What Do We Think About Climate Change

Something interesting from the proposal of the 9.1 M euros CLOUD experiment to the CERN.
http://cloud.web.cern.ch/cloud/documents_cloud/cloud_proposal.pdf

"The observation that warm weather seems to coincide with high sunspot counts and cool weather with low sunspot counts was made as long ago as two hundred years by the astronomer William Herschel who noticed that the price of wheat in England was lower when there were many sunspots, and higher when there were few."

What's the CLOUD experiment? Here the Abstract from a Jasper Kirkby's paper (CERN, Geneva, Switzerland. 2002)
http://cloud.web.cern.ch/cloud/documents_cloud/kirkby_iaci.pdf

"Palaeoclimatic data provide extensive evidence for solar forcing of the climate during the Holocene1 and the last ice age, but the underlying mechanism remains a mystery. However recent observations suggest that cosmic rays may play a key role. Satellite data have revealed a surprising correlation between cosmic ray intensity and the fraction of the Earth covered by low clouds [1, 2]. Since the cosmic ray intensity is modulated by the solar wind, this may be an important clue to the long-sought mechanism for solar-climate variability. In order to test whether cosmic rays and clouds are causally linked and, if so, to understand the microphysical mechanisms, a novel experiment known as CLOUD has been proposed [3]–[5]. CLOUD proposes to investigate ion-aerosol-cloud microphysics under controlled laboratory conditions using a beam from a particle accelerator, which provides a precisely adjustable and measurable artificial source of cosmic rays. The heart of the experiment is a precision cloud chamber that recreates cloud conditions throughout the atmosphere."


Cheers.

 

The one about the Culex pipians?

Cheers.

 

Worrying weather prediction for UK.

http://co2sceptics.com/attachments/ftp/Weather_Action_Nov08.pdf

Let's see what happens Wednesday to Friday.

Perry

 

Don't worry. A minor nuisance.

Your friends at the Met Office do not believe in global cooling: Global Warming goes on.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/news/warming_goes_on.pdf

Cheers.

 

The Met Office! I spit on the Met Office.

Perry

 

Mad dogs & Englishmen

http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/LTTPeiser-Nov08.pdf

Hat tip to http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global...tries/2008/11/14_Mad_Dogs_And_Englishmen.html

 

You have posted twice!
I answered about the first link at the other thread. I tried to answer here on the 'Mad Englishmen and Dogs' thing , but was unable to open it.

Cheers

 

Guillermo,

I went for a broad brush scenario for maximum spread. The links would not have opened a second time, if they were still open on your desktop.

Perry

 

Something on Benny Peiser:
(From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benny_Peiser)

Peiser examined an essay by Naomi Oreskes published in the academic journal Science which showed the lack of dissenting opinions in a sample of 928 peer reviewed articles on global climate change.

Peiser tried to repeat the study, but failed to reconstruct the article set with the specified search key words 'climate change'. Oreskes sent in a correction to Science explaining that the keywords used in the ISI database search were in fact 'global climate change' and not 'climate change' as originally stated.

Peiser then performed a similar survey with the keywords 'climate change' and searched for 'all document types' (which would include non-scientific, non-peer reviewed publications) rather than limiting the search to 'articles' (i.e., peer-reviewed publications) as in Oreskes' study.

In a letter to Science, Peiser claimed that only 29% of such papers agreed with the consensus viewpoint, while 3% explicitly disagreed. Science choose not to publish Peiser's letter for a variety of reasons and indicated that the information had already been "widely dispersed on the internet". Peiser felt that Science had made the wrong decision and published the correspondence on his webpage. This led some to question whether Science were censoring the debate on global warming.

One of his main points of criticism is his claim that the vast majority of the abstracts referred to in the study do not mention anthropogenic climate change, and only 13 of the 928 abstracts explicitly endorse what Oreskes called the "consensus view".


(bolded is mine)
Cheers.

