//
you're reading...
Arctic/Antarctic, Australasian politics, Climate Science, General Topics, IPCC, Loony Toons, Settled science?, These items caught my eye, UK Weather

These items caught my eye – 8 September 2013

1: Is Antarctica Getting Warmer?; 2: COP19 – Déjà vu In Poland; 3: Stocker’s ounces of self-promotion … and IPCC demotion prevention; 4:Big green in denial; 5: Britain’s Warm, But Unremarkable Summer; 6: Phlogiston and Global Warming.; 7: Arctic sea ice reaches minimum for 2013 – about a week early; 8: when climate science became political science …; 9: Does crossing (a part of) the Northwest Passage demonstrates the dramatic effect of climate change?; 10: Fundamentals that Climate Science Ignores; – Please remember to read the comments, as the information (and the links) contained in them often put the main article into context..
_____________________________________________

Is Antarctica Getting Warmer?

Posted on September 8, 2013 by Paul Homewood

Is Antarctica Getting Warmer?

Is Antarctica Getting Warmer?

We often hear claims that the Antarctic is getting warmer, but what do the numbers tell us?

A study in 2002, by Peter Doran and others, “Antarctic climate cooling and terrestrial ecosystem response” looked at temperatures between 1966 and 2000, and was pretty conclusive:

Although previous reports suggest slight recent continental warming, our spatial analysis of Antarctic meteorological data demonstrates a net cooling on the Antarctic continent between 1966 and 2000

And in 2006, a paper by George Taylor, State Climatologist for Oregon, came to similar conclusions, finding: – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

COP19 – Déjà vu In Poland

Posted on September 8, 2013 by Tory Aardvark

Dateline December 1st 2008 Poznan, Poland the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 14th Conference of the Parties (COP) is underway.

The world 5 years ago was a vastly different place than it is today, fear of Anthropogenic Global Warming was still in the ascendancy, Al Gore and Rajendra Pachauri were taken seriously, fawning Liberal politicians hang on their every word, Green NGO’s like Greenpeace, WWF and FoE have the ear of politicians and their Green propaganda is included in IPCC Assessment reports as observed scientific fact.

The outcome of COP14 was as always with COP meetings the gateway to the big deal on Climate that was going to happen at the next COP meeting, in this case COP15 in Copenhagen.

As COP14 progressed there was no sign on the horizon of the gathering storms clouds of Climategate, the Greens, warming alarmists and Liberals were confident, the election of the Boy King Obama in the US was going to bring the impetus to force through the climate deal in Hopenhagen.

The Friends of the Earth International website for that day is upbeat and full of optimism: – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Stocker’s ounces of self-promotion … and IPCC demotion prevention

Posted on September 7, 2013 by Hilary Ostrov

Readers may recall that in mid July, I had posted an open letter to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Secretariat with some questions pertaining to submissions that had been received in response to a “background paper” on the Future of the IPCC.

While I did not receive a response from the Secretariat, I did receive a (surprisingly!) timely and courteous response from Jonathan Lynn, (IPCC Head, Communications and Media Relations) to whom I had forwarded my open letter.

On July 7, when I had written my open letter, there was no sign anywhere on the IPCC site of this “background paper” or any indication as to whom the invitation to respond might have been sent; however, within three days of my E-mail to Lynn, the documents I sought were posted on the IPCC site for its October meeting in Batumi, Georgia, when the issue is scheduled to be discussed [Item 8 on the Agenda]

I was still curious to know whether (as had occurred in a similar exercise in 2008) submissions would be received from: – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Big green in denial

Posted on September 7, 2013 by Judith Curry

Naomi Klein explains how environmentalists may be more damaging to their cause than climate change deniers.

Salon has a provocative post Naomi Klein: Green groups more damaging to cause than climate change deniers. Naomi Klein is author of two books: No Logo and The Shock Doctrine. She is currently working on a new book about climate change. Excerpts from the Salon article, which is from an interview by Jason Mark at the Earth Journal: – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Britain’s Warm, But Unremarkable Summer

Posted on September 7, 2013 by Paul Homewood

For those of us living in the UK, the glorious summer has been much in the news. We seem to have spent half of it listening to the BBC telling us about temperature records that might be broken, and been bombarded with heatwave warnings from the NHS.

