Global Warming and thermometers

[amdx]

From the International Journal of Climatology.

New paper finds that aging weather stations record much higher daytime
temperatures, 1.63°C higher than new stations, which by way of
comparison is more than twice the global warming of 0.7°C recorded since
the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850.


http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/new-paper-finds-that-aging-weather.html

If you have access to the International Journal of Climatology or
Wiley, look here.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.2013.33.issue-7/issuetoc

Mikek

 

[[email protected]]

And then we have :

http://www.cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/m...y-did-arctic-ice-cap-grow-920000-square-miles

"Well, it seems global warming skeptics have won another battle in the climate >wars. The Arctic ice cap grew by 920,000 square miles since last year.. That's a >60% increase in just one year. So, with this development, can we say that Earth >is undergoing a period of global cooling? It's ironic. "

Having a look around the page it seems to have a rupubican slant, but it's pretty hard to lie about almost a million square miles. Of ocurse they didn't mention the thickness of the ice.......

 

[Wymsey]

Having a look around the page it seems to have a rupubican slant, but
it's pretty hard to lie about almost a million square miles. Of ocurse
they didn't mention the thickness of the ice.......

It's easy to lie about anything and there will always be some who believe
it. The people behind that quote are the MRC - just another right wing
organisation trying to appear objective "MRC’s sole mission is to expose
and neutralize the propaganda arm of the Left: the national news media.
This makes the MRC’s work unique within the conservative movement." says
their website (http://www.mrc.org/static/about-us). These guys make me
laugh, they have no idea what left wing or liberal mean - still as long
as they stay in Virginia!

 

[amdx]

It's sad that the climatology is so permeated by politics, on both
sides. The leftist press won't publish anything that casts doubt on
AGW, and posts nonsense about all the evils of CO2, blaming it for any
bad weather or frog disease or civil war that happens. So the only
place you can find references to contrary research is right-wing rags.

A couple of decades from now, the AGW research will be cited as
another shameful event in the history of science, like eugenics and
cold fusion and polywater and phrenology and 90% of the nutrition
studies these days.

Hope you're wrong mixing cold fusion in there.
But then there was name change, Low Energy Nuclear Reaction.

Mikek

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christensen]

But our world is run by nutcases... at a close-by supermarket it's

hard to find real butter buried amongst the "tastes-like" substitutes.

don't think I've seen noticed any "taste-like butter" here, margarine sure but not that claim to be anything like butter

as far as I'm concerned real butter is pretty required if you want really
good food, though I'm not a big fan of American butter

but we do have several types of a mix of about 75% butter and 25% vegetableoil
taste pretty much the same but it is easy spreadable on a piece of bread straight from the fridge

And then they only provide "salted" butter, ignoring their own whine

about low-sodium being good :-(

didn't they recently realize that for most people low sodium is pretty
much just as bad as high sodium

we even have a version with coarse sea salt, it's yummy

-Lasse

 

[Bill Sloman]

It's sad that the climatology is so permeated by politics, on both
sides. The leftist press won't publish anything that casts doubt on
AGW, and posts nonsense about all the evils of CO2, blaming it for any
bad weather or frog disease or civil war that happens. So the only
place you can find references to contrary research is right-wing rags.

A couple of decades from now, the AGW research will be cited as
another shameful event in the history of science, like eugenics and
cold fusion and polywater and phrenology and 90% of the nutrition
studies these days.

John Larkin's aspirations to prophecy aren't exactly convincing.

And it isn't "sad" that climatology is permeated by politics, but inevitable, granting that the scientific facts strongly suggest that we should slow down our digging up and burning of fossil carbon for fuel, while the peoplewho are making a lot of money out of this activity want to keep on doing it.

There are well-established techniques for using money to diffuse the political impact of scientific facts, and it's no surprise that some of the people who told you that smoking didn't really damage your health are now telling us that CO2 isn't really warming up the planet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt

Eugenics has now become genetic counselling, cold fusion and polywater wererapidly recognised as mistakes, and phrenology - like 90% of the "nutrition science" on offer - was a pseudo-scientific fad that grew out of real scientific advance. We all know about Broca's area in the brain and Wernicke'sarea, as we know about vitamins and essential trace elements (like iodine)..

In reality it's denialism that's going to be seen in the future as a shameful event in the history of capitalism, like the persistent unwillingness ofthe tobacco industry to recognise the damage their product was doing to the people who bought it.

Since quite a few people - those less gullible than John Larkin - already perceive this, this shouldn't be regarded as a prophecy.

 

[whit3rd]

From the International Journal of Climatology.

New paper finds that aging weather stations record much higher daytime
temperatures, 1.63°C higher than new stations, which by way of
comparison is more than twice the global warming of 0.7°C recorded since
the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850.