 

"There have been reports from many parts of the world that October 2008 was unusually cold. But, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), announced that last month “was the hottest on record”. GISS is run by Al Gore’s chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the October, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.

So who should we believe….the warmers or, the coolers?

Science is all about validating hypotheses by data analysis,,,but, what if the data is wrong? Independent analysis of the GISS data showed that temperature records from Russia were not based on October readings at all. Since October data was unavailable in time, GISS used data from September in place of October data.

This is not the first time Dr Hansen’s methodology has been called into question. In 2007 he was forced by Watts and McIntyre (Watts Up With That and Climate Audit) to revise his published figures for US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s, as he had claimed, but the 1930s.

Beware politically motivated scientists (& all politicians) who don’t check their data!"


For the NOAA data audit, see: http://www.climateaudit.org/

Cheers.

 

Data on first para referred to NASA = Global? - - - NPAA was referring to USA of North America?

second para - neither - make up your own mind

third para - Some are reading infra red on planet surface (GW arguement?) and some slightly above (the atmosphere?) (cooling arguement?) and is then aligned with most land based recording which is at 1.5m above the ground or thereabouts - shows colder readings....

For me, the proof of the pudding is in the pot, ie surface temperature.... in particular, the oceans of the world..... I am only guessing at the source of the above data (surface or in the atmosphere) and on/over land or on-in oceans or above recordings are critical to proper understanding so please DECLARE where the temperatures represent when posting as failure to do so defeats any validity in any debate.....

When a post is made of the warmest or coldest month is it Global, - N or S hemisphere, - or over land as air, or land surface - or ocean air or ocean surface - or - subsurface and was the temperature - max or min or mean or average --------- - - - - - post the full facts , else is less than statistics - which we all know are next to lies....

Thanks Guillermo for an excellent post - maybe we can get a proper and reasoned debate going where all the data is consistent and complete - Half truths never help in determining the facts....

 

The northeast and northwest passages were (a few weeks ago) open at the same time first time ever in the recorded history ...

 

Certainly not yesterday.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Cheers.

 

Yes! certainly not yesterday.. it's winter up here now. Generally the yearly minimum is somewhere round september. However what comes to passages it's very dependant how the winds and streams are driving the ice around. Unfortunately I don't remember the excact date of that happening, but it was surely only a short time phenomen (a day or two?)
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2008/090408.html Almost open here!
and something from the resent years..
http://winds.jpl.nasa.gov/imagesAnim/ArcticSeaIceAnim.cfm

 

TeddyDiver,

Recorded history in the Arctic Circle does not go back very far. so if the NE & NW Passages were open simultaneously this year it'd be the first time in a relatively short period of history. After all, If humans weren't there to see and record, how do we know for sure that the passages are usually closed or whether they do open simultaneously every 200 years or so:?:

However, from whence did you obtain your information about the simultaneous opening of the NE & NW Passages?

On August 21, 2007, the Northwest Passage became open to ships without the need of an icebreaker. According to Nalan Koc of the Norwegian Polar Institute this is the first time it has been clear since they began keeping records in 1972. The Northwest Passage opened again on August 25, 2008.

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

The NE passage is now known as the Northern Route.

"The Northern Sea Route was opened by receding ice in 2005 but was closed by 2007. The amount of polar ice had receded to 2005 levels in August 2008. Images from the NASA Aqua satellite revealed that the last ice blockage of the Northern Sea Route in the Laptev Sea had melted by late August 2008, the first time in 125,000 years that both the Northwest Passage and Northern Sea Route had been open simultaneously."

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...north-pole-can-be-circumnavigated-913924.html

Gentlemen, if the supporting evidence for a claim comes from the Independent newspaper, the chances are that the opposite scenario is just as likely to be true.

The Passages are now closed. There is snow right now on the streets of London. 5 more years of weather like this and I am going to declare the end of the present Interglacial and as Central Europe, Canada and Middle America begin to be crushed under millions of tons of ice......

Well, I'm sure you get the picture. The Winter World War to end all wars.