But how exceptional has it been? The Met Office have now published their figures, and the answer seems to be “not very”.

Temperatures

UK mean temperature was 15.16C, making it the 9th warmest summer on records going back to 1910. – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Phlogiston and Global Warming.

Posted on September 7, 2013 by Pointman

Gracious acceptance of criticism is not a common human trait. In most scientists it provokes irritation, denial and antagonism. Among what their admirers call the top climate scientists, dissent seems to provoke spectacular responses. They are obsessed with CO2 as an explanation for everything. Nothing else will serve. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, CO2 causes warming, CO2 causes snow, CO2 causes strong winds; soon we will hear CO2 blamed for Man City losing the Championship.

In the early Eighteenth Century phlogiston was all the rage. When a metal corroded it was said to have lost phlogiston. When it was pointed out that rusting iron gained weight, it was explained that phlogiston had negative weight. A burning candle lost weight because it was rich in phlogiston. It was the settled science.

Until that is, Scheele and Priestley discovered oxygen, although both made convoluted work of it as neither wished to challenge settled science. Lavoisier used a closed system such as a burning candle in a bell jar, and proved that phlogiston had zero weight and zero volume. He made the obvious conclusion. Of course, we know now that the candle used up oxygen and released carbon dioxide. – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Arctic sea ice reaches minimum for 2013 – about a week early

Posted on September 6, 2013 by The k2p blog

A late spring and a short summer has led to Arctic ice melting much slower than for many years: IS ARCTIC SEA ICE REBOUNDING?

It would seem that the minimum ice extent in the Arctic which usually happens around the middle of September has already been reached – about a week early. – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

when climate science became political science …

Posted on September 6, 2013 by pindanpost

Climate Science 101 Climastrology 101 Political science 101 from the warmist, and left, have started to wreak havoc on costs.

Report: 19% of typical Aussie home electric bill due to carbon tax and other ‘green’ energy programs – Junk Science

Those who could afford government subsidized solar power, are able to have their solar subsidies, subsidized by those who can’t afford it, with bigger power bills. – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Does crossing (a part of) the Northwest Passage demonstrates the dramatic effect of climate change?

Posted on September 5, 2013 by Trust, yet verify

With interest I followed the (failed) attempt of the Mainstream Last First Expedition to row across the Northwest passage. They didn’t really stranded in the ice as I was expecting, but aborted their mission about half way their intended route. They ended in beauty before the ice stopped them in their tracks.

Flashback a couple months. This is how they heroically introduced themselves in the media titled “Four adventurers set off this summer to row the Northwest Passage”:

On July 1, 2013 four modern-day explorers from Vancouver will attempt a world first by rowing the 3,000 km Northwest Passage in a specially commissioned boat by human power alone in a single season-a feat only possible now due to the melting ice in the Arctic.

Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Fundamentals that Climate Science Ignores

Posted on September 8, 2013 by ManicBeancounter

Climate Science is a hugely complex subject, dealing with phenomena that are essentially chaotic, with vague patterns. Yet the promotion of that science is banal and superficial. Below are some of the fundamentals that have been addressed in established areas like economics, philosophy and English Common Law, but which the Climate Science community ignores. Most overlap, or are different ways of looking at the same thing.

A: Positive and Normative

I do not hold with the logical positivism in vogue in the early parts of the C20th and later underpinning the “positive economics” ideas of Milton Friedman that was popular in the 1950s to 1980s. But it made the useful distinction between positive statements (empirically based statements) and normative statements (what ought to be). The language of climate science is heavily value-laden. There is not attempt to distinguish positive from normative in language, nor highlight that competency in the sphere of positive statements is not necessarily an indication of competency in normative ones. For instance, when scientists make statements about the moral imperative for policy, they may overemphasize the moral questions raised as they may be too close to the subject. In fact believing that that rising greenhouse gas levels causes a worsening of climate can lead to a bias towards the simplified solution to constrain that growth. It takes understanding of the entirely separate fields of economics and public policy-making to determine whether this is achievable, or the best solution. – Click here to read the full article
_____________________________________________

Advertisements

Discussion

No comments yet.

Add your thoughts. . .

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Follow me on Twitter

Flag Counter
%d bloggers like this: