Commenter ‘USteiner’ asks this question on suggestions 16 and explains the reason for asking.
Let’s put aside the conclusion that CO2 makes the antarctic cool the earth. In the Schmithüsen paper (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL066749/full) they claim to have made the calculation, and it shows that. However, what is new? This had been measured with – gosh – real data some 45 years (!) ago. See here the Nimbus data from 1971 in Fig. 12d (http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710026041.pdf )
Further, look at Schmitthüsen’s Fig 2. You see the spike on the CO2 pimple at the South pole at a Spectral radiance of 2.5. And exactly at the same level for the US Standard atmosphere. This is at least consistent with an interpretation that CO2 radiates the same everywhere on earth, but becomes only visible, when the background black body radiation from the ground is low enough. And this requirement is fulfilled only at the very cold south pole. So, what is left as excitement?
Moderator Tim Channon writes: This article is unusual for the Talkshop. I may for personal reasons be leaving the Talkshop, a consequence of recent serious troubles, why I have been quiet. I hope this proves untrue.
I want to get some items out in the world for others. From my point of view leave a legacy. I am releasing the Synth software, done rapidly so none of this is neat or complete.
This is a simple example of usage with perhaps some current interest. No answers are intended for more the whole idea is about gaining insight by you playing around with data and ideas.
According to published datasets the characteristics of sea ice changed around 2006/7. Dataset used here is NSIDC/NOAA D02135 monthly. ( if you try and decode the published data, read the notes, has offsets which need compensation, do not use as is)
Based on experience I think this change is in the data gathering, perhaps geometry, not actual ice change. In the past in various articles I’ve mentioned some of the dubious practices.
An ought to read
“Canadian journalist Donna Laframboise has been watching the climate world since 2009. What she sees isn’t pretty.” — strap line from her blog. Donna has now put up a transcript with slides of a talk she gave to World Federation of Scientists in Erice, Italy, during August 2015
This article is part of preparing the way for later revelations about instrumentation defects.
Figure 1 (upper), Figure 2 (lower) computed mean insolation for horizontal surface at this exact location and weather parameters, no cloud.
Figure 1 (upper), Experimental work showing nearly daily temperature variation from expected, specifically designed to exclude diurnal but include detail variation at the fastest scale feasible. Time graticule at 10 days, data points at 12 hours. Surprisingly the July 1st hot period has vanished. Plots of other sites show a similar effect. The most frequent warm and cool periods of weather are brief and readily seen.
This computation will produce different values from the mean values computed from thermometer minimum and maximum data because data shape at other times is taken into account, min/max does not. The filter used is also windowed, leakage is negligible.
Another instance of ‘adjustments’ completely distorting temperature history – from Paul Homewood.
By Paul Homewood
Thorshavn, Faroe Islands
In 2003, two proper scientists wrote a paper on the climate of the Faroe Islands, which lie between Iceland and Norway.
They published this graph of air temperatures at the capital Torshavn.
So we find confirmation of the 1925-40 warm period, and that the recent temperature rise is no more than a natural recovery from the colder 1950-80 interval.
Of course, temperatures may have risen since 2003, but the raw GISS data shows otherwise.
Below is their graph based on the raw GHCN V2 temperatures, as they appeared in 2011. (The warmest year was 2003 itself).
Now, you can probably guess where we are going here!
View original post 114 more words
Level and length of cyclic solar activity during the Maunder minimum as deduced from the active-day statistics
J. M. Vaquero, G. A. Kovaltsov, I. G. Usoskin, V. M. S. Carrasco and M. C. Gallego
A&A, 577 (2015) A71
Published online: 06 May 2015
(open access with registration)
Aims. The Maunder minimum (MM) of greatly reduced solar activity took place in 1645–1715, but the exact level of sunspot activity is uncertain because it is based, to a large extent, on historical generic statements of the absence of spots on the Sun. Using a conservative approach, we aim to assess the level and length of solar cycle during the MM on the basis of direct historical records by astronomers of that time.
