Tips and Notes

Tips & Notes to WUWT

note_to_WUWT
Cleaned 6/15/14

1. Be sure to check the front page of WUWT first, we often get duplicate tips here of stories already posted, sometimes days later.

2. Please remember this is not a discussion thread. Tips, notes, and links only please.

3. To put links in comments. simply copy the entire link URL and paste it into the comment. No need for code.

About these ads

328 Responses to Tips and Notes

  1. Bill Parsons says:

    I’d like to thank Dennis Wingo for his excellent article in WUWT a few weeks ago, describing his plan to re-activate the International Sun-Earth Explorer Satellite as part of a joint project with fellow NASA employees. As I understood it, the ultimate goal included using the experience as part of an educational exercise for young STEM students.

    Dennis’ project was recognized on the front page of the NY Times this morning.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/science/space/calling-back-a-zombie-ship-from-the-graveyard-of-space.html?_r=0

  2. yam says:

    Vanadium: The metal that may soon be powering your neighbourhood http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27829874

    ………………………………………….

    The BBC article is as much about the failure of solar power on the grid as it is about vanadium and its potential use for electric storage.

  3. Mike McMillan says:

    Ditto yam on Vanadium.
    The big anchor slowing solar and wind is the storage problem. We should quit spending the bucks subsidizing “renewables” and direct it to storage. Once solved, solar/wind would be self supporting without taxpayer subsidies.

  4. Mike Jowsey says:

    Surprised to see this not covered by WUWT – it’s a biggie!

    BIG NEWS Part I: Historic development — New Solar climate model coming
    http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/big-news-part-i-historic-development-new-solar-climate-model-coming/

  5. F. Ross says:

    Anthony —

    Now that you have had solar power at your home for some time, I think many of your readers would appreciate it if you would share your evaluation of that project with those of us who may be considering going the same route.

    In any case thanks for the great site.

  6. Mike Lewis says:

    Hi Anthony, just noticed this line in New Scientist: “Conversely, high IQ is no guarantee that a person will act rationally – think of the brilliant physicists who insist that climate change is a hoax” – from the article:
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21729101.800-stupidity-what-makes-people-do-dumb-things.html?page=1#.U54uVfmSx8E
    I am not sufficiently gifted but surely this must be worthy of a withering response.
    Best wishes.
    Mike Lewis

  7. Most Ice Pack since 1994 resulting in many icebergs along the shores of Newfoundland. A record long viewing season extending into September is expected:
    http://www.ctvnews.ca/icebergs-off-n-l-amaze-locals-thrill-visitors-1.674171
    http://www.newfoundlandlabrador.com/TheLatest/NewsArticle/211

  8. el gordo says:

    And here is the second part of Nova’s story.

    http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/big-news-part-ii-for-the-first-time-a-mysterious-notch-filter-found-in-the-climate/

    I feel in my water that this could be the breakthrough, but its highly complex and I’m not qualified.

  9. Warren in New Zealand says:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11275211
    Greenpeace loses $5.2M on rogue employee trading

    AMSTERDAM (AP) Greenpeace has suffered a 3.8 million-euro ($5.2 million) loss on an ill-timed bet in the currency market by a well-intentioned if reckless employee in its financial unit.

    The environmental group, which is based in Amsterdam, said Monday the employee who had bet the euro would not strengthen against other currencies in 2013, when it did had acted beyond the limits of his authority.

  10. View from the Solent says:

    “A top British expert has come out with new research flatly contradicting the idea that extremely cold winters in North America – like the one just past – will become more frequent due to global warming. This new analysis disagrees completely with the assessment of President Obama’s personal science advisor.”
    from http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/16/brit_boffin_to_obama_science_advisor_you_are_wrong_on_climate_change/

    reporting on http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2268.html

  11. Ken Coates says:

    Oxfam America’s Behind the Brands campaign is targeting Kellogg and General Mills by turning Tony the Tiger and the Pillsbury Doughboy against them:

    “In a subversive new PSA about climate change, Oxfam America is taking aim at titans of industry Kellogg and General Mills by using their own beloved brand spokesmen Tony the Tiger and the Pillsbury Doughboy.”

    http://www.thewrap.com/tony-the-tiger-pillsbury-doughboy-advocate-for/

    Oh, the irony!

  12. omegapaladin says:

    XKCD tries to make the case for global warming alarmism again – this time, with ice age units.

    http://xkcd.com/1379/

  13. Mac the Knife says:

    Iraq burns…. Kerry fiddles about Climate Change while Obama golfs

    John Kerry: Protecting Oceans from Climate Change a ‘Vital Security Issue’
    “With the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) advancing rapidly through Iraq and posting images of their brutal mass executions, plans have begun to evacuate America’s embassy in Baghdad. In Washington, however, Secretary of State John Kerry hosted a conference on the world’s real “vital security issue”: climate change.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/06/16/John-Kerry-Protecting-Oceans-from-Climate-Change-a-Vital-Security-Issue

  14. JaneHM says:

    Antarctic warming causing massive damage to near-shore seabeds around Antarctica
    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27831958

  15. Rocky says:

    Jo Nova and David Evans have a proposed theory on a Solar Notch. Still early days on this but worth a look

  16. Lewis P Buckingham says:

    http://www.canadianbusiness.com/business-news/greenpeace-says-rogue-employee-lost-5-2-million-on-currency-hedge-gone-wrong/ Warren in New Zealand says:
    June 16, 2014 at 7:01 am
    Further to this the annual non profit income of Greenpeace is given as just over 400 million Canadian Dollars.

  17. Cam says:

    Reading University scientists have come out with their prediction of September ice extent based on melt ponds on the ice flow. Their guess for this year…5.4 million sq km.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27870459

  18. Cam_S says:

    Ross McKitrick has an article in the Financial Post.

    The global warming hiatus?
    Climate models all wrongly predicted warming, so let’s call it a discrepancy
    http://business.financialpost.com/2014/06/16/the-global-warming-hiatus/

  19. Terry Comeau says:

    CBC has story about Northern Gateway Pipeline:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/northern-gateway-pipeline-decision-to-come-this-afternoon-1.2678285?ref=fh,www.mymanitoba.com

    There is also an internet poll asking whether the Feds should approve it. Feel free to weigh in.

  20. Richard Patton says:

    You are always talking about science is never settled, Here is a very good article on the subject, unfortunately it is just the first part, the next part is next week.
    http://www.baen.com/Why_Science_is_Never_Settled.asp

  21. The BBC has an article up about forecasts for Arctic sea ice cover. The quote that caught my eye:

    “Their extent has diminished from about 7 million square km in the 1990s to less than 5 million square km in five of the past seven years, with a record minimum of 3.6 million square km being set in 2012.

    But the year-to-year variation is large and the computer models in general have failed to capture the behaviour.”

    Computer models not infallible? Bit of a break-through for the BBC.

    Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27870459

  22. Larry Ledwick says:

    Statistics professor fired as an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, a progressive Washington D.C. think tank due to his position on climate change. This particular article is interesting in that it details how he made the switch from a believer to a skeptic and the reactions of students when they find out how weak the data is.

    About a decade ago, Rossiter assigned his international statistics students a paper that asked them to analyze some topic of international affairs using statistics. When one female student turned in a paper on humans’ role in global warming, he gave her an F.

    “She came to see me and said, ‘But Doc, it’s not fair, I am just repeating exactly what they said,” he recalled. “And I said, ‘That’s impossible, because the evidence you cited here is just wishful thinking, there is no real data.’”

    http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/18034/

  23. Larry Ledwick says:

    Al Gore spews more garbage in rolling stone.

    Major article where he sells the idea that they are winning and renewables are a big success story.
    No he did not miss an opportunity to direct a significant portion of the article to ranting on Koch conspiracies.

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-turning-point-new-hope-for-the-climate-20140618

  24. Data Soong says:

    Here is a new journal article that might be of interest to your readership: Adjustments in Tornado Counts, F-Scale Intensity, and Path Width for Assessing Significant Tornado Destruction, by E. Agee and S. Childs in the Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, here: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JAMC-D-13-0235.1

    Here’s my brief summary of their paper:
    - The U.S. tornado record is inhomogeneous, so “adjustments” need to be made to compare data at different points in time.
    - They increase the strength of reported tornadoes from 1953-1973 (the pre F-scale era) to account for “overestimated intensities”.
    - Since from 1953-1994, the mean path width of a tornado was recorded, yet this was changed to maximum path width from 1995 onward, they adjust upward the annual mean maximum path width from 1953 to 1994 to obtain a common lower threshold to compare the two datasets.
    - Despite these adjustments, the annual mean kinetic energy of all tornadoes combined shows no annual trend since 1953.
    - The annual mean maximum path width shows an increasing trend (i.e., tornadoes are getting wider.)
    - The tornado destruction index ((wind speed * path width)^2) shows no significant trend until 2007, after which the 3 years with the highest values in their 1953-2012 database were 2007, 2008 and 2011.

    My conclusion: There are no overall trends in tornadic activity significant enough to rise above the uncertainty in the observational measurements. We’ll have to wait longer before we can conclude if there is a significant trend.

  25. Luc VC says:

    This might be a bit political but at the end of the day a technology revolution direly needed by the EU might mute the whole climate debate. http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/luc-vancrean-putins-greatest-gift-may-be-eventual-energy-independence-of-eu-ukraine-352211.html

  26. L. E. Joiner says:

    How about a page for the constant flood of examples of “Reflexive Obeisance to Global Warming”? E.g.:

    SCIENTIST GETS WORLD FOOD PRIZE FOR WHEAT ADVANCES

    DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A crop scientist credited with developing hundreds of varieties of disease-resistant wheat adaptable to many climates and difficult growing conditions was named Wednesday as the 2014 recipient of the World Food Prize.

    Sanjaya Rajaram, 71, wins the $250,000 prize founded by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Norman Borlaug that honors vital contributions to improving the quality, quantity or availability of food throughout the world. . .

    “It’s a great honor,” Rajaram said. “I’m a very humble person but very honored the World Food Prize committee has recognized me for the work I have done.”

    The next big challenge, Rajaram believes, is developing plants with more drought tolerance, staving off the effects of salt water intrusion as oceans rise, and other issues related to climate change.

    “Future crop production is bound to decline unless we fully factor in the issues related to climate change, soil fertility and water deficits, and utilize advanced genetics in the next 20 to 30 years,” he said in a telephone interview. . .

    /Mr Lynn

  27. Bruce Foutch says:

    http://www.newsmax.com/larrybell/warming-global-climate/2014/06/17/id/577481/

    “Dr. Christian Schlüchter’s discovery of 4,000-year-old chunks of wood at the leading edge of a Swiss glacier was clearly not cheered by many members of the global warming doom-and-gloom science orthodoxy.”

    “This finding indicated that the Alps were pretty nearly glacier-free at that time, disproving accepted theories that they only began retreating after the end of the little ice age in the mid-19th century. As he concluded, the region had once been much warmer than today, with “a wild landscape and wide flowing river.””

  28. Bruce Foutch says:

    This should have been pasted with above regarding Dr. Schlüchter:

    “Then he made himself even more unpopular thanks to a recent interview titled “Our Society is Fundamentally Dishonest” which appeared in the Swiss publication Der Bund where he criticized the U.N.-dominated institutional climate science hierarchy for extreme tunnel vision and political contamination.”

  29. Mark says:

    http://joannenova.com.au/2014/06/big-news-part-i-historic-development-new-solar-climate-model-coming/

    Solar climate model….not familiar with the source, but it sounds promising,,,,

  30. Hans Henrik Hansen says:

    Looks like interesting stuff:
    “…trade-off between the climate impact of aviation carbon dioxide emissions and contrails for a single flight”
    - basically this article outlines how much a flight could (should?) be extended to nullify/reduce the climate effects of contrails, see:

    http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/9/6/064021/article

  31. Frank Perdicaro says:

    The “Slow Fourier Tranform” of Willis http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/03/the-slow-fourier-transform-sft/ is now generalized. See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3169583/posts
    and the good paper referenced there.

  32. aaron says:

    Matt Ridley:

    http://business.financialpost.com/2014/06/19/ipcc-climate-change-warming/

    Junk Science Week: IPCC commissioned models to see if global warming would reach dangerous levels this century. Consensus is ‘no’

    The IPCC commissioned four different models of what might happen to the world economy, society and technology in the 21st century and what each would mean for the climate, given a certain assumption about the atmosphere’s “sensitivity” to carbon dioxide. Three of the models show a moderate, slow and mild warming, the hottest of which leaves the planet just 2 degrees Centigrade warmer than today in 2081-2100. The coolest comes out just 0.8 degrees warmer.

    Now two degrees is the threshold at which warming starts to turn dangerous, according to the scientific consensus. That is to say, in three of the four scenarios considered by the IPCC, by the time my children’s children are elderly, the earth will still not have experienced any harmful warming, let alone catastrophe…

    Curious to know what assumptions lay behind this model, I decided to look up the original papers describing the creation of this scenario. Frankly, I was gobsmacked. It is a world that is very, very implausible…

    Nuclear and renewable technologies contribute little, because of a “slow pace of innovation” and hence “fossil fuel technologies continue to dominate the primary energy portfolio over the entire time horizon of the RCP8.5 scenario.” Energy efficiency has improved very little.

    These are highly unlikely assumptions. With abundant natural gas displacing coal on a huge scale in the United States today, with the price of solar power plummeting, with nuclear power experiencing a revival, with gigantic methane-hydrate gas resources being discovered on the seabed, with energy efficiency rocketing upwards, and with population growth rates continuing to fall fast in virtually every country in the world, the one thing we can say about RCP8.5 is that it is very, very implausible…

    The IPCC produced two reports last year. One said that the cost of climate change is likely to be less than 2% of GDP by the end of this century. The other said that the cost of decarbonizing the world economy with renewable energy is likely to be 4% of GDP. Why do something that you know will do more harm than good?

  33. el gordo says:

    I’ve been battling this nonsense since yesterday, explaining to warmists that one month is not a trend, but they won’t listen.