Interesting, but unimportant.
Ground-based weather stations are a useful worldwide network regardless
of calibration (i.e. predictable, systematic, repeatable) issues.
Global climate modeling is of the WHOLE ATMOSPHERE, most of
which is a mile away, vertically, from those ground-based weather boxes.

No one has been blindly following the ground-station numbers.
No one has been getting anything wrong because of near-ground
temperature measurement difficulties.

There's been cross-checking of near-ground temperatures against other
thermometers for centuries. Maybe longer.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.2013.33.issue-7/issuetoc

Thanks for the reference, I'll try to look it up (and any serious replies).In future,
though, try to include date and author; is the article under discussion
"Sensors and the City: ..."? That's a REVIEW article, is just a compilation
of well-known info from many old sources. Nothing new there.

 

[[email protected]]

It's sad that the climatology is so permeated by politics, on both
sides. The leftist press won't publish anything that casts doubt on
AGW, and posts nonsense about all the evils of CO2, blaming it for any
bad weather or frog disease or civil war that happens. So the only
place you can find references to contrary research is right-wing rags.

A couple of decades from now, the AGW research will be cited as
another shameful event in the history of science, like eugenics and
cold fusion and polywater and phrenology and 90% of the nutrition
studies these days.

To biggies: ALR and the king of them all DDT.

 

[Bill Sloman]

Bad calorimetry, most likely. Chemists are awful with stuff like this.

It wasn't bad calorimetry as such, but something odd happening when you electrolysed heavy water with high surface area palladium electrodes.

You could store a lot of energy in the palladium until some threshold was exceeded, when it all came out rapidly, messing up the calorimetry. People seem to have replicated that effect - if not in a controlled way - and it's pretty clear that nuclear fusion wasn't what was going on. My guess would be some sort of switch between palladium crystal structures (as you see whenyou get tin cold enough, not that there's much energy involved there).

Of course, if it were that simple, someone would have long since documentedthe effect and published.

Some chemists are bad at any experimental technique you care to specify, just as some physicists produce rotten electronics. It's as silly to write off the whole profession as it would be to assume that all physicists are as good with electronics as Phil Hobbs.

 

[Ecnerwal]

Having a look around the page it seems to have a rupubican slant,

Gosh, really? I'm shocked, just shocked... ;-)

but it's
pretty hard to lie about almost a million square miles. Of ocurse they didn't
mention the thickness of the ice.......

And exactly _where_ was the ice in 2012? - at a VERY low level. So low
that a "60% increase" is not really all that impressive. It's all in how
you cherry-pick which "truth" you tell about the amount of ice, de-ah.
If you can find one that extends to this year and shows both poles, I'd
be happier with it, but this is what I could find that shows the
Northern ice over a longer term, including the 2012 minimum.

 

[Martin Brown]

In a couple of decades or so it will become perfectly clear that the
climatologists *were* telling the truth and paranoid lying dittoheads
were spreading deliberate disinformation. Think of that next time
Florida Keys, New Orleans or New York next suffer horrendous flooding
from a storm surges combined with accelerating rising sea levels.

The reason you only find contrary research in paranoid rightwing rags is
that none of it would pass basic peer review for the science!
AGW research will eventually prove more or less correct and the lying
rabid right wing dittoheads will be shown for exactly what they are.

Hope you're wrong mixing cold fusion in there.
But then there was name change, Low Energy Nuclear Reaction.

Mikek

Cold fusion was a genuine mistake by two reputable electrochemists who
rushed into print with what turned out to be dodgy calorimetry. For a
while at least it looked like it might be genuine and the setup so
trivial that you could not buy Pd or heavy water for months afterwards!

Unfortunately the only cold fusion that actually works is the muon
catalysed version (first catch your muon). It was this work that
"forced" Pons & Fleischmann into premature publication.

LENR & eCat are more walks like a duck quacks like a duck conmen. When
he demonstrates something that actually works in front of independent
scientific researchers instead of lame sycophants and cronies I will
take it seriously. Until then it is just more expensive snake oil.

 

[Martin Brown]

To biggies: ALR and the king of them all DDT.

Do you have something against Abbey Light Railways?
Or Automated Lip Reading?

DDT was an incredibly double edged sword right from the outset.

It had been synthesised many decades before Muller spotted its potency
as an insecticide. In WWII the secrecy surrounding its manufacture
convinced Nazi intelligence that the allies also had also discovered
nerve agents. This made them think twice about loading their V weapons
with anything other than HE. They had Sarin and Tabun in quantity.

