Archive for the ‘solar system dynamics’ Category

View from the Moon [credit: Wikipedia]

View from the Moon
[credit: Wikipedia]

First there was a report saying:
‘Computer model shows moon’s core surrounded by liquid and it’s caused by Earth’s gravity’

Of course the words ‘Computer model shows’ will ring a few alarm bells with some talkshop readers. Yes, it’s a theory based on a model, and the output of ‘climate models’ has led to many controversies so we may well be suspicious already.




Mark Serreze goes all “Ummm and Errr” about the timing of the ‘Arctic death spiral’.

Originally posted on polarbearscience:

Climate scientists specializing in future sea ice predictions made some remarkable statements to polar bear scientists at their last meeting – admissions that may really surprise you.

USFWS_PolarBearNews2013_pg5 labeled

Back on June 26 (reported here), the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) posted a summary of its last meeting. So, I was very surprised to find (while there looking for something else), that on 18 July 2014 they had added minutes from the meeting to that summary.

These minutes are a bonanza because among the juicy nuggets of information is a summary of what the three invited climate scientists from Colorado (Jennifer Kay, Mark Serreze, and Marika Holland) had to say and what questions were asked. While real transparency would have involved posting copies of the sea ice presentations and transcripts of the question and answer sessions, this is certainly better than nothing.

I’ve pulled some quotes from the minutes…

View original 1,102 more words

fracking-toonDellers has an article over at Breitbart about the success of the green propaganda around shale gas drilling:

“Fracking” was the second most popular UK search term in the “what is?” category on Google in 2014.
(The top ten were: Love; Fracking; Gluten; FGM; Lupus; Anxiety; Twerking; Instagram; Gout; Bitcoin).
What this tells you is that capitalism in general and the fracking industry in particular is losing the argument.
How does it tell you this?
Because what it instantly suggests is that “fracking” is a controversial process.


From NASA:

Cassini took readings of the day-length indicator regarded as most reliable, the rhythm of natural radio signals from the planet. The results give 10 hours, 45 minutes, 45 seconds (plus or minus 36 seconds) as the length of time it takes Saturn to complete each rotation. Here’s the puzzle: That is about 6 minutes, or one percent, longer than the radio rotational period measured by the Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 spacecraft, which flew by Saturn in 1980 and 1981.

[Tallbloke notes that Venus has also slowed by an unexplained six minutes since 1997]

Cassini scientists are not questioning Voyager’s careful measurements. And they definitely do not think the whole planet of Saturn is actually rotating that much slower than it did two decades ago. Instead, they are looking for an explanation based on some variability in how the rotation deep inside Saturn drives the radio pulse.


H/T Maxime Duprez:


Prolific solar-planetary scientist and long-time talkshop friend Nicola Scafetta has a new paper published in Physica A entitled ‘Global temperatures and sunspot numbers. Are they related? Yes, but non linearly. A reply to Gil-Alana et al. (2014)’ which comments on Gil-Alana et al 2014; a paper purporting to dismiss any correlation between solar activity and terrestrial surface temperature. Nicola gently points out the limitations of their methods and patiently explains how the astronomical-solar signal can be found in the data. Here is Figure 3 to whet your appetite:



Fig. 3. (A) Annually solved HadCRUT3 global surface temperature record [34] from 1850 to 2013. (B) Power spectrum density functions calculated using the MEM method (using M = N/2 = 82) and the MTM periodogram f (p) [35,36]: the calculations were made with the SSA–MTM Toolkit. Several spectral peaks (e.g.: at about 9.1, 10.4, 20 and 60 yr) are statistically significant above the 95% confidence level, and their solar, lunar and astronomical origin is explained in the literature (e.g.: Scafetta [10,32,33,25]).

Nicola also provides plots of several of the various solar and temperature related indices and techniques for representing them over a wide range of timescales which clearly demonstrate the plain fact of the close coherence between the activity of our host star which supplies all our energy, and the fluctuations of the lovely moderate temperatures we live in on the surface of our planet.