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/may-2014-was-worlds-hottest-may-in-recorded-history-20140619-zse27.html#ixzz352ZKjkR8

  34. Pamela Gray says:

    It would be interesting to give this piece of research a once over. Fairly recent (2013). Attributes 40% of the recent trend to intrinsic factors, with the AMO oscillation a prominent piece. It has a pretty good section on Solar issues too. I am betting Willis might be interested as well. Lots of filtering of a single record.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3568361/

  35. kakatoa says:

    http://ecologicallyoriented.wordpress.com/2014/06/20/yeah-who-cares-about-climate-change-consensus-anyway/

    …….”The point being that in an article that argues that it’s all just a big communication problem, they give a first class example of why, no, it ain’t just a communication problem, outside of the fact that yeah, misrepresenting the actual state of what is known about a scientific issue, is yeah, a big communication problem.
    So, I broke my own rule of not wasting time commenting on such thing, and submitted a brief comment. It was up briefly, got a couple of responses, then got deleted by somebody later. I have no idea why I’m listed as “ID1686610″, since I gave my full name when registering, but whatever, here’s the comment:
    “Wildfires have become more prevalent in the US because of climate change.”
    Negative.
    Wildfires have become more “prevalent” (frequent?, larger?, more intense?…and with reference to what baseline period, exactly?…what *exactly* do you mean?) …due to a combination of factors, the principal one being the very large increase in available fuels that have arisen due to a century or more of fire reduction activities, especially in fire prone ecosystems…..”

  36. A Lovell says:

    I have been keeping an eye on Josh Tickell’s Indiegogo fundraising for his ‘Fracked’ endeavour. He was trying to raise $72,000. He raised only $3,535 from 37 funders. There are 10 comments registered, of which only 3 are shown. I’d love to see the censored ones!

    http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/fracked#home

  37. Keith Wallis says:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27935479

    Interesting in itself, but with comments you’d never hear from the Team.

    The BICEP2 Collaboration announced in March that, from their telescope at the South Pole, they thought they’d discovered the signal of the rapid inflation of the Universe immediately after the Big Bang. They said that they’d picked up the predicted swirls and ripples in cosmic microwave background radiation, but now they’re not so sure.

    Data from the European Space Agency’s Planck telescope found the same rippled pattern in dust within the Milky Way galaxy. Importantly, it looked at many parts of the sky, including that part surveyed by BICEP2. One of the BICEP team leaders, Professor Clem Pryke, from Uni. Wisconsin, said “Has my confidence gone down? Yes”. But here’s the quote that the climate science Usual Suspects would do well to heed, but have ridden roughshod over:

    “Real data from Planck are indicating that our dust models are underestimates. So the prior knowledge on the level of dust at these latitudes, in our field, has gone up; and so the confidence that there is a gravitational wave component has gone down. Quantifying that is a very hard thing to do. But data trumps models.

    Good to see that the to and fro of scientific investigation getting nearer the truth and trying to make sure that the null hypothesis is fully assessed before rejection.

    However, swap “dust models are underestimates” for “climate models are overestimates”, and “gravitational wave component” for “anthropogenic component”, and you have the last year’s numerous papers providing climate sensitivity downgrades summed up nicely. If only the IPCC process followed the same path of integrity that true science treads…

  38. Keith W. says:

    Keith Wallis beat me to it, but still, here is the Yahoo! News link for the story on the Big Bang story.

    http://news.yahoo.com/big-bang-breakthrough-team-allows-may-wrong-114835743.html

  39. DougS says:

    June 20, Friday. A Flu like virus is moving among us in the SF Bay Area. Both my wife and I are sick and so are co-workers. Wash hands and hydrate; whiskey recommended.

  40. Mac the Knife says:

    Anthony,
    This may be a bit late for the Friday Funny but it IS worth a laugh!

    Rep. Stockman introduces ‘The Dog Ate My Tax Receipts Act’
    by John Hayward 20 Jun 2014, 1:14 PM PDT

    Why shouldn’t taxpayers be allowed to use the same excuses the IRS, and other elements of our imperial government, deploy when they get in trouble? Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) aims to make it happen with his “The Dog Ate My Tax Receipts Act.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/06/20/Rep-Stockman-introduces-The-Dog-Ate-My-Tax-Receipts-Act

  41. Margaret says:

    This article by a group of economists is trying to work out what the right discount rate should be for benefits in the future. They come up with 2.6%. I can’t remember what Lord Stern used, so it would be interesting to compare it.
    http://www.voxeu.org/article/discounting-very-distant-future

    According to my calculations (and I may be wrong) this means that something which gives you $100 in 100 years time should be valued as if it gave you $7.37 now.

  42. charles nelson says:

    Steven M. Mosher, B.A. English, Northwestern University (1981); Teaching Assistant, English Department, UCLA (1981-1985); Director of Operations Research/Foreign Military Sales & Marketing, Northrop Corporation [Grumman] (1985-1990); Vice President of Engineering [Simulation], Eidetics International (1990-1993); Director of Marketing, Kubota Graphics Corporation (1993-1994); Vice President of Sales & Marketing, Criterion Software (1994-1995); Vice President of Personal Digital Entertainment, Creative Labs (1995-2006); Vice President of Marketing, Openmoko (2007-2009); Founder and CEO, Qi Hardware Inc. (2009); Marketing Consultant (2010-2012); Vice President of Sales and Marketing, VizzEco Inc. (2010-2011); [Marketing] Advisor, RedZu Online Dating Service (2012-2013); Advisory Board, urSpin (n.d.); Team Member, Berkeley Earth 501C(3) Non-Profit Organization unaffiliated with UC Berkeley (2013-Present)

  43. Jarmo says:

    EPA war on nuclear?

    The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a new emissions rule for nuclear power plants, which sets very low levels for Krypton-85, a noble gas. For the past 50 years, we’ve known that there is no scenario in which Kr-85 released from a power plant could cause any health issues. K-85 can’t enter the human body. Once it’s released, K-85 cannot react or bond with other elements and decays to stable, non-hazardous, non-radioactive rubidium. Nothing has changed to lead the EPA to think otherwise. What could change if we set absurdly low limits on Kr-85 emissions is that new generation of nuclear reactor designs that are incapable of melting down could become more expensive, maybe even economically impossible. Given that it poses no risk to human health, K-85 shouldn’t even be regulated by the EPA; this falls to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/programs/energy-and-climate/proposed-epa-rules-are-kryptonite-to-new-nuclear

  44. SanityP says:

    This must be a kick in the nuts for the warmistas:

    Melting Yukon ices reveals 5,000-year-old archaeological treasures

    http://www.macleans.ca/authors/john-geddes/melting-yukon-ices-reveals-5000-year-old-archaeological-treasures/

  45. boballab says:

    Anthony thought you might like this:

  46. F. Ross says:

    Well who would have thought that species might be able to adapt to “climate change”?

    http://www.thewestsidestory.net/2014/06/21/13233/emperor-penguins-appear-acclimatize-varying-climate-study-finds/

  47. Keith Minto says:

    Just clicked on to my fav SST anomaly map by Unisys and found that it not operating (sorry, unable to cut and paste), only this information: http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.gif

  48. Paul Westhaver says:

    Wind Power Economic Failure:

    Nova Scotia Government lies about power generation, green jobs and costs to install wind generation facilities.

    The Wealthe redistribution scam revealed:

    http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1217484-job-claims-for-province-s-60m-investment-in-dsme-unrealistic

    Only the sycophant reporters at Chronicle Herald never asked the socialist NDP government to verify it’s fake jobs projections when the project was proposed.

  49. J Martin says:

    Ross McKitrick finds a 97% concensus.

    The IPCC briefly discussed the seriousness of the model-observation discrepancy in Chapter 9 of the 2013 report. It reports that over the 1998-2012 interval 111 out of 114 climate model runs over-predicted warming, achieving thereby, as it were, a 97% consensus.

    http://business.financialpost.com/2014/06/16/the-global-warming-hiatus/

    found via http://icecap.us/

  50. Roger Sowell says:

    President Obama is either clueless about the difference between “solar” and “renewables” or just does not care about being off by a factor of 3. He stated that California recently obtained 18 percent of its total grid energy from solar power. It was barely 6 percent, in fact.

    http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/more-renewable-bs-from-president.html

  51. L. E. Joiner says:

    Christopher Booker in The Telegraph (made Drudge):

    The scandal of fiddled global warming data
    The US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10916086/The-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html

    /Mr Lynn

  52. Hoser says:

    Yes, what he said (LE Joiner)!!!

  53. Sasha says:

    Greenpeace leaked documents reveal extent of financial disarray

    …Like their entire raison d’etre…

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/23/greenpeace-losses-financial-disarray

  54. Earth mesh says:

    The Galaxy-sunspots-climate connection finally revealed!
    The huge electric galactic center-magnetar sends electricity to all the Milky-way [1. Eatough R. P. et al]. In our solar system, mostly Jupiter and secondly the other planets periodically divert a part of this electricity (that stimulates them) from its course to the Sun, causing him a solar minimum and to the Earth more atmospheric and magma stimulation: more thunderbolts [2. Gurevich A.] (even from CLEAR sky, without clouds), storms, quakes [3. Simpson J., Jain R.] and volcanic eruptions-clouding-glacials [4. Ebisuzaki et al], all AVERTABLE with proper MESHES [global-providence.info] over active craters and the equator, where from most electricity hits our planet.
    The reason why the sunspot cycle is averagely 11 years is because the charge-discharge of Jupiter lasts as long as it takes him to evolve around the Sun and it depends on the other planets’ positions [5. Wilson I. R. G.].
    1.A strong magnetic field around the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Galaxy R. P. Eatough et al http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v501/n7467/full/nature12499.html?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20130919
    A magnetar at the heart of our Milky Way
    - J. A. Kennea et al. Swift Discovery of a new soft gamma repeater, SGR J1745-29, near Sagittarius A*, Astrophysical Journal Letters 770, L24, 2013 (http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.2128) 
- K. Mori et al. NuSTAR discovery of a 3.76-second transient magnetar near Sagittarius A* 
Astrophysical Journal Letters 770, L23, 2013 (http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.1945) 
- R. M. Shannon, S. Johnston Radio properties of the magnetar near Sagittarius A* from observations with the Australia Telescope Compact Array Monthly Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. (MNRAS) Letters, August 14, 2013 (http://de.arxiv.org/abs/1305.3036)
    - Intergalactic Medium Emission Observations with the Cosmic Web Imager: I. The Circum-QSO Medium of QSO 1549+19, and Evidence for a Filamentary Gas Inflow
    Martin, D. Christopher and Chang, Daphne and Matuszewski, Matt and Morrisey, Patrick and Rahman, Shahinand Moore, Anna and Steidel, Charles C. (2014) Intergalactic Medium Emission Observations with the Cosmic Web Imager: I. The Circum-QSO Medium of QSO 1549+19, and Evidence for a Filamentary Gas Inflow.Astrophysical Journal, 768 (2). Art. No. 106. ISSN 0004-637X.http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20140303-152428640
    http://authors.library.caltech.edu/44109/
    - Intergalactic Medium Emission Observations with the Cosmic Web Imager. II. Discovery of Extended, Kinematically-Linked Emission around SSA22 Lyα Blob 2
    Martin, D. Christopher and Chang, Daphne and Matuszewski, Matt and Morrisey, Patrick and Rahman, Shahinand Moore, Anna and Steidel, Charles C. and Matsuda, Yuichi (2014) Intergalactic Medium Emission Observations with the Cosmic Web Imager. II. Discovery of Extended, Kinematically-Linked Emission around SSA22 Lyα Blob 2. Astrophysical Journal, 786 (2). Art. No. 107. ISSN 0004-637X.http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20140303-145821259
    On the Galactic Center Being the Main Source of Galactic Cosmic Rays as Evidenced by Recent Cosmic Ray and Gamma Ray Observations – Yiqing Guo, Zhaoyang Feng, Qiang Yuan, Cheng Liu, Hongbo Hu http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.5192
    2. The observed electric fields in thunderclouds are generally too weak to initiate the atmosphere’s electrical breakdown. But COSMIC RAYS can play a surprising role in the drama of LIGHTNING: A. V. Gurevich and K. P. Zybin, Runaway Breakdown and the Mysteries of Lightning. http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~jgladden/phys510/spring06/Gurevich.pdf.
    http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/9/5/055004/article
    - Solar activity as a triggering mechanism for earthquakes – Simpson J., http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967E%26PSL…3..417S
    - Solar flares trigger earthquakes – Jain, R., Physical Research Laboratory.
    EACH of the 682 >4.0 EARTHQUAKES under study was preceded by a SOLAR FLARE of B to X class by 10-100 hrs. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AGUSMIN33A..03J
    -2011 March 9th ended with a powerful SOLAR FLARE. In addition, on March 10, 2011 around 0630 UT, a CORONAL MASS EJECTION did strike a glaceing blow to Earth’s magnetic field. ww.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/News031011-xclass.html
    4. Explosive volcanic eruptions triggered by cosmic rays: Volcano as a bubble chamber
    Toshikazu Ebisuzaki, Hiroko Miyahara, Ryuho Kataoka, Tatsuhiko Sato, Yasuhiro Ishimine
    sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1342937X10001966
    5. The Venus–Earth–Jupiter spin–orbit coupling model, I. R. G. Wilson, The Liverpool Plains Daytime Astronomy Centre, Gunnedah, Australia – http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/1/147/2013/prp-1-147-2013.pdf

  55. M Courtney says:

    Further to what Sasha highlights.

    That article also reports on a Greenpeace employee who commutes to work in Amsterdam form Switzerland by aeroplane. How large a carbon footprint can a hypocrite have?

    It’s surprisingly critical of Greenpeace for the Guardian. And so are the comments.

  56. Navy Bob says:

    Not sure where to post this, but it seems worth passing on. The Supreme Court has ruled against at least a portion of EPA’s greenhouse gas authority. The news item below is short and cryptic. I can’t tell if EPA’s rule-making authority over CO2 has been abolished or if it’s just a minor technical limitation.

    “Supreme Court strikes down part of EPA permitting rule
    Jeremy P. Jacobs, E&E reporter
    Published: June 23, 2014 at 10:14 AM

    The Supreme Court today struck down part of a U.S. EPA program for reducing heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions.

    Justices held in a split decision that the agency improperly required stationary sources to obtain permits if they qualified for the program only because of greenhouse gas emissions.

    Utilities, several industry trade groups and a dozen states challenged EPA’s suite of greenhouse gas regulations, including the auto standards and EPA’s finding that the gases endanger public health. They lost at a federal appeals court, and the Supreme Court declined to take up those issues.

