Archive for the ‘Analysis’ Category

An article in the Daily Mail today piqued my interest. It trumpets empirical results which they say empirically confirm the theoretical CO2 greenhouse effect for the first time:

greenhouseeffect“Scientists have witnessed carbon dioxide trapping heat in the atmosphere above the United States, showing human-made climate change ‘in the wild’ for the first time.

A new study in the journal Nature demonstrates in real-time field measurements what scientists already knew from basic physics, lab tests, numerous simulations, temperature records and dozens of other climatic indicators.

They say it confirms the science of climate change and the amount of heat-trapping previously blamed on carbon dioxide.”

“These instruments, located at ARM research sites in Oklahoma and Alaska, measure thermal infrared energy that travels down through the atmosphere to the surface.

They can detect the unique spectral signature of infrared energy from CO2.

Other instruments at the two locations detect the unique signatures of phenomena that can also emit infrared energy, such as clouds and water vapor.


Reposted from the Climate Sceptic Party. H/T the Hockey Schtick

How did many usually sensible experts get “GLOBAL WARMING” so very wrong?


Oops! One wrong equation caused the climate scare!


RED FACES all around among the profiteers of doom. A wrong equation that falsely triples the tiny direct warming caused by doubling CO2 concentration has been discovered and exposed in a major peer-reviewed paper just published in the Science Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences  (LINK – pdf), one of the world’s top peer review science journals.

No rogue equation means no climate crisis.

Ole Humlum: Climate 4 You annual report 2014

Posted: January 28, 2015 by tallbloke in Analysis, climate

Ole Humlum has produced a report of 2014 climate (pdf 2.1mb), download and enjoy. Ole’s use of a 1998-2006 baseline shows the current state of play against the peak years of ‘global warming’, hence the cool colours, indicating the climate’s gentle descent towards the expected minimum around 2035 as the predicted long slide in solar activity levels starts to take effect.



Australians cool Melbourne

Posted: January 23, 2015 by tchannon in Surfacestation, UHI, weather


Mr Trewin also noted that the Bureau had recently changed its Melbourne monitoring site from the Royal Society of Victoria on La Trobe Street in the city to Olympic Park, near Rod Laver Arena. Maximum temperatures recorded at the new site were on average 1.2 degrees cooler, particularly on cool days, because air coming from the south and west was travelling over parklands rather than the through the city.

h/t to handjive at notricks

Head image from an article by Anthony Watts at Steve McIntyre’s ClimateAudit 2007 article 6 years ago. (I’ve add the red circles)


BOM report it here, no mention of why [wrong, see comment by jdmcl]. Above is how BOM show the station.

Even rainfall data will be wrong with those tall nearby structures and fences.

The Age reported the closure here. No mention of why.


Matt Ridley: A Lukewarmer Against Dogmatism

Posted: January 22, 2015 by tallbloke in alarmism, Analysis, flames
Tags: ,

Reposted from Matt Ridley’s blog

Matt-RidleyI am a climate lukewarmer. That means I think recent global warming is real, mostly man-made and will continue but I no longer think it is likely to be dangerous and I think its slow and erratic progress so far is what we should expect in the future. That last year was the warmest yet, in some data sets, but only by a smidgen more than 2005, is precisely in line with such lukewarm thinking.

This view annoys some sceptics who think all climate change is natural or imaginary, but it is even more infuriating to most publicly funded scientists and politicians, who insist climate change is a big risk. My middle-of-the-road position is considered not just wrong, but disgraceful, shameful, verging on scandalous. I am subjected to torrents of online abuse for holding it, very little of it from sceptics.

I was even kept off the shortlist for a part-time, unpaid public-sector appointment in a field unrelated to climate because of having this view, or so the headhunter thought. In the climate debate, paying obeisance to climate scaremongering is about as mandatory for a public appointment, or public funding, as being a Protestant was in 18th-century England.



Via GWPF  – London, 19 January: A new paper by Andrew Montford AKA Bishop Hill published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation examines the unintended consequences of climate change policy around the world.

Mitigation Policies Have Brought Pain & Chaos In Their Wake

We are constantly told about the risks of what climate change might bring in the distant future. In response, governments have adopted a series of policy measures that have been largely ineffective but have brought with them a bewildering array of unintended consequences.

From the destruction of the landscape wrought by windfarms, to the graft and corruption that has been introduced by the carbon markets, to the disastrous promotion of biofuels, carbon mitigation policies have brought chaos in their wake.

The new paper surveys some of the key policy measures, reviewing the unintended consequences for both the UK and the rest of the world. Mr Montford is a prominent writer on climate change and energy policy and has appeared many times in the media.



Posted: January 8, 2015 by tallbloke in Accountability, Analysis, Education


Excellent article from Kenan Malik which adresses the vacillation of the PC mainstream media and the fundamental error of social thinking underlying it.