From, a new paper which looks at how dry atmosphere’s of some exoplanets could cast doubt on long cherished notions about planet formation. Current mainstream thinking is that big planets form a long way out and migrate inwards. Perhaps the opposite may be the case, and ‘hot jupiters’ form near the parent star and increase the size of their orbits asthay gain angular moentum. Supporting this possibility, a recent paper by Poppenhaeger on the electromagnetic coupling of proto-planetary discs with the host star posit a slowing the stellar rotation and a shift of its angular momentum to the forming planets.

hd189733Scientists searching for worlds outside of the Solar System say that three such planets — distant gas giants that resemble Jupiter — are surprisingly dry.

The atmospheres of these exoplanets, known as ‘hot Jupiters’, contain between one-tenth and one-thousandth water vapour than predicted, measurements from the Hubble Space Telescope show. The findings, published 24 July in Astrophysical Journal Letters1, are at odds with theories of how planets form.

Madhusudhan thinks that it is possible, but not likely, that clouds are skewing his results. The particles would have to be high in the atmosphere, above the water vapour, for this to be true. That would place the clouds in the thinnest part of each exoplanet’s atmosphere, but they could be too heavy to stay aloft. The clouds would also need to survive in the wide range of temperatures the three planets’ atmospheres span — 900–2,200 ºC — which models can’t yet explain. “There is just no candidate cloud composition or physics that can do it,” he says.


From Physorg, news of a new paper  which may shed light on the rapid warming at the end of the last ice age. The young scientists don’t mention Milankovitch cycles in this presser, but these are slow to change in comparison to the rapid deglaciation, so maybe their theory lends something to the story. It does lead me to wonder if the precession cycle might be involved with bringing the oceanic oscillations into synch though.

From Here you can see the original waveforms of the two different kick-drum samples. It's clear that they are drifting in and out of phase with each other. The resulting phase cancellation made it impossible to arrive at a consistent sound, so Mike had to edit them back into phase before processing.

Here you can see the original waveforms of the two different kick-drum samples. It’s clear that they are drifting in and out of phase with each other. The resulting phase cancellation made it impossible to arrive at a consistent sound, so Mike had to edit them back into phase before processing.

Synchronization of North Atlantic, North Pacific preceded abrupt warming, end of ice age

A newly published study by researchers at Oregon State University probed the geologic past to understand mechanisms of abrupt climate change. The study pinpoints the emergence of synchronized climate variability in the North Pacific Ocean and the North Atlantic Ocean a few hundred years before the rapid warming that took place at the end of the last ice age about 15,000 years ago.

The study suggests that the combined warming of the two oceans may have provided the tipping point for abrupt warming and rapid melting of the northern ice sheets.

“If we really do cross such a boundary in the future, we should probably take a long-term perspective and realize that change will become the new normal. It may be a wild ride.”

Results of the study, which was funded by the National Science Foundation, appear this week in Science.




Tremendous post from Bob Tisdale. Lewandowsky strikes (out) again.

Originally posted on Bob Tisdale - Climate Observations:

UPDATE 2:  Animation 1 from this post is happily displaying the differences between the “Best” models and observations in the first comment at a well-known alarmist blog. Please see update 2 at the end of this post.
# # # #
UPDATE: Please see the update at the end of the post.
# # #
Figure 0The new paper Risbey et al. (2014) will likely be very controversial based solely on the two co-authors identified in the title above (and shown in the photos to the right).  As a result, I suspect it will garner a lot of attention…a lot of attention.   This post is not about those two controversial authors, though their contributions to the paper are discussed.  This post is about the numerous curiosities in the paper.  For those new to discussions of global warming, I’ve tried to make this post as non-technical as possible, but these are comments…

View original 8,690 more words

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Guest essay by Jim Steele, Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism

Two of the world’s premiere ocean scientists from Harvard and MIT have addressed the data limitations that currently prevent the oceanographic community from resolving the differences among various estimates of changing ocean heat content (in print but available here).3 They point out where future data is most needed so these ambiguities do not persist into the next several decades of change. As a by-product of that analysis they 1) determined the deepest oceans are cooling, 2) estimated a much slower rate of ocean warming, 3) highlighted where the greatest uncertainties existed due to the ever changing locations of heating and cooling, and 4) specified concerns with previous methods used to construct changes in ocean heat content, such as…

View original 2,393 more words

Physorg has a story on a new reconstruction of volcanic activity from ice cores in Antarctica. It’s fairly strong on boilerplate but there is an interesting kicker near the end of the article:

A team of scientists led by Michael Sigl and Joe McConnell of Nevada’s Desert Research Institute (DRI) has completed the most accurate and precise reconstruction to date of historic volcanic sulfate emissions in the Southern Hemisphere.

