe D’Aleo (WeatherBell)
Joe Bastardi (Weatherbell)
Senator Jim Inhofe
Bob Tisdale (author of Who Turned on The Heat?)
Dr. Ryan Maue (Weatherbell)
Dr. Sebastian Lüning (co-author of Die Kalt Sonne)
Harold Ambler (Author of Don’t Sell Your Coat)
Donna LaFramboise (Author of The Delinquent Teenager)
Pat Michaels (former State climatologist of Virgina, fellow of the Cato institute)
Pete Garcia (Producer of the movie The Boy Who Cried Warming)
Christopher Monckton (SPPI)

Invited but still undecided or have not returned RSVP:

Judith Curry (may appear by pre-recorded presentation she offered)
Burt Rutan (no reply)
John Kehr (no reply)
David Stockwell (no reply)
Jo Nova (undecided)
Dr. David Evans (no reply)
Zeke Hausfather, BEST (undecided)

Invited but declined:

Dr. Walt Meir, NSIDC (declined)
Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. (conflicting commitments prevent appearance)
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. (declined but offered supplemental materials)
Bill McKibben (declined due to other commitments)

There are still a few slots open. For those on the opposite side of the debate, as well as those on the skeptic side we invite you to participate, and welcome slide and narrative presentations from 15 minutes to 1 hour in length.

For questions or to request a time slot, please use the contact form if you will be able to participate. Given that Mr. Gore wants to sell the American public on ‘dirty weather’, which we know is an act of desperation, unsupported by the current state of the science (see this Nature editorial on the lack of linkage between climate and extreme weather) your voice will be particularly important.

If you cannot participate live during that time, we can arrange to pre-record the segment and play it at the appropriate time on November 14th or 15th. All that is required is a functional webcam (with headset preferred for best audio quality) A Skype account, and a short PowerPoint presentation or video clip.


News article formating I use: News headline in bold, body of article in italics, link to article shown as (1), (2) etc, internal links shown as (http://www.exampleofalink.com) my comments in plain text. For those who don't like to hand code just click on full form reply and highlight and then click Italics etc to change the format.


_________________________
202mm April 2017
Best 156mm 19/5/17
2017 Total 694mm
2016 Total 649mm
2015 Total 375mm
2014 Total 1032mm
2013 Total 715mm







Top
Page 2 of 135 < 1 2 3 4 ... 134 135 >


Moderator:  Lindsay Knowles 
Who's Online
0 registered (), 271 Guests and 6 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
Astraphobia, Jillamanda, terrydavidphoto
Forum Stats
29341 Members
32 Forums
23661 Topics
1458385 Posts

Max Online: 2925 @ 02/02/2011 22:23
Satellite Image