    The high court limited its review to whether EPA lawfully decided to include greenhouse gases in its Prevention of Significant Deterioration, or PSD, program.

    The regime requires facilities to obtain permits before construction or modifications. The permits mandate that they use the “best available” technology to control emissions of harmful pollutants.”

    http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/stories/1060001767

  57. Navy Bob says:

    Never mind. Looks like it’s a very limited technical restriction.
    ‘Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the court, said “EPA is getting almost everything it wanted in this case.” Scalia said the agency wanted to regulate 86 percent of all greenhouse gases emitted from plants nationwide. The agency will be able to regulate 83 percent of the emissions under the ruling, Scalia said.’
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal_government/justices-limit-existing-epa-global-warming-rules/2014/06/23/a6966718-fae0-11e3-9f27-09f20b8bfd1a_story.html

  58. aaron says:

    Pondering a new geological epic.

    http://judithcurry.com/2014/06/22/pondering-the-anthropocene/

    I say we call it the Anthropomorphicene.

  59. Alec aka Daffy Duck says:

    [Support for O'Dowd et al theory that air pollution had artificially kept temps lower, but then the clean air acts
    of the 1960-70s reduced aerosols which reduced has and clouds, in turn rose temps in the 1970-1990s???

    Clouds did decline: ]

    “A loss of ~4.2% total cloudiness is observed between 1982 and 2012 over a North American domain centered over the contiguous United States. While ENSO can explain some of the observed change, a weather state clustering analysis identifies shifts in weather patterns that result in loss of water cloud over the Great Lakes and cirrus over southern portions of the United States…..
    http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00068.1?af=R

  60. The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley says:

    Greenpiss caught out – one of their blokes flies 250 miles to work. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/10920198/Greenpeace-executive-flies-250-miles-to-work.html

  61. aaron says:

    Oops! “Epoch”. But yeah, the spin of “anthropocene” is epic.

  62. Pacific earthquake swarms in past few hours:

    http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/

  63. David L. Hagen says:

    Magnitude 8.0 quake western Aleutian Islands
    Forecasters Assess Tsunami Threat After Big Quake in Alaskan Islands
    http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2014/06/23/possible-tsunami-threat-after-big-quake-in-alaskan-islands/

    centered near Little Sitkin Island, near the southwestern end of the Aleutians

  64. john says:

    India to open civilian nuclear programme to greater scrutiny
    http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/23/uk-india-nuclear-idINKBN0EY14O20140623

    (Reuters) – India said on Monday it was ratifying an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to expand oversight of its civilian nuclear programme, in a move aimed at unblocking a major nuclear partnership with the United States.

  65. Roger Sowell says:

    My take on the Supreme Court’s ruling today in Utility Air Regulatory Group v US EPA,

    http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/supreme-court-slaps-down-us-epa-power.html

  66. Sasha says:

    Where Greenpeace donations really go

    Massive pay for execs…currency speculation…gratuitous air flights…huge commutes for privileged exec…dangerous, pointless, counter-productive stunts…etc…

    The fairy tale world of those “green” hypocrites at Greenpeace now embraces all the characteristics of any other giant corporation; massive pay at the top, financial malfeasance by it’s employees and now the blatant exploitation of an underclass of its workers who have been either fired or replaced by outsourcing…

    “John Sauven, the executive director of Greenpeace UK, also addressed internal disquiet over a restructuring that has seen staff moved from Dutch wages in Amsterdam to lower, regional wages around the world. “That’s a pretty hard thing to do and get perfectly right, especially when people’s jobs are involved. Perhaps there are things that could have been done better or differently to communicate better about the planned change and help it happen more smoothly.”

    Read about some of the scandal here:

    Greenpeace defends top executive flying to work
    Issue of Pascal Husting flying from Luxembourg to Amsterdam is ‘a really tough one’, says Greenpeace UK’s executive director
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/23/greenpeace-defends-top-executive-flying-to-work

  67. Lewis P Buckingham says:

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2014-06/24/c_133431287.htm Seany Royal says:
    June 23, 2014 at 11:02 pm
    The hottest ever this one has polar bears on the click on.

  68. Sasha says:

    INDIA is Sick and Tired of Greenpeace’s antics

    British Greenpeace activists are a threat to India’s economic development, according to an intelligence report

    The Indian government has banned direct foreign funding of local campaign groups, after a report by its Intelligence Bureau warned that organizations funded by Greenpeace and other international institutions were growing throughout India and creating mass movements which are a significant threat to India’s economic health. Greenpeace and other environmentalist groups have stalled the development of new coal mines, challenged plans for more coal-fired power stations, and delayed other vital infrastructure projects in campaigns which had reduced India’s GDP growth by 2-3%. Prakash Javadekar, the environment minister, said India had a right to grow and that it would not address climate change until it had eradicated poverty.

    The Intelligence Bureau report describes six NGOs, including Greenpeace, at the forefront of anti-GMO activism in India. It says the movement was started by Vandana Shiva 11 years ago. The report goes on to say that Vandana Shiva is a consultant to Greenpeace Australia and her group, Navdanya, is a recipient of foreign donations. This and other movements were blamed for anti-developmental activities.

    Shiva is an adviser to Prince Charles on sustainable agriculture. (Shiva blamed the high cost of GM cotton seeds for the suicides of 284,000 heavily indebted farmers since 1995).

    The report named four British environmentalists and cyber-experts among 12 foreign activists it said were planning to organize protests against coal fired power stations and had been involved in upgrading Greenpeace India’s computer security systems. Two other British activists, Fiona Stewart and Emma Gibson, had visited Greenpeace’s headquarters in Bangalore in January an “upgraded its communications systems and installed sophisticated and encrypted software in its servers and computers,” the report said.

    Dr Vandana Shiva said India’s Intelligence Bureau’s report was an “attack on civil society” which she said she would defend. She had decided to campaign against the introduction of genetically-modified seeds into India in 1987 after she attended a conference at which agricultural chemicals industry representatives said they would “take patents on seeds so they could collect royalties from every farmer, in every season, in every country of the world,” she said in the Asian Age newspaper. Her court action against the genetically-modified seed company Monsanto delayed its plans to cultivate Bt Cotton in India for four years. Her NGO Navdanya has since collected a vast seed bank to help farmers cultivate low cost organic crops and avoid the debts she believes have been caused by the costs of using genetically-modified seeds. The report was biased in favor of foreign companies she blames for farmers’ debts and suicides, she said. “They’re not allergic to foreign funding for defense or railways but only foreign funding to build civil society,” she said.

    Samit Aich, Greenpeace’s India director said the report was a malicious attempt to speed up environmental clearances for coal and nuclear power projects and a “concerted effort by parties with a vested interest to ensure elimination of any opposition.”

  69. Bruce Cobb says:

    Risky Business. Know-nothing big names in the news today blathering about the “big costs” of “climate change”: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/money-men-tally-cost-climate-change-24274746
    The Executive Summary of the group, started last year is here: http://riskybusiness.org/report/overview/executive-summary
    Caution; Regurgitated climate lies galore. Have barf bag handy.

  70. Mardler says:

    Would like to see a critique of the Telegraph story (see Seany Royal above) that claims May 2014 was the hottest month since records began.

  71. Skiphil says:

    Thomas Steyer et al. produce an Alarmist report. Justin Gillis and the NY Times make themselves available as PR flacks:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/24/science/report-tallies-toll-on-economy-from-global-warming.html?_r=0

  72. E. Martin says:

    According to Lamar Smith’s article in today’s WSJ, EPA head Gina McCarthy refuses to make public the scientific research it uses. And she seems to be channeling Phil Jones: “Speaking before the NAS in April, she defended her agency’s need to protect data ‘from those who are not qualified to analyze it’.”

  73. Gary says:

    What ever happened to Kristen Byrnes (Ponder the Maunder)? She was finishing up high school and looking at colleges when she deactivated her blog. It would be interesting to interview her now some 7 years after her brush with fame.

  74. FerdinandAkin says:

    Want to make a quick 10,000 dollars? Dr. Christopher Keating is offering a reward for anyone who can disprove Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.

    http://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/p/1000-global-warming-skeptic-challenge.html

    Monckton of Brenchley critiqued the challenge, but did not offer a response.

  75. daymite says:

    According to Jeff Masters: April and May 2014, warmest April and May months ever recorded. If so, does this mean the “Pause” is over?

    http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/?
    “May 2014: Earth’s 2nd Consecutive Warmest Month on Record

    By Dr. Jeff Masters, 11:31 AM EDT on June 23, 2014
    Director of Meteorology, Weather Underground

    May 2014 was Earth’s warmest May since records began in 1880, beating the record set in 2010, said NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) and NASA. The planet has now had two back-to-back warmest months on record …”

  76. Quinn says:

    Europe’s Green Energy Industry Faces Collapse As Subsidies Are Cut

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/24/europes-green-energy-industry-faces-collapse-as-subsidies-are-cut/

    Looks like Germany is joining Spain, planning to levy charges on residential solar panel owners.

  77. Icebear says:

    The three stooges, paulson, bloomberg, and steyr are really going into misinformational overdrive.

    And look at this on our beloved ex-mayor’s network:-

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-23/global-temperatures-break-another-record-for-the-month-of-may.html

  78. Paul Westhaver says:

    Supreme Court of the USA decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA:

    A non-liberal spin interpretation:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/06/24/Obama-EPA-Suffers-Humiliating-Defeat-at-SCOTUS-Media-Gets-It-Wrong

    Justice Scalia writes:

    “An agency has no power to ‘tailor’ legislation to bureaucratic policy goals by rewriting unambiguous statutory terms,”

    CO2 remains a pollutant according to the decision and the EPA ma regulate BUT they may not do so capriciously and impractically.

    ie The president may not modify statutory terms for politics.

  79. Peter Yates says:

    There is a new NASA video here :-

    Description: “NASA is about to launch a satellite dedicated to the study of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. The Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO-2) will quantify global CO2 sources and sinks, and help researchers predict the future of climate change.”

    At 0:09 they show images of a power station and a vehicle exhaust. It seems that they are releasing a lot of CO2, since that is the subject of the video. However, it should be noted that CO2 is colorless. We can’t see it. Using those images in a video about CO2 is misleading. (See additional images of power stations and pollution at 2:15.)

    At 0:30 there is a graph of CO2 levels over the last 400,000 years. The text just above the graph says: “For 650,000 years…”, and the voice-over says: “..atmospheric CO2 is now at its highest level in at least the past 800,000 years.”.
    Apart from the apparent confusion about the number of years shown on the graph, the CO2 information appears to be factual. However, the full story would have been shown if the graph could have extended to at least 2 million years ago. At that time the proxy records show CO2 levels at about the same levels as they are today (ie. about 350~400 ppmv). If you go even further back in time the CO2 levels go up to 1,000 ppmv or higher, as shown here :-
    http://descentintotheicehouse.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Capture8.jpg

    At 2:25 a graph shows: ‘Global Temperature Anomalies (1880-2012)’. The graph doesn’t clearly show the zero trend during (at least) the last 15 years. .. The voice-over says: “Global surface temperatures are increasing, and changing our planets climate.” The implication appears to be that the climate is getting worse, or will get worse. Is there any evidence to support those claims? On the contrary, there is evidence that storm systems like hurricanes and tornadoes have been *decreasing in their frequency. (Refer: http://www.c3headlines.com/hysteria-hurricanescyclonestyphoonstornados/ )

  80. KenB says:

    Big Al Gore surfaces in Australian politics, standing shoulder to shoulder with Millionaire/Billionaire Clive Palmer who has cobbled together the Palmer United Party, drawing a loose grouping of so called independents together to hold the balance of power in the Australian Senate, able to break or make the deadlock that the Abbot Government is facing to recovering the Australian Economy from the excesses of the Green Left and the Australian Labor Party as they try to both dump the carbon taxes and get rid of the Green preferential renewable energy.

    The deal is that Palmer will support getting rid of the Carbon Tax but demand in return the Australian Government “move” to introduce an Emissions Trading scheme, in a strange echo this was the failed policy of Malcolm Turnbull who was once the leader of the present government party in the Lower house, but rolled by Tony Abbot the present Leader of the Australian Liberal Government.

    The Alliance and endorsement of the Palmer group by Al Gore ensures that this will get world headlines, and lost of promotion by your President, but by my reckoning anybody that thinks Clive is in it for the “good of the country” and/or the good of the world has been sold a pup and like your country we will have been gored and done over, until we wake up to the inconvenient truth. One story you need to highlight, Truly the henhouse has been invaded by the chicken stranglers!!

  81. tango says:

    I am godsmacked this will make your day All Gore backing Clive Palmer in Australia http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-25/palmer-will-help-axe-carbon-tax-but-courts-gore-in-push-for-ets/5549938

  82. Steamboat Jon says:

    From Bloomberg – Climate Forecast: A Heat More Deadly Than the U.S. Has Ever Seen
    By Tom Randall Jun 24, 2014 2:07 PM ET

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-24/what-to-expect-when-your-planet-is-expecting-risky-business-in-climate.html

  83. tango says:

    in Australia we cannot believe Clive Palmer can have anything to do with Al Gore

  84. Sasha says:

    daymite says:
    According to Jeff Masters: April and May 2014, warmest April and May months ever recorded. If so, does this mean the “Pause” is over?
    “…May 2014: Earth’s 2nd Consecutive Warmest Month on Record…”

    That claim is dishonest, though it’s hard to stop hysterical headlines appearing from ignorant and lazy journalists.

    NOAA’s own figures give an error margin for their figures of +/- 0.07C. When this is allowed for, May 2014 statistically joins an eight-way tie as the hottest May, all since 1998. The other years being: 1998, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2010, 2012, and 2013.

    Statistically, their claim of the “hottest month” does not hold water. We should also bear in mind just how sparse their temperature data coverage really is:
    https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-land-sfc-mntp/201405.gif

    Finally, we can take a look at what the satellites have to say:
    http://data.remss.com/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v03_3.txt

    http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt

    CONCLUSION
    RSS show May 2014 as only the 6th warmest, while on UAH it ranks 3rd. Both datasets show May 1998 as by far the warmest month.

    http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/noaas-hottest-month-claims-are-unscientific/

  85. Keith Sketchley says:

    http://gulfislandsdriftwood.com/news/killer-bloom-strikes-harbour/#.U6hDCU_n9V8 Killer bloom strikes Ganges Harbour

    Even on Silly Silly Island people aren’t blaming global warming for odd phenomenon, at least explicitly.