DDT is incredibly well tolerated in mammals but extremely bad for fish,
birds and their eggs particularly the top predators like raptors. It was
a good insecticide that was relatively safe to humans and as a result
massively and irresponsibly overused worldwide.

The benefits of killing malaria and typhus vectors was ultimately
squandered by overuse and population selection by the time a ban was
imposed. The buildup of DDT in the environment and storage in fatty
tissue means that humans from a particular heavily exposed era are
technically on a ppb w/w basis "not fit for human consumption"
(using modern ultratrace analytical techniques it is easily detected)

 

[George Herold]

Hope you're wrong mixing cold fusion in there.
But then there was name change, Low Energy Nuclear Reaction.

Hi Mike, I know nothing I say will convince you. But cold fusion is bunk.
Unfortunately there are still people trying to make it fly.

We received a letter the other day from someone trying to put cold fusion
(now called "condensed matter nuclear science") into the physics teaching labs. There was a long 23 page letter. But I was hard pressed to find any physics in it. It was all "huff and puff".
"We are working with X and Y universities, we have Z number of peer reviewed papers, and W number of patents..." I don't know how he went on for 23 pages without saying anything. If there had been one nice graph that showedsome effect, and that students could reproduce... Well physics lab 'guys' would be all over it. New science is fun, lotsa people would like to do it.. (I'd like to do it.) But I'm not going to waste my time on cold fusion.There's just nothing there.

George H.

 

[Bill Sloman]

tic-ice-cap-grow-920000-square-miles



New Orleans flooded because two artificial structures - the Industrial Canal
and the 17th St canal- were built and improperly maintained. Hurricanes have
happened for millions of years. NY was damaged for similar reasons, improper
preparation for the kind of storms that have happened forever.

But anthropogenic global warming is apparently making "extreme weather" more frequent. Higher global temperatures means more water vapour in the air, which means more stored latent energy of vapourisation to drive hurricanes and the like. It's a statistically significant effect.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com....-severe-storm-climate-change-weather-science/

The deadliest hurricane in US history was the Galveston storm of 1900. The
great east coast storm was in 1938.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_hurricanes

Stop blaming AGW for storms. And stop blaming 20 feet of flooding on an inch > or so sea level rise.

AGW is making more extreme storms more likely. Martin Brown didn't blame the current flooding event on sea level rise, but was pointing out that future sea level rise is likely to make it worse.

We don't really know how the Greenland ice cap is going to behave as the climate gets warmer. It's easy enough to predict how long it would take to melt if it stayed stuck on top of Greenland, but the Laurentian ice cap on top of Northern Canada didn't melt in place at the end of the last ice age, but slid off into the Atlantic, dumping boulders - erratics and drop-stones - on the bottom of the Atlantic ocean a long way south of the then ice cap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_erratic

Life could get interesting if that happened to the Greenland ice cap. Some blame the Younger Dryas on that kind if large-scale ice movement. Somebody made a film about an imagined modern re-run of the Younger Dryas recently ....

 

[[email protected]]

Do you have something against Abbey Light Railways?
Or Automated Lip Reading?
No.

DDT was an incredibly double edged sword right from the outset.

Except, like AGW, there was no science behind it and people die.

It had been synthesised many decades before Muller spotted its potency
as an insecticide. In WWII the secrecy surrounding its manufacture
convinced Nazi intelligence that the allies also had also discovered
nerve agents. This made them think twice about loading their V weapons
with anything other than HE. They had Sarin and Tabun in quantity.
Irrelevant.

DDT is incredibly well tolerated in mammals but extremely bad for fish,
birds and their eggs particularly the top predators like raptors. It was
a good insecticide that was relatively safe to humans and as a result
massively and irresponsibly overused worldwide.
BS

The benefits of killing malaria and typhus vectors was ultimately
squandered by overuse and population selection by the time a ban was
imposed. The buildup of DDT in the environment and storage in fatty
tissue means that humans from a particular heavily exposed era are
technically on a ppb w/w basis "not fit for human consumption"
(using modern ultratrace analytical techniques it is easily detected)

More BS.

 

[Bill Sloman]

Except, like AGW, there was no science behind it and people die.

DDT value was determined by systematic observation - which is scientific - so we have just been reminded = once again, that krw is the sort of nitwit who gives ignorance a bad name.

Irrelevant.

True, but interesting none-the-less.

BS

It's certainly not BS - in fact it is a pretty good precis of Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring", which was the very antithesis of BS.

More BS.

Granting krw's well-known ignorance and stupidity, it may well be BS to him. Better-informed readers - 99.9% of the population - will recognise it as a brief, accurate and focused exposition.

Krw is diligent in characterising himself as ill-informed character with very limited intellectual powers. I - for one - would be happier if he were less diligent.