Originally posted on Pandaemonium:


‘Je suis Charlie’. It’s a phrase in every newspaper, in every Twitter feed, on demonstrations in cities across Europe. The expressions of solidarity with those slain in the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices are impressive. They are also too late. Had journalists and artists and political  activists taken a more robust view on free speech over the past 20 years then we may never have come to this.

Instead, they have helped create a new culture of self-censorship. Partly, it is a question of fear, an unwillingness to take the kind of risks that the editors of Charlie Hebdo courted, and for which they have paid such a heavy price. But fear is only part of the explanation. There has also developed over the past two decades a moral commitment to censorship, a belief that because we live in a plural society, so we must police public discourse about different…

View original 863 more words


Reblog from BD live

MANY of the world’s leaders in science, engineering and other relevant disciplines will no longer comment publicly about climate change. They fear being labelled scaremongers, or deniers, or funded by special interest groups, or not caring about the poor.

This must change this year or what promises to be the largest global warming agreement in history will be signed at the United Nations climate conference in December with little or no input from many of the brightest minds in the field.

Taming the noxious and illogical climate change debate will not be easy. We will need strong public leadership from philosophers and other scholars who study rational argumentation to help us overcome the errors in thinking that are sabotaging the discussion. At stake are billions of dollars, countless jobs and, if activists are right, the fate of the global environment itself. Intellectuals have a moral duty to tackle this problem.


Glimmers of understanding are percolating through into mainstream climate science, this time through the journal Climate Dynamics. I can’t remember if Marcia Wyatt and Judy Curry explicitly linked these oscillations in their stadium wave paper, but it’s more evidence that our cycles driven theory of climate is correct, and that the 1976-2005 warming was mostly a natural phenomenon. It is likely to be followed by a 2006-2035 cooling phase, possibly accentuated by the lowest solar activity levels in two centuries or more. Unfortunately, the luni-solar dimension to the multidecadal variability is not explored. Nonetheless, this paper represents some joined up thinking in terms of the cyclic chain of cause and effect which connects the northern hemisphere oceanic oscillations.


A delayed oscillator model for the quasi-periodic multidecadal variability of the NAO
Cheng Sun, Jianping Li, Fei-Fei Jin Date: 06 Jan 2015
Wavelet analysis of the annual North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index back to 1659 reveals a significant frequency band at about 60 years. Recent NAO decadal variations, including the increasing trend during 1960–1990 and decreasing trend since the mid-1990s, can be well explained by the approximate 60-year cycle.


Maybe not an expected article from me right now but as things turn up…


During a recent cold snap there were at times clear skies and a calm. Here is evidence of a profound difference between Met Office sites when site exposure and UHI thermal mass can upset natural radiative cooling.

The Farnborough site is in my estimation WMO Class 1 whereas RHS Wisley is poor, in an orchard designed to make a microclimate. Wisley however has been cited in literature and government chambers (and by Phil Jones) in relation to UHI in comparison with a record setting London site, specifically a site I have omitted from the surfacestation work. Overloaded with too much information.


Cool weather

Posted: December 29, 2014 by tchannon in Analysis, Surfacestation, weather

Been away for a variety of reasons, has been a horrible few weeks including frenetic work on software workarounds. Several personal matters were far worse. Lets hope that is the end of it, more stuff keeps on dumping on me.

The weather is a tad chilly in England, went down to -6.8C at Katesbridge Northern Ireland last night (27th into 28th) [UPDATE] and what happened next? See comments and link to another blog article with data, went off the bottom of plot shown here –Tim][UPDATE 2, -8.8C ]


It might drop further tonight, flat anti-cyclone calm over the UK, unusually clear skies but there is still humidity to freeze out.

We had a remarkable day today in southern England, clear sunny all day with flat calm, just right to look at insolation and radiation balance.


Earth's Axial Tilt, or Obliquity [Credit: Wikipedia]

Earth’s Axial Tilt, or Obliquity [Credit: Wikipedia]

This Atlantipedia report (reproduced below) from 2010 concerns research by English-born George Dodwell, who held the post of Government Astronomer for South Australia for 43 years (1909 – 1952) until his retirement. He came across a study by a Professor Drayson who cited ancient astronomical observations and put forward a revision to standard Earth precession theory which Dodwell found ‘untenable’, but he became interested in the data.

Dodwell: ‘it seemed to me worthwhile to trace out more clearly just how much, and why, the ancient and mediaeval observations of the obliquity of the ecliptic, on which Professor Drayson based his conclusions, differed from Newcomb’s internationally accepted formula for the secular, or age-long, variation of the obliquity. These observations went back to values given by Strabo, Proclus, Ptolemy, and Pappus in the early centuries of the Christian era. They indicated a consistent and increasing divergence in past ages from the values calculated by means of Newcomb’s formula.’ [bold added]


Here’s another guest post from Ed Hoskins. This one deals with the IPCC’s own figures fro the effect of CO2 on global tamperature, demonstrating that due to the logarithmic limitation as this trace gas increases, future warming will be limited to within beneficial limits.