    Algal blooms are common late this spring/early summer.
    An article in the Driftwood newspaper of June 18, 2014 identifies the likely cause as warm sunny weather encouraging reproduction rates higher than currents, winds, and animal consumption can clear (especially in the inlet called Ganges Harbour).

    Worse is that much marine life such as mussels is dying. Likely cause is that organisms are unable to access needed light, nutrients, and oxygen due to the algal bloom.
    Early indications are that rain and wind are reducing the problem.

    (There have been algae blooms elsewhere on SSI and in the region, some are orange, some are stringy.)

    Just another “once in 50 years” phenomenon I’d say. Millenia ago people might think it was the result of a curse

  86. Ben Bauer says:

    Toronto Star, Ottawa Bureau reporter, Published on Tue Jun 24 2014

    “The report, ‘Canada in a Changing Climate,’ is an update of a 2008 examination of Canada’s efforts to recognize and cope with global warming.
    ‘Over the last six decades, Canada has become warmer, with average temperatures over land increasing by 1.5 degrees Celsius between 1950 and 2010,’ it says.
    The rate of warming in Canada is double the global average, the study says.

  87. Gil Dewart says:

    Check out the Paulson-Steyer-Bloomberg out fit called :”Risky Business”.
    Big money promotes “climate change”, as usual.
    http://riskybusiness.org/report/overview/executive-summary

  88. Mark Hladik says:

    Yahoo news page lists a new challenge/bet: $10,000 to the first person to “prove” AGW is wrong/hoax.

    Guess who the judge(s) is/are.

    Mark H.

  89. DaveH says:

    Mark Hladik:
    Here is the link to Christopher Keating’s offer:
    http://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/p/1000-global-warming-skeptic-challenge.html

    There were 177 comments – for fun, I refreshed the page and now there are 167, now 155.

  90. Roy says:

    Coastal residents team up with skeptics to convince North Carolina’s legislature to deep six the alarmists prediction of a 39-inch sea level rise.

    NAGS HEAD, N.C. — The dangers of climate change were revealed to Willo Kelly in a government conference room in the summer of 2011. By the end of the century, state officials said, the ocean would be 39 inches higher and her home on the Outer Banks would be swamped.

    The state had detailed maps to illustrate this claim and was developing a Web site where people could check by street address to see if their property was doomed. There was no talk of salvation, no plan to hold back the tide. The 39-inch forecast was “a death sentence,” Kelly said, “for ever trying to sell your house.”

    More at The Washington Post

  91. mark in toledo says:

    are EPA grant proposals considered FOIA compliant?

    I wonder if it wouldn’t be a good study for someone to look at all proposals given in the past 20 years and determine what percentage mentioned global warming or climate change total…..which ones mentioned it of those that were accepted….which ones mentioned it of those that were rejected.

    if it turned out that of all climatology proposals the amount which mentioned climate change or global warming was huge, it would be a bit damning. it would confirm the suspicion of many that it is one of the main ways to get grant money.

  92. Jeff L says:

    Mindless journalism from Skiing magazine. Evidently they weren’t around for any of last winter in Colorado – snow so deep that mtn biking still isn’t possible because there is still snow on the trails from last winter.

    http://www.skinet.com/skiing/articles/snows-melting-what-next

  93. TomRude says:

    Funny: Rep Waxman seems all excited about US exporting… LNG
    http://rt.com/usa/168496-house-expedite-natural-gas-exports/
    “Accordingly, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) has questioned the real impact of legislation to expedite approvals.
    “Rushing the DOE review is not going to speed up the construction of these projects. We need the construction of the infrastructure for the export of natural gas,” Waxman said.”

  94. pouncer says:

    WHY Mann and Goddard do what they do… to persuade.

    “one conclusion of work presented by four researchers from the University of California at Los Angeles at this week’s IEEE Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition conference. By wedding computer vision to media analysis, the team of three computer scientists and a communications professor created a way of analyzing huge numbers of political images to determine their likely effects on audiences.

    Images, they note, are especially persuasive. “Because we believe our own eyes, but know well that people are manipulative, we tend to be verbally skeptical and visually gullible,” write Jungseock Joo, Weixin Li, Francis F. Steen, and Song-Chun Zhu. ”

    http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-06-25/is-a-picture-worth-1-000-polls

  95. PaulH says:

    High profile CAGW scientists complain that they aren’t taken seriously:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/jun/26/what-really-annoys-scientists-about-the-state-of-the-climate-change-debate

    “They are now all too used to being shot at, kicked and maligned as their findings are misunderstood, misrepresented, trivialised or booted around like footballs between politicians and other warring ideological factions and self-interested industry groups.”

    The article features musings from Michael Mann, Richard Betts, Stefan Rahmstorf and more.

  96. James the Elder says:

    You have got to be kidding.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/24/us-climatechange-economy-regions-idUSKBN0EZ0AI20140624

    I didn’t know humans couldn’t survive in equatorial jungles.

  97. Trucker Bob says:

    On the 17th of June 2010, Anthony spoke in Newcastle Australia, we novocastrians have the distinction of being the climate craziness of the week with our one and only illuminated wind turbine.
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/18/climate-craziness-of-the-week-lighting-up-your-windmill/
    Well news out yesterday, after 17 years service the turbine is to come down due to unjustified maintenance cost.
    http://www.nbnnews.com.au/index.php/2014/06/26/kooragang-island-wind-turbine-to-go/

  98. Kozlowski says:

    http://www.change.org/petitions/general-mills-and-kellogg-help-farmers-and-end-harmful-business-practices-that-cause-global-warming?utm_source=action_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=86635&alert_id=KpAuCnuAbx_Sa7F8uVThtO9oJm3FMDR%2B6WgCCt2yHQV8Imxg5BJjkeEGUEffmvYAIS25%2BW3%2B33u

    There’s a new petition taking off on Change.org, and we think you might be interested in signing it.

    General Mills and Kellogg: Help farmers and end harmful business practices that cause global warming

    Richard Oswald
    Langdon, Missouri

    Sign Richard’s Petition

    As a fifth generation sustainable farmer, I’ve seen firsthand how devastating climate change has already been to the American way of farming. That’s why I was so shocked to learn that two giant American food corporations, Kellogg and General Mills, use horribly unsustainable business practices that damage the environment and cause climate change.

    Short-sighted policies by General Mills and Kellogg are harming the planet and accelerating climate change. With another dangerous summer upon us, I urgently need you to join me in asking these companies to commit to more responsible environmental policies.

    Both General Mills and Kellogg claim they are trying to reduce their emissions which harm the planet and affect our air quality, but refuse to say what their current impact is and how they plan to reduce their impact. They do business with companies which burn down forests to clear land and overuse polluting fertilizers, too.

    Globally, agricultural production of raw materials is the largest source of global warming emissions. Investigations in Asia and Africa show that General Mills and Kellogg purchase palm oil through suppliers that clear and burn forests. And while General Mills and Kellogg have recently adopted zero deforestation palm oil policies, these do not extend to commodities like soy and sugar. Other companies have policies that address these problems, too, so I know it’s something big food companies can do.

    We need to act now, so I’m supporting a group called Oxfam to urge General Mills and Kellogg to take the three following steps:

    · Disclose emissions from your supply chains that contribute to climate change making people hungry.

    · Commit to clear, science-based targets and actions that reduce emissions from your operations and supply chains.

    · Use your power and influence to call on governments and businesses to do what’s needed to fight climate change.

    I remember the regular rainfall which nourished our corn fields when I was young. It was just about every Saturday night. But a few years ago in 2011, the river flooded from unusual rain and snow, and my fields were underwater for months.

    All told, the flooding in the Missouri and Souris river basins that year caused more than $2 billion in damages and my state had three declarations of major disasters. The devastation contributed to record high prices of grains for consumers like you.

    Because of these companies’ inaction, things continue to get worse on my farm and many like it across the Midwest. The once regular rains have given way to long periods of dryness followed by drenches of four to five inches at a time that damage our corn and soybeans in the standing water left behind. Sudden powerful bursts of wind up to 90 miles an hour slam into our farm several times a summer now, knocking over irrigation systems and ripping our buildings.

    Despite this, neither General Mills nor Kellogg publicly report on agricultural emissions through the industry-standard Carbon Disclosure Project. This is something that the vast majority of food and beverage companies are already doing, so I wonder if they are trying to hide something from consumers.

    Now we have a huge opportunity for these companies to ensure a sustainable source of revenue for the future. Anything that is ultimately good for the earth is good for people. Please sign to support farmers like me!

    Sign Richard’s Petition

  99. Sasha says:

    “Land taken over by foreign investors could feed 550m people”

    Land grabbing in Africa and Asia for export and biofuel crops is keeping populations malnourished and hungry.

    “The world already produces enough food for everyone, yet one in eight people go to bed hungry every night, many of whom are the very people who rely for food on land that big agribusinesses are targeting,” said Hannah Stoddart, head of policy for food and climate change at Oxfam. “Stronger land rights are crucial to ensure that affected communities do not lose out.” She said investment in small-scale farming and more sustainable agricultural practices could reduce hunger for the poorest people.

    The new analysis, published on Friday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, calculated the potential maximum crop yield from every known land grab deal over 200 hectares from 2000-2013 and then used the crop’s food calories to determine the amount of people it could feed. The analysis also revealed that while 43% of grabbed land is in Africa, it is the more productive land and more nutritious crops in countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea that could provide the most food.

    “Policymakers need to be aware that if this food were used to feed the local populations it would be sufficient to abate malnourishment in each of these countries, even without investments aiming to increase yields,” said Prof Maria Cristina Rulli from Politecnico di Milano in Italy, one of the research team.

    The hungry poor can praise Al Gore for saving the planet by making them starve; (notice that Gore himself never goes without food).

  100. Michael D says:

    From the BBC:
    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-28041525

    The government may have failed to protect the interests of bill payers when awarding green energy contracts, says the National Audit Office (NAO). Eight long-term deals worth £16.6bn were signed earlier this year to secure projects at risk of cancellation.

    The NAO says too much money was awarded to these renewable sources “without price competition” and is concerned this could ultimately increase costs.

    The NAO highlights the fact that the money will generate just 5% of the renewable electricity required by 2020.

    It is also concerned that the department made its decision to commit consumer funding, not on the basis of price competition …

  101. PeteJ says:

    WUWT???

    http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/18076/

    At least when Simon and Ehrlich made their wager they had concrete terms specifying who the winner will be. Perhaps $10k if the global temp is lower 10 years out?

  102. pouncer says:

    A wonderful discussion of “data peeking” that fails, utterly, to mention examples in climate science….

    http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/can-social-scientists-save-themselves-human-behavior-78858/

  103. ShrNfr says:

    The latest grant whoring example is the development of a “super-chicken” that will be tolerant of the higher temperatures that will result from CAGW. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-26/research-could-lead-to-a-new-breed-of-superchicken.html

  104. NZ Willy says:

    Just a brief reminder about the polarizing lens on the orbiting satellite. Before 2008 the Arctic ice extent charts showed an upwards bump on 1 July when the polarizing lenses were switched from Antarctic to Arctic mode — this was so that Arctic melt ponds would not be interpreted as open water. The reverse switch was on 1 January so was not evident on the charts because it was at the edge. Anyway, people complained about the bump so they decided to “improve” the chart by gradually turning the polarizing lens. This rapidly became carte blanche for turning the lens any way they wanted, and accounts for much of the symmetry seen nowadays — when the Artic ice anomaly rises, the Antarctic anomaly falls, and so on. Today we see the Antarctic ice anomaly rising to record levels even as the Arctic ice anomaly is oddly dropping even as the ice edge is strong — this is because the Arctic ice concentration has dropped to about 75% – 80% all across the ice cap — because the melt ponds are all being interpreted as open water (see the washed out orange color on the ice concentration map). It’s just that they’ve turned that polarizing lens all the way into Antarctic mode to report as low an Arctic ice area as possible– which thus causes the reported Antarctic ice extent to skyrocket.

    This account is short of citations because they are hard to find, but everything I’ve seen in the past few years is consistent with this interpretation. What’s needed is someone in the satellite data area to come forth and tell the reality.

  105. Mycroft says:

    See the BBC has enforced its view on AGW!! SHOCKING for free speech and unbiased journalism
    http://conservativewoman.co.uk/david-keighley-bbc-arrogantly-censors-free-speech-climate-change/

  106. Auto says:

    Where do they teach them?
    I’ve just had a call from one of the proliferating scams – although this might be a genuine attempt to earn a crust.
    ‘Options in Conjunction with the Government’ [nothing if you google them . . . ] called, trying to get me to have a ‘no-obligation’ solar panel assessment – not for the Chinese type, oh no! – but the German type, which I was assured, will be photovoltaic, and would also be ‘self-funded’, which I think might be their script’s way of saying it’ll pay for itself, but sounded like it would mean that I paid for it!
    And it would work off daylight, too.
    And it would provide all my power needs. now, I don’t run a nine-room cannabis farm, but I did voice my doubts . . . .
    But the great thing, I was told, was that, at the end of the day, all the electricity I had not used would be sold back to the National Grid. It had been stored in the panels I was told, and, when it got dark [at a time that I might like some electricity for lighting, say] it would all flow back to the NG! I queried this, but was assured that it would go back at the end of the day!
    And I’d get paid!

    Now, you’ve probably guessed that, living in the UK, where we have an energy policy that seems designed to turn off all our lights, thanks to Ed Miliband, Christopher Huhne, and Ed Davey [only one of whom has been imprisoned for perjury, so far], such seems interesting, if only due to our weather – and the fact it’s dark half the time, apparently!
    But the education of those who devised the scripts [or the cunning, assuming that three quarters of the population would believe the script] is frightening.

    Auto

  107. Sasha says:

    16 Democratic Assembly Members and California Chamber of Commerce makes lawsuit against the state’s Air Resources Board that cap-and-trade revenues constitute an illegal tax

    “We are concerned about the impact of the AB 32 cap-and-trade program on our constituents,” they wrote, adding that “many of the areas we represent are still struggling with double digit unemployment.” They explain that cap and trade’s carbon permitting “was not intended to be a funding mechanism for massive, new State efforts at greenhouse gas reductions.” They don’t identify any programs by name, but this year’s budget appropriates $250 million of the proceeds from carbon permit auctions, and 25% of all future revenues, for high-speed rail. The state budget analyst predicts the auctions will raise between $12 billion and $45 billion in revenue by 2020.