Usual response: never mind the data, get the ‘D’ word into a headline!
By Paul Homewood
It has not taken long for the left wing press to attack the investigation into the integrity of global temperature records!
The UK’s most prominent climate change denial group is launching an inquiry into the integrity of global surface temperature records.
The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), established by notable climate-change sceptic Lord Lawson, announced an international team of “eminent climatologists, physicists and statisticians” would investigate the reliability of the current data.
Professor Terence Kealey, the former vice-chancellor of the University of Buckingham, has been appointed chair of the international temperature data review project.
Professor Kealey studied medicine at Oxford University before lecturing on clinical biochemistry, which is primarily concerned with the analysis of bodily fluids, at Cambridge University. It is unclear what experience he has in the field of climate change.
The other five commissioners of the data review project: Petr Chylek, Richard McNider, Roman…
View original post 311 more words
The fuss about extreme rainfall last year tripped me into looking for myself. This led to an innovative analysis of Met Office areal time series for precipitation. There was little interest shown but also little criticism. I’m bringing up Windows 8.1 64 here, same hardware, testing various codebases.
As a wonder-if… the Met Office publish areal series for air temperature, Tmean, Tmax and Tmin. Daft idea, pull one file and eyeball, looks the same data format as rainfall. Do the lazy thing, copy code to a new directory, few trivial edits and hit go. It works. The results look sane.
Tmean for East Scotland, one of 68 plots. The four PDF, Tmean, Tmax, Tmin and Precipitation are linked later. Zoom to any scale works on what are postscript vector data, details can be seen.
A take-home from seeing the results is the episodic nature of weather. Mostly it is bouncing around as weather does but also there are sustained periods with less noise and perhaps floods or droughts, warm or chilly. The temperature data says we have recently had cool and then warm episode. Where this is notable it seems to last for around a year, as-if anything is a definite rule.
Two weeks ago, under the headline “How we are being tricked by flawed data on global warming”, I wrote about Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming.
Whoops. This wasn’t meant to be published yet. Oh well, we’ll update it as we go along.
A few days ago Paul Homewood picked up an item where the Met Office seem to make a fuss about UK heat and wet, although Robert Ward seems to be the one fussing. Since I have have the precipitation data on hand what do I make of it?
“More Misleading Claims From The Met Office” (7th Nov)
This cites Yahoo News.
I’ll ignore the temperature, here is the precipitious matter ‘since records began in 1910 it has been the second wettest.’ 
Presumably more than 194 million tons of water dropped on London according to calculations by the British Rainfall Organisation 
The Met Office ploy is add the data January through end October and make that a year by year spot value.
Independently reproduced above. Seems a strange measure so lets look some more.
Reconstruction of total and spectral solar irradiance from 1974 to 2013 based on KPVT, SoHO/MDI, and SDO/HMI observations
K. L. Yeo, N. A. Krivova, S. K. Solanki, and K. H. Glassmeier
18 page PDF available on registration with Astronomy & Astrophysics
This not going to please a certain name.
Modelling total solar irradiance since 1878 from simulated magnetograms
M. Dasi-Espuig, J. Jiang, N. A. Krivova, and S. K. Solanki
Received 27 May 2014 / Accepted 5 August 2014
Astronomy & Astrophysics, Volume 570, October 2014
(access with registration)
Aims. We present a new model of total solar irradiance (TSI) based on magnetograms simulated with a surface flux transport model (SFTM) and the Spectral And Total Irradiance REconstructions (SATIRE) model. Our model provides daily maps of the distribution of the photospheric field and the TSI starting from 1878.
The plot below needs little explanation. The globally average surface temperature hasn’t warmed in over 18 years according to the RSS satellite dataset.
