It is very gratifying to see adjustments of temperature data from surface stations getting some attention again. You could say I started blogging due to that very issue. One of my first posts back in November 2009 was Climate Fast Food (“processed data”). The comparison between the unadjusted and adjusted data for certain stations was shocking:
“If climate change is weather records homogenised, I’d rather have the raw data, as I’m finding the processed kind rather hard to digest.”
In mid-November NASA released an ultra-high-resolution computer model simulating how carbon dioxide in the atmosphere travels around the globe. It is visually stunning – all those colours and swirls and detail – see for yourself:
Posted in CO2, Mapping
Tagged Models, NASA
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2014 annual report for this blog.
A quiet year. I hadn’t realised the break in posts was so long, or that gallopingcamel had helped keep things going with quite so many posts.
Here’s an excerpt:
The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 24,000 times in 2014. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 9 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.
Click here to see the complete report.
There’s been a little song running through my head today while I make mince pies and wrap presents.
I thought you might enjoy it.
They said children won’t know what snow is
They said it’s a disaster for earth Continue reading
Guest Post by Peter Morcombe (gallopingcamel)
The Kyoto Protocol
Elites around the world tend to believe that rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will cause catastrophic climate changes. Collectively they wield enough power to shape energy policies in many nations according to commitments laid down in the “Kyoto Protocol” and subsequent accords. It is interesting to compare the fate of the Kyoto Protocol based on the work of “Climate Scientists” such as Michael Mann with that of the Montreal Protocol based on the work of people like McElroy.
The Montreal Protocol essentially banned the production of Freon and similar compounds based on the prediction that this would reduce the size of the polar “Ozone Holes”. After the ban went into effect the size of the ozone holes diminished. This may mean that the science presented by McElroy and his cohorts was “Robust” or it may be dumb luck. Either way, McElroy has credibility and “Skeptics” are ridiculed. The Kyoto Protocol did not fare so well.
Einstein’s advice for dealing with ‘reptiles’ over a century ago.
A letter to Marie Curie, found among a newly published collection of Albert Einstein’s papers, was written at a time when she was facing vilification by the press.
“Do not laugh at me for for writing to you without having anything sensible to say. But I am so enraged by the base manner in which the public is presently daring to concern itself with you that I absolutely must give vent to this feeling.’ Continue reading
I can’t promise to get back into blogging in the same way as before, but my absence does bear an explanation. It is a case of ‘what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger’. Oftentimes you have to take a few steps backwards before you can start to move forward again.
A journey of self-realisation can be a long one, and all the time you are trying to fulfill the expectations of others while trying to understand who you are and how you fit in. You have a job that seems to be everything you aspire to and a boss that everyone reveres, but it feels as if you are swimming in a current that you fight no matter what direction you chose to turn. You’re a fighter, not one who can sit still. Your response to stress is ‘a change is a good as a rest’ so blogging fills your evenings as a way to switch off after pressured days. Continue reading
While watching an old favourite last night, it occurred to me that, with small changes, one scene suited a modern take:
Man in Suit: Sir, your files say you’ve worked hard to align your business with our new global principles. Do you feel your business is now sustainable? Continue reading
Posted by Peter Morcombe, April 2014
“Climate Science” is a strange discipline that makes all kinds of claims that lack any valid mathematical basis. For example, the Arrhenius hypothesis:
“The selective absorption of the atmosphere is……………..not exerted by the chief mass of the air, but in a high degree by aqueous vapor and carbonic acid, which are present in the air in small quantities.”
I write about “Climate Science” because it is used to justify a political agenda that aims to “mitigate” CO2 regardless of negative impacts on billions of people. Even though most “Climate Scientists” get their pay checks from governments they are reluctant to engage with members of the public who express doubt about the need to reduce the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide.
Before making a post I reach out to experts in the field. For example, Tom Peterson (GHCN), Albert Klein Tank (KNMI), Richard Alley (Penn State) and several scientists at the DMI helped with my posts on Greenland (here and here). When I wrote about the Unified Theory of Climate (here and here) Ned Nikolov provided many helpful comments. Scott Denning took an interest in my doubts about the Arrhenius theory (here and here). I think of these folks as “Good Sports” who don’t get offended when their ideas are challenged. They behave as real scientists should.
I was building a model of planetary atmospheres using FEA (Finite Element Analysis) when I came across this letter in “Nature”:
http://faculty.washington.edu/dcatling/Robinson2014_0.1bar_Tropopause.pdf Continue reading