    Assembly Democrats fear that applying cap and trade to fuels will cause an immediate jump in prices at the pump. While estimates vary, an increase of about fifteen cents per gallon is likely and a much larger jump is possible. Senate President Darrell Steinberg has warned that gas prices could shoot up by 40 cents per gallon. The Assembly Democrats point out, cap and trade is “hurting the most vulnerable members of our communities.” Most of the letter’s 16 signatories represent heavily minority and low-income regions in Los Angeles, the Central Valley and Inland Empire. Nine are black or Latino.

    California’s gas prices, which typically run 40 to 50 cents above the national average, are already the highest in the US due to the state’s fuel blending requirements and taxes—which also top the other 49 states. The Boston Consulting Group predicted in 2012 that cap and trade and the state’s carbon fuel standard would drive up gas prices between $0.49 and $1.83 per gallon by 2020. These green regulations are intended to raise the cost of gas to encourage people to drive less or buy electric cars.

    It’s nice to see some California liberals place the interest of their poor constituents over the party’s rich, Tesla-driving friends. If only Governor Jerry Brown and President Obama would do the same.

  108. Pamela Gray says:

    A fox news snippet about nitrous oxide emissions. The little snippet has a cheerful gal discussing air quality improvement and links to nitrous oxide emissions and asthma. Funny. CO2 wasn’t mentioned. So they are changing the narrative to say that continued efforts to reduce whatever will help asthma sufferers. But I thought it was CO2 that caused asthma? /sarc

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/3645976727001/satellite-images-reveal-better-air-quality/#sp=show-clips
    http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/nitrogen.html

  109. Kauaibrad says:

    OH $HIT! That lady @LenarWhitney just Bought the whole can of WhoopA$$! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BzItCPk5j4 … #tcot #globalwarming

  110. Gail Combs says:

    Sad News we just lost another Warrior: Nigel Calder, 1931-2014

    From: The Global Warming Policy Foundation
    The science writer Nigel Calder has died, aged 82, after a short illness.

    http://www.thegwpf.org/nigel-calder-1931-2014/

    Jo Calder has left a comment on Nigel’s blog\http://calderup.wordpress.com/2014/06/27/ive-gotta-be-driftin-along/

  111. CrossBorder says:

    There’s one born every minute.

    “Solar Roadway drive nets $2.2M”

    http://www.bonnercountydailybee.com/news/local/article_36c39784-f9ba-11e3-ae18-0019bb2963f4.html

  112. Warren in New Zealand says:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11284185


    Is climate change destabilising Iraq?

    By Eric Holthaus
    2:48 PM Sunday Jun 29, 2014

    Save
    Like on Facebook 5
    Post on LinkedIn 0
    +1 on Google+ 0

    Climate Change
    Droughts
    Economy
    Electricity

    Environment
    Iraq
    Middle East
    Middle East Conflict

    An Iraqi woman walks in a field beside a temporary displacement camp for Iraqis caught-up in the fighting in and around the city of Mosul in Kalak, Iraq. Photo / Getty Images
    An Iraqi woman walks in a field beside a temporary displacement camp for Iraqis caught-up in the fighting in and around the city of Mosul in Kalak, Iraq. Photo / Getty Images

    This winter was not a good one for farmers in the Fertile Crescent.

    A punishing drought hit most of Syria and northern Iraq during what’s normally the wettest time of the year. In the mountains of eastern Turkey, which form the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, snow and rain were less than half of normal. The region has seen one of the worst droughts in decades.

    Drought is becoming a fixture in the parched landscape, due to a drying trend of the Mediterranean and Middle East region fueled by global warming. The last major drought in this region (2006-2010) finished only a few years ago. When taken in combination with other complex drivers, increasing temperatures and drying of agricultural land is widely seen as assisting in the destabilization of Syria under the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Before civil war broke out there, farmers abandoned their desiccated fields and flooded the cities with protests. A series of U.N. reports released earlier this year found that global warming is already destabilizing nation states around the world, and Syria has been no exception.

  113. Ken Robinson says:

    Are you going to look into this: http://sciencealert.com.au/news/20142606-25756.html

  114. Mike H. says:

    Editorial from the Washington Times on the Supreme Court following the EPA. It mentions Steve Goddard’s blog.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/23/editorial-rigged-science/

  115. RACookPE1978 says:

    Antarctic Sea ice anomaly sets a new satellite-era record – exceeding 2.04 million square kilometers !

  116. Ben says:

    Good article about drought and excess water usage in Nevada. Las Vegas is close to losing half of it’s water supply lines, if Lake Mead’s water level falls below it.

    From the article:

    “The race to stop Las Vegas from running dry”

    Amid a brutal drought the reservoir that supplies 90 per cent of Las Vegas’s water is fast disappearing and desperate attempts to save Sin City are under way”

    Lake Mead’s water level is currently at 1,087ft above sea level. There are two pipes, known as “straws”, that take water from it to Las Vegas

    The first extracts water at an elevation of 1,050ft and is likely to be sucking at air, rather than water, soon. The second straw is at 1,000ft.
    Lake Mead is expected to fall another 20ft towards that critical point by the end of this year.

    “I go boating on Lake Mead and I’ve watched it dry up. It’s just astonishing. You see a rock poking out and then three weeks later it’s 15ft high. I don’t know what they are going to do.”

    One proposal is for landlocked Nevada to pay billions of dollars to build solar-powered desalination plants in the Pacific off Mexico, taking Mexico’s share of Colorado River water in exchange.

    But Mr Mrowka said: “The Colorado is essentially a dying river. Ultimately, Las Vegas and our civilisation in the American South West is going to disappear, like the Indians did before us.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10932785/The-race-to-stop-Las-Vegas-from-running-dry.html

  117. Gary Barnes says:

    Have you seen the video from John Coleman’s site. The interview with E. Michael Smith about the reduction in weather stations used for surface temperature records? I am almost sure that you must have. If you have, is this a significant piece of the puzzle as to the increase in surface temperatures from the 1990′s on?

  118. Gil Dewart says:

    Is an unstable Middle East muddying our climate data? Are we receiving credible weather reports from the areas of Syria and Iraq occupied by “ISIS”? Or do they crucify meteorologits as part of their dogma (false prophets?). If they do establish some kind of “state” will it be welcomed into the WMO and IPCC along with a bunch of other psychopath-ruled regimes? Inquiring minds want to know!

  119. Chris says:

    Milankovitch theory describes the collective effects of changes in the Earth’s movements upon its climate, named after Serbian geophysicist and astronomer Milutin Milanković, who worked on it during his internment as a First World War prisoner of war (POW).

    Milanković mathematically theorized that variations in eccentricity,axial tilt, and precession of the Earth’s orbit determined climatic patterns on Earth through orbital forcing.

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

  120. kbray in california says:

    Hi An-thony.

    I just did a google search for “climate change”.

    WUWT came up on the 17th page.

    I thought that you adding “climate change” to your heading quite some time ago would move you higher up the google search engine results…

    Is there a reason you still don’t come up on the first or second page?

  121. SandyInLimousin says:

    Anthony
    a further update on Luling data. Looks like the numbers are in a constant state of change.

    http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/06/29/luling-keeps-changing/

    Could it be that there is a programme running every month which is doing an adjustment which was only supposed to run once, alternatively they may just be addicted to changing stuff.

  122. Sasha says:

    kbray in california says:

    I just did a google search for “climate change”.
    WUWT came up on the 17th page.
    …Is there a reason you still don’t come up on the first or second page?

    Actually, “climate change” brings up WUWT on page 21 and “global warming” lists WUWT on page 13, which is remarkable considering it is the foremost site on this subject, gets the highest number of unique visitors year on year, and is linked to and quoted so often even by its critics.

    The reason is because google’s owners, which include Al Gore, have a policy of manipulating the search returns to promote the Church of Global Warming and the Carbon Dioxide religion and exclude to the maximum extent any heretics who question their scripture and doctrine.

  123. Jimbo says:

    We are doomed.

    Eureka Alert – 29-Jun-2014
    High CO2 levels cause warming in the tropics

    …….Project leader and Director of the Cabot Institute, Professor Richard Pancost said: “These results confirm what climate models have long predicted – that although greenhouse gases cause greater warming at the poles they also cause warming in the tropics. Such findings indicate that few places on Earth will be immune to global warming and that the tropics will likely experience associated climate impacts, such as increased tropical storm intensity.”

    The scientists focussed their attention on the South China Sea which is at the fringe of a vast warm body of water, the West Pacific Warm Pool (WPWP)……
    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-06/uob-hcl062614.php

  124. Rich says:

    Climate change is likely to cut Antarctica’s 600,000-strong emperor penguin population by at least a fifth by 2100, a study suggests
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-28089988
    Satellite measurements of Antarctic sea-ice extent show winter coverage to be at record levels. However, climate computer modelling expects this trend to be reversed in the future, as conditions in the Antarctic warm.

    Is there anything computer modelling can’t predict?

  125. Jim Ryan says:

    Kevin Williamson has an article on the abuse of science in political debate in the latest National Review (on dead tree.) It is characteristically brilliant. The gist is that science is used as a cudgel by people who know nothing about science and ignore it when it contradicts their views. Quite insightful.

  126. Hi Anthony, for the first time I noticed when I Googled “Global warming” with 31 million refs, it was surpassed by “global cooling” with 37 million refs.

    REPLY: Yeah, true, but it is a false result. Try it with quote marks included to force search for the exact phrase. Then warming outnumbers cooling 10 to 1. – Anthony

  127. Gil Dewart says:

    June 30 is the anniversary of the “Tunguska Event” of 1908, an extraterrestrial impact “air burst” over Siberia in 1908. It raises many interesting questions, including the role of atmospheric carbon dioxide as a protective shield.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event

  128. Latitude says:

    Anthony…..this deserves it’s own post…

    NOAA Reinstates July 1936 As The Hottest Month On Record

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, criticized for manipulating temperature records to create a warming trend, has now been caught warming the past and cooling the present.

    July 2012 became the hottest month on record in the U.S. during a summer that was declared “too hot to handle” by NASA scientists. That summer more than half the country was experiencing drought and wildfires had scorched more than 1.3 million acres of land, according to NASA.

    According to NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in 2012, the “average temperature for the contiguous U.S. during July was 77.6°F, 3.3°F above the 20th century average, marking the warmest July and all-time warmest month on record for the nation in a period of record that dates back to 1895.”

    “The previous warmest July for the nation was July 1936, when the average U.S. temperature was 77.4°F,” NOAA said in 2012.

    This statement by NOAA was still available on their website when checked by The Daily Caller News Foundation. But when meteorologist and climate blogger Anthony Watts went to check the NOAA data on Sunday he found that the science agency had quietly reinstated July 1936 as the hottest month on record in the U.S.

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/30/noaa-quietly-reinstates-july-1936-as-the-hottest-month-on-record/#ixzz369vSm4WI

  129. View from the Solent says:

    http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/06/30/205249/ninety-nine-percent-of-the-oceans-plastic-is-missing?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed
    “Millions of tons. That’s how much plastic should be floating in the world’s oceans, given our ubiquitous use of the stuff. But a new study finds that 99% of this plastic is missing. One disturbing possibility: Fish are eating it. If that’s the case, “there is potential for this plastic to enter the global ocean food web,” says Carlos Duarte, an oceanographer at the University of Western Australia, Crawley. “And we are part of this food web.”

    Perhaps it’s hiding behind the missing heat

  130. climatemodel says:

    Hi Anthony,
    WUWT readership would likely find this post I have been working on interesting:
    http://climatemodel.org/2014/06/18/statistical-models-of-el-nino-and-the-late-pleistocene/
    WUWT is welcome to repost this in full.
    Thanks
    David.

  131. Non Nomen says:

    Projected continent-wide declines of the emperor penguin under climate change
    Once again predictions made under the influence of erroneous and manipulated IPCC-models.

    http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2280.html

    “We analyse global population trends of the emperor penguin (Aptenodytes forsteri), an iconic Antarctic top predator, under the influence of sea ice conditions projected by coupled climate models assessed in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) effort4. We project the dynamics of all 45 known emperor penguin colonies5 by forcing a sea-ice-dependent demographic model6, 7 with local, colony-specific, sea ice conditions projected through to the end of the twenty-first century. Dynamics differ among colonies, but by 2100 all populations are projected to be declining. “

  132. crosspatch says:

    Suggestion for the Sea Ice page: For the webcam image for the floating buoy, use the Webcam 2 image and link and not Webcam 1. Webcam 1 tipped over some time ago and now appears to have malfunctioned (possibly got wet?). Webcam 2 is the only one functioning.

  133. NikFromNYC says:

    New type of diesel piston engine has no crankshaft and generates electricity instead of torque by simply moving a magnet back and forth for a very high efficiency:

    http://www.roadandtrack.com/go/out-of-turn-toyota-engine

  134. Pat Frank says:

    For the ‘Great Things Going on in Science’ Department

    Just got an email about a seminar at Stanford on some very positive science:

    “Restoration of Sight with Photovoltaic Subretinal Prosthesis”

    Speaker: Daniel Palanker (Stanford University)
    Wednesday, July 2, 2014
    Kavli Auditorium, 1:30PM

    Abstract: “Retinal degeneration leads to blindness due to gradual loss of photoreceptors. Information can be reintroduced into the visual system by patterned electrical stimulation of the remaining retinal neurons. Photovoltaic subretinal prosthesis directly converts light into pulsed electric current in each pixel, stimulating the nearby inner retinal neurons. Visual information is projected onto the retina by video goggles using pulsed near-infrared (~900nm) light. This design avoids the use of bulky implants with power supplies, decoding electronics and wiring, thereby greatly reducing the surgical complexity. Optical activation of the photovoltaic pixels allows scaling the implants to thousands of electrodes, and multiple modules can be tiled under the retina to expand the visual field.