The diminishing influence of increasing Carbon Dioxide CO2 on temperature
Ed Hoskins MAarch (Cantab)  BDS (Lond).

The temperature increasing capacity of atmospheric CO2 is theoretically plausible, but its influence is known and widely accepted to diminish as its concentration increases. It diminishes logarithmically with increasing concentration.

Global Warming advocates and Climate Change sceptics both agree on this. IPCC Published reports, (TAR), acknowledge that the effective temperature increase caused by growing concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere radically diminishes with increasing concentrations. This information has been presented in the IPCC reports. It is well disguised for any lay reader, (Chapter 6. Radiative Forcing of Climate Change: section 6.3.4 Total Well-Mixed Greenhouse Gas Forcing Estimate) [i].


Ole Humlum: Climate Indices November Analysis

Posted: December 20, 2014 by tallbloke in Analysis, climate

Ole Humlum, one of the PRP contributors, has emailed me the climate4you November roundup of global temperature records and other climate metrics from the various providers. Clear analysis with informed commentary, the full document is available here.


  • GC33H-07Atmospheric controls on northeast Pacific temperature trends and variations, 1900-2012
Wednesday, December 17, 201403:16 PM – 03:28 PM
    • Moscone West
    • 3005
    Over the past century, northeast Pacific coastal sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and land-based surface air temperatures (SATs) display multidecadal variations associated with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, in addition to a warming trend of ~0.5 to 1°C. Using independent records of sea-level pressure (SLP), SST and SAT, this study investigates NE Pacific coupled atmosphere-ocean variability from 1900 to 2012, with emphasis on the coastal areas around North America. We use a linear stochastic time series model to show that the SST evolution around the NE Pacific coast can be explained by a combination of regional atmospheric forcing and ocean persistence, accounting for 63% of nonseasonal monthly SST variance (r = 0.79) and 73% of variance in annual means (r = 0.86).

    Guest post from Peter Morecambe aka ‘Galloping Camel’


    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.


    Ferenc Miskolczi

    Well here’s a nice surprise. Out of the blue, Dr Ferenc Miskolczi has dropped a link onto Tim Channon’s thread, which goes to his major new paper, published by the SEI. So we are privileged to be among the first to read it and start a discussion. It challenges the entire basis of the IPCC AGW theory by deriving a theoretical atmosphere which fits observations and demonstrates stability of the Earth’s radiative balance. Thanks Ferenc!

    Ferenc Mikolczi 2014 Abstract


    Repost from Roger Pielke Sr’s weblog. Important this isn’t lost, because it shows a fatal error in Schmidt and Benestad’s paper. A paper still relied on by the IPCC in AR5 to dismiss solar forcing as an important climate variable, five years after Nicola demolished it. Benestad and Schmidt claim they successfully rebutted Scafetta’s exposure of their fatal error, something Scafetta vigorously disproved. We’ll take a look at that part of the controversy later.

    Roger Pielke Sr’s original intro:
    On July 22 2009 I posted on the new paper on solar forcing by Lean and Rind 2009. In that post, I also referred to the Benestad and Schmidt 2009 paper on solar forcing which has a conclusion at variance to that in the Lean and Rind paper.

    After the publication of my post, Nicola Scafetta asked if he could present a comment (as a guest weblog) on the Benestad and Schmidt paper on my website, since it will take several months for his comment to make it through the review process. In the interests of presenting the perspectives on the issue of solar climate forcing, Nicola’s post appears below. I also invite Benestad and Schmidt to write responses to the Scaftta contribution which I would be glad to post on my website.

    venus-transit-2012Congratulations to Astrophysicist Ian Wilson who has had a new paper published at Pattern Recognition in Physics:
    Discussion of this paper is going to be in the form of a workshop with specific objectives, and comments will be strictly moderated for relevance. The objectives will be announced by the main participants, Ian Wilson and Paul Vaughan, in their opening comments. Basically, unless you have something to contribute to the mathematical exposition, please sit this one out and watch.

    This new peer-reviewed paper is available for (free) download at: . This post reproduces the one at Ian’s blog.


    Gerry Pease has sent us a solar cycle 24 update:

    It’s all downhill now for solar cycle 24. Cycle 24 Max (smoothed sunspot number 81.9) appears to have occurred in April, 2014:

    Cycle 24 progress (last update December 1, 2014

    Cycle 23 Solar Max (smoothed sunspot number 120) was in early 2000:

    Solar cycles 23-24 (last update December 1, 2014)

    Note the progression from cycle 21 to 24:

    Graphical comparison of cycles 21, 22, 23 and 24 (last update December 1, 2014)

    Similar cycles 12, 14, and 16 had lower peaks than cycle 24, and similar cycles 10, 12, 13, 14, and 16 all had earlier peaks:

    Graphical comparison of cycles 10, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 24 (last update December 1, 2014)

    Smoothed solar activity since April is projected to be successively lower each month.