Now, Some say the surface hasn’t warmed because the ‘missing heat’ has gone into the oceans instead of warming the surface.However, if we look at ARGO; the best data we have for ocean heat content (OHC) (before it got reworked in 2010 by dropping buoys showing cooling from the dataset) – we see that Ocean Heat Content actually fell from 2003 to 2008:
Where else could the heat have ‘hidden’? Well, the warmists claim it went deeper than the bulk of the ARGO system measures – below 700m, where uncertainty rises dramatically. However, they offer no plausible explanation of how energy is transferred through a 700m deep COOLING layer, in defiance of the second law of thermodynamics.
The size of the sun is of critical importance to solar studies yet this is poorly known, let alone if and how the size varies over time. Paper published this week in Astronomy & Astrophysics.
Ground-based measurements of the solar diameter during the rising phase of solar cycle 24
M. Meftah, T. Corbard, A. Irbah, R. Ikhlef, F. Morand, C. Renaud, A. Hauchecorne, P. Assus, J. Borgnino, B. Chauvineau, M. Crepel, F. Dalaudier, L. Damé, D. Djafer, M. Fodil, P. Lesueur, G. Poiet, M. Rouzé, A. Sarkissian, A.Ziad, and F. Laclare
Paper access is available with registration.
This article is part II of “A new Lunar thermal model based on Finite Element Analysis of regolith physical properties“, written primarily by gallopingcamel (Peter Morcombe), edited and prepared for WordPress by Tim Channon.
Modeling the Moon
A few months ago an analysis of the Moon’s equatorial temperature was posted here using two different types of engineering software. Tim Channon used SPICE circuit analysis software originally developed at Berkeley while I used Quickfield, a finite element analysis program developed by Tor Cooperative, a Russian firm, marketed outside Russia by Tera Analysis. In addition, several detailed comments were received from “br” who used LTSPICE from Linear Technology Inc.
Two very different methods. The results were identical.
Both Quickfield (in Student edition) and LTSPICE are freely available for download for those interested in replication or for further investigation.
Jennifer Marohasy has a new post “Revisionist Approach Destroys Information About Natural Cycles Embedded in Climate Data” where there is underlying interest for Talkshop readers. Mention of Ken Ring is perhaps not so good given a reputation for excessive claims, caveat emptor.
Her take is from an Australian perspective mentioning a Senator and the lead author is Australian.
Periodicities in mean sea-level fluctuations and climate change proxies: Lessons from the modelling for coastal management
R.G.V. Baker, , S.A. McGowan
BCSS, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia
Available online 12 July 2014
Elsevier so it is paywalled http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.05.027
The Hockeyshtick highlights a peer reviewed paper that puts media personality and ‘official climate science’ promoter Bill Nye in the spotlight.
‘Not only did the authors find that addition of the non-greenhouse gas Argon had similar heating effects to CO2, the Argon control actually heated up slightly more than in the greenhouse gas CO2 experiment, definitively proving that such experiments assume the wrong “basic physics” of radiation were responsible for the heating observed, instead of the limitation of convection due to CO2 having a greater density compared to air.’
Academic economist Richard Tol has been on the receiving end of some nasty misrepresentation published by notoriously alarmist UK small circulation newspaper ‘The Guardian’. One of it’s ‘columnists’, Dana Nuccitelli, an employee of a big oil and gas outfit called Tetra-Tech, has been writing inaccurate and scurrilous pieces on Tol since he decided to check the quality and accuracy of a paper Dana co-authored with cartoonist John Cook.
Cook runs a parody website called ‘Skeptical science’ which sends up the climate debate with a collection of joke impressions of climate-sceptical talking points and ‘mainstream climate science responses’ to them. Somehow, the Guardian, a self important and supposedly highbrow newspaper, mistook Dana for a real commentator on science and gave him a job as a blogger. Richard writes:
The Guardian has published six hatchet jobs impugning me and my work. The first four are under investigation by the Press Complaints Commission.
For hatchet job #5 and #6, the Guardian granted me the right to reply by return email. They were published together, without a clear structure and in the wrong order, with the first piece heavily edited. Here are the originals.