    “Subretinal arrays with 70μm photovoltaic pixels provide highly localized stimulation: retinal ganglion cells respond to alternating gratings with the stripe width of a single pixel, which is half of the native resolution in rat retina (~30μm). Similarly to normal vision, retinal response to prosthetic stimulation exhibits flicker fusion at high frequencies (>20 Hz), adaptation to static images, and non-linear summation of subunits in the receptive fields. In rats with retinal degeneration, the photovoltaic subretinal arrays restore visual acuity up to half of its normal level, as measured by the cortical response to alternating gratings. If these results translate to human retina, such implants could restore visual acuity up to 20/250. With eye scanning and perceptual learning, human patients might even cross the 20/200 threshold of legal blindness. Ease of implantation and tiling of these wireless modules to cover a large visual field, combined with high resolution opens the door to highly functional restoration of sight.”

    Here’s Palanker’s website page describing his sight-restoration project:
    http://web.stanford.edu/~palanker/lab/retinalpros.html

    Amazing stuff.

  135. Bruce Foutch says:

    “Unipolar model of the world has failed” – Vladimir Putin

    I saw this today and thought how appropriate this would be to describe the almost universal media and alarmist focus on the Arctic sea ice extent while ignoring the antarctic. Of course, Putin was talking about something else entirely:
    http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/738488

  136. cjames says:

    As of July 1, Dr. Judith Curry has stepped down as Chair of the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech. She has been replaced by Dr. Greg Huey.

  137. Roger Sowell says:

    A hybrid super-capacitor/battery without the weakness of traditional lead-acid batteries. Axion’s batteries are penetrating the highly lucrative frequency regulation market on the grid, easily beating out natural gas power plant response times. Validating the new technology, the company just received a $1,100,000 purchase for four more PowerCube energy storage systems from a NJ-based solar installer, where the Cubes will store energy from a commercial solar panel system and provide short bursts of power to the frequency regulation market on the PJM grid.

    http://chenected.aiche.org/video/new-battery-is-changing-the-grid/

    No hype. Just better technology. Making wind and solar more and more attractive.

  138. Warren in New Zealand says:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11286562
    The report, which analyzed the work of 90 experts over three years, said Caribbean reefs have declined by more than 50 percent since the 1970s. It said that while many experts have blamed climate change for the problem, a drop in the populations of parrotfish and sea urchins is largely responsible.

    Parrotfish and sea urchins feed off seaweed, and a drop in their numbers has led to an increase in seaweed, which smothers coral reefs, Jeremy Jackson, lead author of the report, said.

    “The situation is truly horrific in the sense that you have all these places that are desperately overfished,” Jackson said in a phone interview from Australia.

    He said the main culprits in reef degradation are overfishing, coastal degradation and diseases introduced to the region.

    Willis has been saying this for how long now? 3 years? more?

  139. Bob F says:

    Nature will investigate how it reviews articles… shame it cant be retrospective

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28124749

  140. Mac the Knife says:

    Anthony,
    A positive story of science developing the tools to restore sight to many blind people. The process for regrowing corneas and restoring sight has been demonstrated in mice.
    Mac

    Researchers regrow corneas using adult human stem cells
    Boston researchers have successfully regrown human corneal tissue – a feat that could potentially restore vision in the blind. The achievement also marks one of the first times that scientists have constructed tissue using adult-derived human stem cells.
    http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/02/researchers-successfully-regrow-corneas-using-adult-human-stem-cells/?intcmp=features

  141. Merrick says:

    Perhaps someone knows more about the information in the graphics over at NOAA and can help me understand what appears to be a major discrepancy in the information presented over at the National Hurricane Center. Here is the email I just sent them:

    Hello,

    I’m looking at the 2014-June-02-1400EDT Intermediate Advisory (7A) for Tropical Storm Arthur and it calls for hurricane development during the day on Thursday and most of the weather forecasts I have seen are calling for 85 MPH sustained winds Friday. But if I look at the Hurricane Wind Speed Probability for the same update is shows a maximum probability of hurricane force winds at <30% in the center of the storm path for the next 5 days (wouldn't it have to be 100% somewhere is a hurricane is predeictied?) and the Tropical Storm Force Wind Speed Probabilities for the same update shows <100% probability of tropical storm force winds anywhere on land for the next 5 days. Additionally, looking at US Rainfall Potential for the same update indicates much less than 2" of rain anywhere on land for the next 5 days. In fact, none of the other graphics presented with the Warnings/Cone Static Images graphic which predicts hurricane formation seem to be at all consistent with hurricane formation. Can you please comment on that?

    With best regards

  142. Leo Morgan says:

    HI Anthony,
    I ask your forebearance for the length of my posting.
    I am frustrated beyond belief by the number of websites that censor the climate debate, regardless of how factual and courteous the contributor might be.
    I would like you to consider writing a lead about the widespread censorship of the debate. I am contemplating creating a blog simply to publicise the censorship. I would appreciate any advice you might have on the subject.
    In the interim, I have ben repeatedly censored on Tamino’s blog. (I’m glad of the first instance, it turns out I was factually wrong. He could justifiably have mocked me. But his opposition to letting any view he disagrees with being heard is outrageous.) I have just submitted a comment in response to his article suggesting Patrick Moore was not a co-founder of Greenpeace. I expect that this too will be censored. I’d like your indulgence to display here exactly what it is that Tamino finds too threatening to publish. If I’m wrong and he does publish it, I apologise in advance. But I don’t expect it:

    I’m writing about your article “Who founded Greenpeace? Not Patrick Moore.”
    Tamino, you say “I would love to hear him (Moore) explain this one”.
    He did so back in 2010. (1)
    You can easily disprove this claim by Greg Laden on Scienceblogs (2). Just go to the Greenpeace website,(3) or the Wikipedia article on Greenpeace(4).
    Laden claims Greenpeace was founded in 1970. Greenpeace itself disagrees. On their website they claim 1971 as their founding year. (3 Ibid)
    They identify the activists who sailed on the Phyllis Cormack as the founders of Greenpeace. Moore was one of those activists, on that sailing.
    Their website identifies that trip as the birth of Greenpeace. Moore was on that trip. He provides a screen capture of the organisation’s website as of 2007, which lists the dozen people on board that ship. (5) There were journalists, crew, scientists and three Greenpeace members including Moore himself, explicitly listed as a Greenpeace member.
    Laden’s fallacy is his identification of the embryo organisation that grew into Greenpeace with Greenpeace itself. That might perhaps be arguable; if it weren’t for the fact Greenpeace itself doesn’t think so. Or that the predecessor group had a different goal, membership and name. That goal was solely and explicitly to oppose the American underground nuclear test at Amchitka (6).
    Moore has many achievements each of which entitles him to be called a co-founder of Greenpeace:
    • He was a director of Greenpeace International from its very first day.
    • He was one of those who conducted the negotiations that created Greenpeace International.
    • He was president of the predecessor (and subsequently subordinate) organisation of Greenpeace International, the Greenpeace Foundation, before Greenpeace International was formed.
    • He was a member of the Greenpeace Foundation from its very first day in 1972.
    • He was a member of the predecessor organisation, the Don’t Make A Wave Committee before it was called Greenpeace.
    • He was one of those responsible for the organisation calling itself Greenpeace(6).
    • He was one of the three people Greenpeace later identified as Greenpeace members who participated in the activity Greenpeace calls the birth of Greenpeace.
    Even if we ignore all the above, and disagree with Greenpeace itself, and grant Laden his premise, it is still not inappropriate to call Moore a founder of the Don’t Make A Wave Committee, given that he was an active member (as a researcher) for the organisation before its first ever public protest action. (7)
    Moore’s 2010 article was in response to the first draft of this Orwellian attempt to make him an unperson, produced by a naïf who did not appreciate the difference between the Phyllis Cormack and the Rainbow Warrior, which Moore was also on. This attempted rewriting of history is an affront to the intellectual integrity of those who practice it and those who are subjected to it. We don’t love Big Brother.
    1. http://www.beattystreetpublishing.com/who-are-the-founders-of-greenpeace-2/
    2. http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/06/27/who-founded-greenpeace-not-patrick-moore/
    3. http://www.greenpeace.org/australia/en/about/history/
    4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace
    5. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/about/history/founders/
    6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_Make_a_Wave_Committee
    7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenpeace#History
    8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_(environmentalist)

  143. Quinn says:

    Climate Change ‘Experts’ Didn’t See This Coming: Rising Water Levels In The Great Lakes

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/02/climate-change-experts-didnt-see-this-coming-rising-water-levels-in-the-great-lakes/

    “Scientists warned communities that they could only expect more tragedy with the Great Lakes. With a lack of rain from climate change, they told everyone to expect levels to continue to drop. Even last week, Canadian news outlet CTV News reported that sinking water levels in the Great Lakes could have severe economic impacts and cost the U.S. and Canada billions of dollars. Mark Fisher, the leader of the Mowat Centre for the Council of the Great Lakes Region, said the downturn could be severe.”

    “But scientists cannot ignore the rapid increase of water levels that has occurred in Great Lakes since the conclusion of the study. The New York Times reported that levels are rising at a remarkable rate.”

  144. CaligulaJones says:

    In more “the science is settled”, and “but it was peer reviewed!” nonsense:

    http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2014/07/02/stem_cell_studies_retracted_after_extensive_errors_found.html

  145. Anthony Watts says:

    Leo,
    There is no point trying to argue with Greg Laden, he has no honor, he’ll never admit to being wrong – Anthony

  146. Antarctic sea ice hits second all-time record in a week
    http://talkingabouttheweather.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/antarctic-sea-ice-hits-second-all-time-record-in-a-week/

    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,

    Over the phone, I asked Serreze if he could clarify what was heating the water. His full response is below:

    What we’re talking about is water that is 60 degrees south and more southerly than that, and so the basic thing is you have got surrounding the Antarctic continent a band of fairly strong and somewhat steady west-east winds, which they call the Roaring 40s, but then you’ve got this thing called the coriolis force, which wants to turn things to the left. What happens is that water at the high latitudes, what happens is that as we heat that water, you set up what’s called an Ekman drift, which at the surface transports that water from the high southern latitudes toward the equator.

    What happens is you have to set up a continuity that has to occur so that what happens is that there’s an upwelling of cold waters from below, there’s a whole circulation loop where water sinks in the lower southern latitudes, then there’s a return flow that brings the same amount of mass to the higher latitudes.

    Basically, what happens is that in the Arctic you can warm that surface water up and it doesn’t get transported away. It stays there, and it helps melt more ice, but in the Antarctic, the water gets carried away.

    I thanked Serreze for his response but told him that I still didn’t know what heated the water at high latitudes. Was it, simply, global warming?

    “Exactly!” he said.

    “How many degrees is the water heated, before it is transported toward the equator?” I asked.

    “I don’t have data on that,” Serreze said. He indicated that Marika Holland, a sea ice specialist and climate modeler at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, would possibly have some data as well as, perhaps, a fuller description of the mechanism warming the water nearest Antarctica and the associated growth of sea ice.

    Holland did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

    Gavin Schmidt, director of Goddard Institute for Space Studies, also did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

  147. pat says:

    ***least strings attached? bribes?

    2 July: Reuters: Alister Doyle: UN green fund to seek cash in November; poor want $15 billion
    Green fund seen intended to unlock global climate deal.
    “Now it’s time to mobilise money,” Hela Cheikhrouhou, executive director of the Green Climate Fund, told Reuters after two days of talks in Oslo among more than 20 nations about the legal details of cash pledges.
    ***”What matters is that we raise as much as possible as early as possible with the least strings attached as possible.”…
    Rich nations gave developing nations $10 billion in climate aid a year from 2010 to 2012 and aim to raise it to $100 billion from 2020. Sapped by years of austerity, they have not mapped out how they will raise the amounts in the years up to 2020.
    ***Cheikhrouhou said the fund so far has $55 million, largely for its own administration and to help countries plan, including $10 million from Seoul and $23 million from Germany. She said the fund was primarily seeking cash grants rather than loans…
    “Financing is a prerequisite for having the developing world as part of a global compact” he (Norwegian Foreign Minister Boerge Brende) said…
    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/07/02/climatechange-cash-idUKL6N0PD2LH20140702

    Point Carbon has the following story, but no MSM picking it up, so can’t excerpt, but found the details here:

    2 July: Montel Norway: Nora Kamprath Buli: Frankfurt prosecutor raises new emissions VAT-fraud charge
    Frankfurt prosecutors on Wednesday said they have raised criminal charges against a British citizen accused of evading EUR 30m in tax payments from emissions trading deals.
    The accused was arrested in the UK on 21 January and has been in police custody in Germany since 16 April, the German prosecutor’s office said.
    Between September 2009 and April 2010 the man was managing director of a Frankfurt-based company and involved at the so-called “buffer level” in a carousel VAT-fraud scheme in connection with the trading of European CO2 allowances.
    The man is part of the same carousel scheme that led to the arrest of one of the scheme’s main organisers in Las Vegas, Nevada, in May, Frankfurt prosecutor spokesman Alexander Badle told Montel…
    Around 150 suspects are being investigated as part of the case that started in 2010, Badle said, calling it “the most extensive tax evasion case our unit has been handling over the past few years”.
    As part of the investigations, six people were sentenced in December 2011 and two in April this year.
    The investigation focuses on the top members of the fraud scheme, many of whom are often hiding outside of Germany, Badle said…
    http://www.montel.no/StartPage/SubPage.aspx?id=527751

  148. Warren in New Zealand says:

    http://divermag.com/snorkel-relay-sedna-expedition/
    The latest lunacy
    An intrepid team of 10 women divers are preparing for the experience of a lifetime snorkeling the arctic with a little help from their expedition namesake, Sedna, Inuit Goddess of the Sea

    In July 2016, the team of passionate women divers will embark on an epic three-month journey, snorkeling over 1,865 miles (3,000km) through frigid Arctic seas from Pond Inlet, Nunavut, to Inuvik, Northwest Territories. Supported by a mother ship equipped with two rigid hull inflatables, the snorkelers will scout and document the impacts of global warming on this fragile arctic ecosystem and on the aboriginal peoples’ traditional ways of life.

    Before tackling the 100-day Northwest Passage snorkel relay, ‘Team Sedna’ will embark on a 15-day, action-packed proof-of-concept expedition in July of this year. Traveling aboard the 116-foot (35m) MV Cape Race, along the Labrador coast to Baffin Island and across the Davis Strait to Western Greenland, the participants will conduct team-building exercises and, importantly, demonstrate that snorkelers—using diver propulsion vehicles—can successfully ‘go the distance’ through ice-infested arctic waters. This summer’s schedule also includes oceanographic studies, educational outreach in Inuit communities and shooting topside and underwater footage for a two-part television series.