“Both observations and model results show that not all eruptions lead to the same spatial pattern of sulfate deposition,” said Matthew Toohey from the German institute GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel. He added, “Spatial variability in sulfate deposition means that the accuracy of volcanic sulfate reconstructions depends strongly on having a sufficient number of ice core records from as many different regions of Antarctica as possible.”


OK, Have at it. :)

Originally posted on ScottishSceptic:

Greenhouse gases, are not so much “trapping” heat, as acting by “tapping” heat. They are acting as a vector (tap) enabling the flow of energy between the adiabatic controlled atmosphere and the IR radiation that eventually leaves the atmosphere. And it is because the adiabatic cooling reduces the temperature, that the apparent temperature of earth from space is cooled. This may reconcile the “Dragon slayers” with mainstream skeptic views.

Introduction: why colder means warmer

The warmer windows are warmer because to lose more heat.

The warmer windows are warmer because to lose more heat.

Talking through my post yesterday with a physicist (The CO2 Greenhouse effect is real (sometimes), it was clear I needed to spend a bit more time explaining what may appear counter intuitive. That is why when the apparent temperature of the earth from space decreases, that this must mean the planet is warmer.

This is easiest to explain using the analogy of a house. To…

View original 2,297 more words


Too funny. Nice one Harold

Originally posted on Talking About the Weather:

A graph of the latest all-time record of Southern Hemisphere sea ice area, expressed as an anomaly, courtesy of The Cryosphere Today.

A graph of the latest all-time record of Southern Hemisphere sea ice area, expressed as an anomaly, courtesy of The Cryosphere Today.

Antarctic sea ice has hit its second all-time record maximum this week. The new record is 2.112 million square kilometers above normal. Until the weekend just past, the previous record had been 1.840 million square kilometers above normal, a mark hit on December 20, 2007, as I reported here, and also covered in my book.

Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center, responded to e-mail questions and also spoke by telephone about the new record sea ice growth in the Southern Hemisphere, indicating that, somewhat counter-intuitively, the sea ice growth was specifically due to global warming.



“The primary reason for this is the nature of the circulation of the Southern Ocean  – water heated in high southern latitudes is carried equatorward, to be replaced…

View original 444 more words


‘Steve Goddard’ defends his approach to checking the temperature data.

Originally posted on Real Science:

Every method has its advantages and disadvantages.

The USHCN database has more than 81,000,000 daily temperature readings going to 1895. It is a scientific obscenity to attempt to “adjust” that many records. Adjustments open the door to confirmation bias or outright fraud, and will invariably make the data less meaningful. I call this “tampering.”

There is no need to “adjust” the data. With a database that large, the distribution of error will be uniformly distributed between “too low” and “too high” and average out to zero. Many fields of science and engineering depend on this principle.

Use of anomalies completely hides baseline shifts, as NOAA has done.

Infilling is exactly the wrong thing to do, when station loss is biased towards loss of colder rural stations. It simply corrupts the temperature record further.

Gridding is just barely above the noise level in the US, because the USHCN stations are relatively…

View original 43 more words


Judy Curry blogs about the official response from NOAA NCDC
“Nothing to see here, move along…”

Originally posted on Climate Etc.:

Our algorithm is working as designed. – NOAA NCDC

View original 754 more words

More News On USHCN Temperature Adjustments

Posted: June 30, 2014 by Rog Tallbloke in solar system dynamics


Paul Homewood now finds that even the adjustments have been adjusted over the last couple of years. The temperature record is in a mess.