    Where does the stupidity begin or end?

  149. Michael Larkin says:

    Anthony, I’ve seen your response to my post in the “A Cool Question, Answered?” thread, which you have now closed.

    I didn’t mean to cast aspersions on you personally: my high regard for you remains unaltered. I know it’s a hard job you do and that you can’t be moderating every post. My present annoyance is not with you, but with a couple of individuals who in my opinion have behaved atrociously. It’s left a sour taste in my mouth and I just don’t feel as enthusiastic about coming here. I hold Jo Nova and David Evans in high regard too, whether or not the notch model turns out to be correct. It feels like friends have been insulted for no good reason that I can see and I felt I had to say how much that has disappointed me.

    Maybe in time my annoyance will attenuate. But please, don’t think my main issue is with you personally–though I do fear that your blog stats might be negatively affected.

  150. JustAnotherPoster says:

    Mann has released a new paper. Whats really interesting is the four temperature graphs and the temperature change estimates…..

    http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/Mann/articles/articles/PaaijmansEtAlCCOnline14.pdf

    We present GCM and DS estimates for recent historic conditions

    the graphs are FLAT

    There is absolutely no change in temperature whats so ever.

    Copy of the graphs screenshotted and uploded elsewhere

    http://imgbox.com/NriV9yXH

    DS

    Mean T Change 0.02±0.01 (0.01–0.03)

    Mann has somehow written a climate change paper using a site that basically has has absolutely ZERO temperature change from 1981–2000.

    We can accurately read temperatures to 0.01 of a degree ?

    How on earth this has been published i’ll never know.

    I haven’t done maths formally since school His calculations stand out a mile as being wrong.

    Managing to write a paper linking climate change in an area where there hasn’t been any to Malria takes some skill.

  151. Crispin in Waterloo but really in Singapore says:

    Obama grants wind industry permit to kill eagles, ruffling more than feathers

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/2/california-grants-wind-industry-permit-to-kills-ea/

    By sacrificing a few bald eagles, the Obama administration may have opened a can of worms.

    In a bid to give alternative energy sources a boost, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has quietly granted a California wind energy farm a permit to kill a limited number of endangered bald and golden eagles that get sliced up in its giant turbines. But last week’s free pass is sparking anger from wildlife advocates and from free market advocates who ask why they don’t qualify for the same dispensation.

    ……

    “We know we need renewables, and that’s fine. We’re not saying shut them down, we’re just saying, ‘Hey, enough’s enough, bring them into the same ballpark that everyone else is in,’” said Mr. Johns. “Give them regulations, tell them where they need to site these things, where they shouldn’t site them. Don’t give them a set of, ‘Gee, it would be nice if you did this, but if you don’t, it’s OK.’”

    …….

    Michael Sandoval, an energy analyst with the Independence Institute in Denver, said there is inevitably enormous outrage when sea gulls or ducks are coated with oil after a spill, but much less concern over wind turbines that chop eagles in half or cause bats to explode.

  152. Green Sand says:

    Met Office latest on the El Nino potential:-

    “Is an El Niño on the way and what might its impacts be?”

    The message appears to be:-

    “The current assessment presented in this report is that an El Niño is probable, but that its strength is likely to be moderate, similar to the 2009/10 event.”

    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/k/d/El_Nino_Briefing_Final2.pdf

    Published under “Research News”?

  153. g2-9ed9acc685824c6663c51c5b093476cc says:

    Saw on Gizmodo today a story about the island nation of Kiribati planning to move the entire population (around 50 people) elsewhere because “the island is sinking due to climate change.”

    Except digging into the story it seems the only indicator of the demise of the island is climate models. What’s the reality?

  154. Sun Spot says:

    I recently came across a video link at WUWT, it was either an American Senator or Congressman asking a panel of scientists to raise their hands to affirm President Obama’s pronouncements on Extreme Weather/ClimateChange. NONE of the panel would raise their hand to confirm Obama’s pronouncements. Dose anyone have this link as I cannot seem to locate it and need it to convince a person that President Obama is wrong ?

  155. Pete Kang says:

    Have you heard the $30,000 reward offered by Keating for anyone to disprove man-made global warming?

    http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/07/02/physicist-offers-30000-reward-to-anyone-who-can-disprove-climate-change/

  156. g2-9ed9acc685824c6663c51c5b093476cc says:

    So everyone gets two dollars then?

  157. David L. Hagen says:

    WUWT Readers could win NASA $10,000 jackpot
    NASA Challenge: New Ways to Use, Visualize, and Analyze OpenNEX Climate and Earth Science Data

    NASA is seeking creative new ways to utilize the Climate and Earth Science data recently made available on the Open NASA Earth Exchange (OpenNEX) platform on Amazon Web Services (AWS). This Challenge is being run in conjunction with the 2014 NEX Virtual workshop to engage and enable individuals and groups to provide new contributions and insight to address global climate change.

    This is an Ideation Challenge with a guaranteed award for at least one submitted solution.
    Challenge 9933584
    Deadline: July 31, 2014
    Reward: $10,000

  158. David L. Hagen says:

    $60,000 NASA OpenNEX Challenge
    https://nex.nasa.gov/nex/static/htdocs/site/extra/opennex/

    Challenge goes live on July 1st, 2014
    The OpenNEX challenge, in collaboration among NASA, Amazon Web Services Inc. and Innocentive, invites the general public, climate scientists, software engineers, and data analysts to design and implement concepts that enable climate resilience. There will be $60,000 in prize money available for participants as a reward for their innovations. To learn more click below

  159. Bill P. says:

    Now, if I were a cynic, I would note that:

    1. It is a canon of logic that you cannot “prove a negative.”
    2. A self-proclaimed “climate scientist” would know that.
    3. Making such a bold offer might be construed as pandering to the low-information types who hang on every word of the “climate science experts,” and who might NOT know about “not provign a negative.”
    4. That kind of pandering to low-information types is exactly the kind of thing that we skeptics accuse the “AGW Alarmist” crowd of indulging in constantly.

    Good thing I’m not a cynic.

  160. RACookPE1978 says:

    The Great Pacific Garbage Patch Hoax
    Townhall.com ^ | July 3, 2014 | Debra J. Saunders

    A new study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences could mean bad news for environmental doomsayers. Forget all those warnings about the million tons of plastic debris floating in the ocean. Ignore the photos that you think show the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. Andres Cozar of the University of Cadiz in Spain is the man who once extrapolated the 1 million-ton estimate. Since then, however, he has led research that collected samples at 141 ocean sites. Cozar’s new estimate: Between 7,000 and 35,000 tons of plastic are floating in the ocean.

    Cozar’s team didn’t find country-sized islands of plastic bags strangling baby birds and sea turtles. It found “micro plastics.” What people think of as a dump doesn’t look like floating junk. Instead, ocean current “convergence zones” are swirling with flecks of plastic — like a snow globe a half-minute after you shake it — and with considerably less plastic trash than expected.

    Not that plastic in the ocean is a good thing, but it’s looking to be less of a peril to the planet than once suggested.

    As I read about the Cozar study, I could not help but think of California state Sen. Alex Padilla and his Senate Bill 270, which would ban single-use plastic bags. San Francisco started the plastic bag ban craze in 2007. More than 100 cities in the state have followed as bag ban proponents have shopped two images — of bags in the ocean and of dead marine life.

    The thing is that you don’t find whole shopping bags in convergence zones. Peter Davison, an oceanographer with California’s Farallon Institute for Advanced Ecosystem Research, told me he frequently has seen plastic bags littering harbors, but in the ocean, one is likelier to come across debris from a fishing fleet and bits of plastic from many sources.

    In support of bag bans, the Surfrider Foundation has posted a video that asserts, “Plastics kill 1.5 million marine animals each year.”

    “I have no idea where they got that number,” Joel Baker, environmental science professor at the University of Washington, Tacoma, told me. He has assigned students to track down that number, and “the trail goes cold.”

    Surfrider now uses a different number — 100,000 marine animals. As for the 1.5 million figure, Surfrider senior staff scientist Rick Wilson referred me to a United Nations paper with no specific sourcing. Then he said, “I will admit it’s difficult to track down a definitive scientific study source for it.”

    Factoids are almost as indestructible as plastic.

    Both Davison and Baker can think of animals that have died from plastic; you can see photos on the Internet. But from bags? Davison found chunks of plastic in about 10 percent of 150 ocean fish he dissected. “We don’t know if it kills them or not.”

    Neither Davison nor Baker likes the idea of plastic in the ocean, and neither would say it is not a problem. As Baker put it, “we don’t know what effect it’s having on organisms.”

    We do know, however, that single-use plastic bags require fewer resources than reusable bags — which you have to wash — and paper bags. Plastic bags litter harbors but also represent less than 1 percent of the U.S. municipal waste stream. It’s a mistake to believe that what might replace them would have no downside.

  161. Mick says:

    Hi Anthony, and readers…
    this is new for me…. not sure if has been suggested. It has global temp. anomaly and more climate visualization…. just click under the globe to change perspective.
    http://cci-reanalyzer.org/DailySummary/index_ds.php#
    Kind Regards,
    Mick

  162. Galane says:

    http://www.cnet.com/news/physicist-offers-30000-to-disprove-climate-change/ Dr Christopher Keating is offering a cash reward to anyone who can provide him with proof that man-made climate change isn’t real.

  163. John Slayton says:

    National Geospatial Intelligence Agency? $20 million to study climate change and civil unrest?
    http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2014/07/02/asu-researching-national-security-risks-of-climate-change/12082781/

  164. Kip Hansen says:

    [noted -thanks]

  165. ossqss says:

    Happy 4th of July WUWT’ers!

  166. Bob Koss says:

    Anthony,

    GHCN has changed their priority over-write scheme for the unadjusted files. I assume this is a screw-up, but maybe not. Using the following files it is obvious there has been a change. The flag data and data tallies all point to it.
    Old = ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.2.20140603.qcu.dat June 6th.
    New = ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.2.20140702.qcu.dat July 2nd.

    Here are the correct flags for their data-sources. The readme file in the folder with their data files appears to be incorrect. USHCN data shouldn’t be ranked near CLIMAT data in priority, and isn’t in the following table.
    From:LAWRIMORE ET AL.: OVERVIEW OF GHCN-M TEMPERATURE VERSION 3

    Table 3. Source Data Sets From Which GHCN-M Version 3 is Constructed and Maintained.
    Priority: Data Source: Source Flag
    1: Datzilla (Manual/Expert Assessment): Z
    2: USHCN-M Version 2: U
    3: World Weather Records: W
    4: KNMI Netherlands (DeBilt only): N
    5: Colonial Era Archive: J
    6: MCDW (DSI 3500): M
    7: MCDW quality controlled but not yet published: C
    8: UK Met Office CLIMAT: K
    9: CLIMAT bulletin: P
    10: GHCN-M Version 2: G

    The table indicates when you have multiple data sources for the same month, over-write priority is given to the lowest number in that list. Example: data with flag K(8:) shall be over-written by data with flag C(7:).

    Here is a comparison of the two files for the single year 2013.
    Monthly data by source flag:
    _______C_____K_____P_____U_____total data
    Old___16387__2539__25___10863___29814
    New___20___18441__53___10865___29379

    No data(-9999)__station tally
    Old___2310_____2677
    New__2673_____2671

    Note the reduction in total data and the increase in -9999 data. Six stations have also disappeared from the New file. It appears they have started over-writing MCDW QCed data with CLIMAT data from the Met Office.

    By eyeball it doesn’t seem to affect the USHCN data, nor the 501 stations which I believe are all Australian. Not sure about other specific areas of the world.

    How long this has been going on, I don’t know. 2012 and 2014 also appear to have problems. I assume this change was done recently and is simply projecting back through several years.

    Hope my underscores kept the columns reasonably aligned.

  167. R L says:

    Hi Anthony, It is distressing for me to read about sackings of academic staff and others who have voiced a challenge to aspects of GW.It seems that the list is becoming quite long ,and I wondered if you thought that a permanent link, listing the casualties and their circumstances would worthwhile.No doubt there have been many others who we haven’t heard about. This segment may give them a place to air their stories ,or for others who also feel the injustice to colleagues .

  168. reaping says:

    …. again…

  169. JFA in Montreal says:

    We’re Screwing Up the Oceans So Much, These Fish Can’t Find Their BFFs
    As CO2 levels rise, coral-reef fish seem to lose the ability to recognize each other.
    —By John Metcalfe
    | Tue Jul. 1, 2014 1:04 PM EDT

    http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/07/were-screwing-oceans-so-much-these-fish-cant-find-their-bffs

  170. Allen says:

    BBC wants to eliminate false balance (whatever that means) on science reporting:

    http://io9.com/bbc-institutes-changes-to-prevent-false-balance-in-sc-1600207025?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+io9%2Ffull+%28io9%29

    Perhaps they should take courses on the authority fallacy that biases their science reporting.

  171. John Colaw says:

    I came across something odd in one of your stories from 2008 ( http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/11/16/nevada-ushcn-station-surveys-are-done/ ) You commented that the USHCN station in boulder city NV had closed sometime in the previous 5 years. In an oddity, if you pull up the historic median temps for that station they go all the way to the current date.

    Even stranger, they go all the way back to 1904. Boulder city was purpose built by the government to build the dam, it was empty desert before 1931. Even stranger yet, by eyeball the temperatures shown before the city existed or anyone was there are about 2F cooler.

    http://cdiac.ornl.gov/cgi-bin/broker?id=261071&_PROGRAM=prog.gplot_meanclim_mon_yr2013.sas&_SERVICE=default&param=TMEAN&minyear=1893&maxyear=2013
    link used to get above link:
    http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/ushcn_map_interface.html

    Is this historic data or fantasy data????

  172. Bob Koss says:

    Anthony,

    Minor error in file dates. They are correct in the actual filenames, but while interpreting them into plain language, I inadvertently confused day with month and put June 6th for the date of the older one. It should be June 3rd.

  173. markx says:

    Speaking of computer models, corrections, theoretical calculations, solar cycles, and small measurements of largely unknown processes:

    Top Habitable Exoplanet Candidate Probably Doesn’t Exist
    July 4, 2014 | by Lisa Winter

    The study analyzed the rotational speed of Gliese 581, which had been unknown up until this point. That data was then used to go back to previous observations and correct for the star’s movement that caused excess noise and distorted signals. Those corrections did boost the signal of many super-Earth planets, but diminished the signal for d incredibly while the signal for g was eliminated entirely.