Originally posted on NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT:

By Paul Homewood

1) First I have had a comment accusing me of lying. Will the accuser, who cowardly goes under the name “anonymous”, note that further accusations of lying will be earn him a ban.


ScreenHunter_739 Jun. 29 15.03


The top line highlighted is USHCN Station Code 415429, which, as can be confirmed here, is Luling, Texas.

Such moronic comments, not to mention inclusion of the mandatory “cherry picking” and “denier”, rather sum up just weak some alarmist arguments have become.

2) Kansas

Returning to yesterday’s topic of adjustments in Kansas, I have plotted the annual adjustments for TOBS (Time of Observation Bias) at one of the stations there, Ashland.

They are downloaded from USHCN’s website here.


Currently, 0.3F is being added to actual temperatures, whilst back in 1934, for instance, 1.1F was deducted. This makes a net adjustment of 1.4F.

This figure is way above NOAA’s previously published figure…

View original 452 more words

Just How Bad Is The USHCN Data Tampering?

Posted: June 30, 2014 by Rog Tallbloke in solar system dynamics


Ohhh dear. Steve Goddard has found a big divergence between real and ‘estimated’ data in USHCN temperature ‘dataset’.

Originally posted on Real Science:

According to the USHCN V1 docs, they were done adjusting after 1990.


ts.ushcn_anom25_diffs_urb-raw_pg.gif (650×502)

According to the V2 specs, they use the same TOBS algorithm as in V1. So it seems safe to assume that stations with no missing data after 1990 need no adjustments.

1990 was also the year when they started exponentially losing station data, and started doing a lot of infilling.

So I did an experiment. I calculated the post-1990 measured temperatures for all stations with no missing data, and the post 1990 temperatures for all of the fabricated data. The fake data is diverging from the real station data at a phenomenal 5.3 degrees per century.

ScreenHunter_693 Jun. 28 20.18

That huge spike in temperatures after 1990 which NCDC shows (and  I asked you to bookmark last night) is almost entirely due to fake data. Unbelievable.

ScreenHunter_680 Jun. 27 21.17

I’ve been talking about the discontinuity after 1990 for a long time, and there you…

View original 2 more words




Here’s an interesting post originally published at Verity Jones’ excellent blog ‘Digging in the Clay’, from Peter Morecambe, AKA Galloping Camel. He has found a model which reproduces atmospheric profiles well, rather than just surface temperature and an approximate profile to the 100mb level.

Originally posted on Digging in the Clay:

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…

View original 695 more words

I came across this paper today while searching for the heat capacity of Venus near surface atmosphere, which is actually an ocean-like (in thermodynamic terms) supercritical fluid. It presages Harry Dale Huffman’s ‘rediscovery’ of the lapse rate calculation by four decades. Another paper, much more recent, (Bolmatov et al 2013) contains some theory which raises yet more questions about the reasons for Venus’ high surface temperature. So, greenhouse due to radiative proerties of co2 as Sagan claimed, lapse rate due to gravity and pressure as Nikolov and Zeller maintain, or the thermal properties of supercritical fluids and geothermal energy having a hard time escaping the lower atmosphere? Let the debate recommence!



Vulcão Russo: Klyuchevskaya Sopka

Posted: June 28, 2014 by Rog Tallbloke in solar system dynamics


Great images! H/T to Pam Sutherland

Originally posted on Cansei de Procurar:

Acho vulcões lindos e apavorantes!


Achei esse especialmente interessante

Ee ainda está ativo! Última erupção foi em 2010, mas deu sinal de vida também em 2012 e 2013.


Parece tão solitário em meio ao terreno.

Klyuchevskaya Sopka


E olha a formação das nuvens ao redor dele!

Klyuchevskaya Sopka_nuvem

Enfim, perigoso mas lindo! Para quem gosta é um lugar bem inusitado para se visitar e não parece ser comum nos guias…rs

Obs: Interessante que nome de vulcões parecem sempre impossíveis de serem ditos… deve ser para parecerem mais grandiosos! Ou pq os que acho mais bonitos não estão aqui no Brasil… pq será?…rs

View original