    “Gliese 581d does not exist,” the paper states, “but is an artifact of stellar activity which, when incompletely corrected, causes the false detection of planet g.”

    http://www.iflscience.com/space/top-habitable-exoplanet-candidate-probably-doesnt-exist

    The paper: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2014/07/02/science.1253253

  174. policycritic says:

    BBC staff told to stop inviting cranks on to science programmes
    BBC Trust says 200 senior managers trained not to insert ‘false balance’ into stories when issues were non-contentious

    The BBC’s determination to give a balanced view has seen it pit scientists arguing for climate change against far less qualified opponents such as Lord Lawson who heads a campaign group lobbying against the government’s climate change policies.

    Andrew Montford, who runs the Bishop Hill climate sceptic blog, former children’s television presenter Johnny Ball and Bob Carter, a retired Australian geologist, are among the other climate sceptics that have appeared on the BBC.

    The report highlighted World at One edition in September of a landmark UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) research project which found concluded with 95 per cent certainty that the climate is changing and that human activity is the main cause.

    The programme’s producers tried more than a dozen qualified UK scientists to give an opposing view but could not find one willing to do so – so they went to Mr Carter in Australia.

    Pitted against Energy Secretary Ed Davey, Mr Carter described the findings of the most authoritative report ever undertaken into the science of climate change – put together by hundreds of scientists around the world – as “hocus-pocus science”.

  175. David L. Hagen says:

    EPA Presumes rules & right to garnish wages for its imposed fines without court order.
    Roy Spencer links to
    EPA Harasses Americans

    Chantell and Michael Sackett of Idaho were similarly threatened by the agency with fines of $75,000 per day for seeking to build a home on a small lot situated between two other lots that already had homes, an action the EPA claimed the couple could not even challenge. The Sacketts challenged it anyway, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court, where they won a unanimous verdict. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the court’s decision stating that, “In a nation that values due process, not to mention private property, such treatment is unthinkable.” Scalia went on that “there is no reason to think that the Clean Water Act was uniquely designed to enable the strong-arming of regulated parties into ‘voluntary compliance’ without the opportunity for judicial review—even judicial review of the question whether the regulated party is within the EPA’s jurisdiction.”
    While the Supreme Court may have found that the Sacketts and, consequently, folks like Johnson, do have some recourse to challenge administrative compliance orders from the EPA, those who fall into the agency’s sights may now face a new and crushing hurdle: wage garnishment. Just how many people could endure challenging the EPA’s regulatory actions—no matter how indefensible—if they faced fines that the agency could garnish from their wages? How many can be coerced into “voluntary compliance”?

    Detailed letter opposing the EPA by the Heritage Foundation

  176. PhilW2 says:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/marthagilltech/100013948/i-know-climate-change-nuts-are-annoying-lord-lawson-but-sadly-theyre-right/

    “Martha … has also written for the FT, the Times, and the Guardian, and has appeared on The Today programme, BBC News and Sky News. Previously, she was a staffer at the New Statesman …”
    Says it all really. Continuing the Leftward drift of the once fine Telegraph.
    Oh, and she links to “an excellent piece that shoots down all [Lord Lawson's] arguments”… turns out to be by Bob Ward. Poor girl.

  177. jorgekafkazar says:

    Found this on Twitter: http://www.govexec.com/federal-news/fedblog/2014/06/epa-employees-told-stop-pooping-hallway/87223/

    This explains a lot. Now they’ll just have to go back to crapping on the wealth-producing sectors of the US.

  178. Mark says:

    Presentation explaining how to predict weather, temperature and climate based on the solar cycle modulated by solar magnetic links and the moon.

    https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2014/04/29/piers-corbyn-the-reality-of-long-range-weather-and-climate-forecasting-eu2014/

  179. Not only do these idiots not understand climate, simple genetics and mutation confuses the heck out of them:
    ===
    Climate change could make red hair a thing of the past if Scotland gets sunnier
    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/climate-change-could-make-red-3814089

    REDHEADS could become extinct as Scotland gets sunnier, experts have claimed.

    The gene that causes red hair is thought to be an evolutionary response to the lack of sun in Scotland.

    Redhead colouring allows people to get the maximum vitamin D from what little sun there is.

    Only one to two per cent of the world’s population has red hair but in Scotland the figure is about 13 per cent, or 650,000 people.

    However, the figure could fall dramatically – and even see redheads die out completely in a few centuries – if predictions that the country’s climate is set to become much sunnier are true.

    Dr Alistair Moffat, boss of genetic testing company ScotlandsDNA, said: “We think red hair in Scotland, Ireland and the north of England is adaptation to the climate. We do not get enough sun and have to get all the vitamin D we can.

    “If it was to get less cloudy and there was more sun, there would be fewer people carrying the gene.”

    Another scientist, who asked not to be named because of the theoretical nature of the work, said: “I think the gene is slowly dying out. Climate change could see a decline in the number of people with red hair in Scotland.”

    Canadian comic Shawn Hitchins, who led a ginger pride march in Edinburgh last year, said: “It seems like everyone is coming up with new ways to eradicate the gingers.”

  180. Alec aka Daffy Duck says:

    Trenberth slapped in the face with a cold fish!
    The Anchovy say no Super El Niño!

    Peru says El Nino threat over, waters cooling and fish returning
    http://in.mobile.reuters.com/a…00A20140705?irpc=932

  181. Larry Butler says:

    Over on acrim.jpl.nasa.gov it says:
    “It is theorized that as much as 25% of the anticipated global warming of the earth may be solar in origin.”

    I’m only a simple RF electronics engineer with no training in climate, but can you, for the ignorant readers like me, please explain this stupid statement? Where else does global warming come from? Is this about dark matter or some new branch of physics kept secret from mere mortals?
    Thank you for all you do…..I nearly fell out of my chair. Nasa’s oco-2 website already states the conclusion the human CO2 is responsible for everything. It’s right there on the oco.jpl.nasa.gov home page. Hansen must write this stuff….

  182. Robert in Calgary says:

    I came across this NY Times item via the Hot Air Headlines.

    http://hotair.com/
    ———————–
    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/06/upshot/when-beliefs-and-facts-collide.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

    “Do Americans understand the scientific consensus about issues like climate change and evolution?

    At least for a substantial portion of the public, it seems like the answer is no. The Pew Research Center, for instance, found that 33 percent of the public believes “Humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time” and 26 percent think there is not “solid evidence that the average temperature on Earth has been getting warmer over the past few decades.” Unsurprisingly, beliefs on both topics are divided along religious and partisan lines. For instance, 46 percent of Republicans said there is not solid evidence of global warming, compared with 11 percent of Democrats.

    As a result of surveys like these, scientists and advocates have concluded that many people are not aware of the evidence on these issues and need to be provided with correct information. That’s the impulse behind efforts like the campaign to publicize the fact that 97 percent of climate scientists believe human activities are causing global warming.”

  183. Bob Koss says:

    Anthony,

    Given the holiday weekend, I imagine you are waiting to get confirmation and comments from GHCN. Just figured I’d add a couple examples of what I found.

    Old = ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.2.20140603.qcu.dat June 3th.
    New = ghcnm.tavg.v3.2.2.20140702.qcu.dat July 2nd.

    Below are changes to three stations between time of Old file and New file for the year 2013. Old is first one in each pair. My comments are intersperse.

    Two fields have been cropped from each station year, they are all the string ’2013TAVG’. The lines have been split in order to avoid the vagaries of screen wrap due to line length. The letters C & K are the data source for the value to the left. C = MCDW QCed data. K = Met Office CLIMAT data. All three stations had data provenance changed from MCDW to Met Office.
    ———
    13167217000 2030 C 2030 C 2000 C 1890 C 1730 C 1570 C
    1510 C 1720 C 2000 C 2080 C 2240 C 2080 C

    13167217000-9999 1970 K 2000 K 1890 K 1730 K-9999
    -9999 1720 K 2020 K 2080 K 2240 K 2080 K

    The no data(-9999) values in New above are not given a data source provenance, but my inference is they must be from source K. Also two temperature changes (Feb & Sep).
    ———
    40578767000 2530 C 2510 C 2530 C 2630 C 2640 C 2670 C
    2530 C 2640 C 2700 C 2650 C 2580 C 2520 C

    New has no trace of the full year of data found in Old. Maybe Met Office had nothing?
    ———
    40678310000 2390 K 2430 K 2290 K 2630 K 2670 K 2690 K
    2730 C 2730 C 2670 C 2670 C 2550 C 2480 C

    40678310000 2390 K 2430 K 2290 K 2630 K 2670 K 2690 K
    2730 K 2730 K 2670 K 2670 K 2550 K 2480 K

    Only difference is the data source has been changed from July onward.
    ———
    It appears they over-write the data an entire year at a time. No consideration is given to the existence of a valid value being big-footed by a -9999 or the possibility of averaging two valid values. I don’t understand the type of mind-set it takes to think less information is better than more. Especially when the claim is made the fate of the world is in jeopardy.

  184. J Martin says:

    http://www.rtcc.org/2014/06/30/us-turning-red-as-summer-temperatures-soar/

    Myself, I haven’t come across the above site for the global warming faithful before. They haven’t posted any of my critical comments.

  185. J Martin says:

    http://knowledgedrift.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/log1-co2.jpg

    The above co2 logarithmic curve looks more like a straight line and is surely preposterous ?

    Can anyone tell me where I can find the real co2 forcing curve to rebut

    http://joannenova.com.au/2014/07/more-strange-adventures-in-tsi-data-the-miracle-of-900-fabricated-fraudulent-days/#comment-1503221

  186. Caleb says:

    Alas! The second North Pole Camera got crunched by a jumble of ice, apparently as two bergs collided and formed a pressure ridge. (Not because the bergs melted, if anyone asks.) The blogger Max™ put together a short sequence of stills that shows the end coming, and the last tilted picture with the jumble approaching from the right. It is at the bottom of my post at : http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/arctic-sea-ice-melt-crunch-time/

  187. sadbutmadlad says:

    Guardian publishes article about “dark snow” or soot as the cause of melting glaciers/ice. Tell me its not true that the Guardian is agreeing with Anthony.

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/05/dark-snow-speeding-glacier-melting-rising-sea-levels?CMP=twt_gu

    “Dark snow: from the Arctic to the Himalayas, the phenomenon that is accelerating glacier melting
    Industrial dust and soil, blown thousands of miles, settle on ice sheets and add to rising sea level threat”

  188. milodonharlani says:

    Reluctant as I am to give CACA advocates ammo with which to attack this blog, here is a “puzzling thing”, ie UFOs observed high over Chile:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-kean/government-agency-in-chil_b_5558713.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

    Since it’s forwarded from the HuffPo, “progressives” can’t hoot too much.

    My dad was the first person Ken Arnold told about his UFO sighting in 1947, to kick off the craze. And no, I don’t think that the observations are of space alien flying saucers.

  189. cjshaker says:

    This paper makes the Climate Models look like a joke – 100% Error Per Century on Temperature Forecasts
    The Backcasting of Climate Models
    “However it is not true that the accuracy of the climate models cannot be tested without waiting 50 years or so. The climate models can be run backwards just as well as forward. Instead of a forecast they would give a backcast of the climate characteristics of the past. Another term coined for this process is retrodiction, in analogy wit prediction. Patrick J. Michaels in his book, Meltdown, gives the backcasting of two climate models from about 1993 back to 1905. One is the first Coupled Global Climate Model(CGCM1) from the Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling and Analysis and the second is British, from the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. The data were scaled from the Michaels’ graph.” …
    “Although the model gets the shape generally right the timing is off and that shape had to have come from inputting the sulfate aerosol estimates which may not have been independent estimates but values chosen on the basis of the known observations of global temperature. Nevertheless the backcast change in temperature was 96 percent higher than the observational change of the eighty eight year period. That is nearly a 100 percent error per century.”
    http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/backcasting.htm
    http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/CMU.htm
    http://deimos.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/DownloadTrackPreview/sjsu.edu.1568518003.01657302292.1633255438.pdf

    The Need for Honest Backcasting of Climate Models
    “The validity of climate models must be established by their use in explaining the past climate data, the so-called backcasting of the model. However this backcasting must be honest; i.e., the independent variables must be independently known and not surmised from the past climate data. For example, global temperatures after rising for decades took a downturn from 1940 to about 1955. Climatologist speculated that downturn was due to increased levels of sulfate aerosols. If measurements of the average global sulfate levels were available and higher levels did in fact coincide with the downturn in global temperatures then that would be a validation of the model. However if the investigators had no independent measurements of sulfate levels or anything correlated with sulfate level to test the speculation then that is not a validation of the model. The term that is used for this process is tweaking. Worst yet than tweaking is if the investigators asked what would the sulfate level have had to be to produce that downturn and found out the values by trial-and-error and presented that information as though it were an actual measurement of sulfate levels. This would be simple dishonesty.

    Furthermore, the backcasting that is relevant for validation of models for the projection of future climate is the backcasts based upon no more information than is available for the future projections. This means volcano erruptions and such should not be used because they are not available for the future projections.”
    http://applet-magic.com/backcasting02.htm

    Interesting that a search for “Backcasting of Climate Models” at Google Scholar finds NOTHING!
    http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Backcasting+of+Climate+Models%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C38

    Google Scholar also has NO hits for “Backcasting Climate Models”! Puzzling that no one has written a peer reviewed paper doing Backcasting of Climate Models as this teacher did????

  190. cjshaker says:

    So, is the climate data really bad, or is this paper bad?

    Pattern of strange errors plagues solar activity and terrestrial climate data
    “The last decade has seen a revival of various hypotheses claiming a strong correlation between solar activity and a number of terrestrial climate parameters. Links have been made between cosmic rays and cloud cover, first total cloud cover and then only low clouds, and between solar cycle lengths and northern hemisphere land temperatures. These hypotheses play an important role in the scientific debate as well as in the public debate about the possibility or reality of a man-made global climate change.

    Analysis of a number of published graphs that have played a major role in these debates and that have been claimed to support solar hypotheses [Laut, 2003; Damon and Peristykh, 1999, 2004] shows that the apparent strong correlations displayed on these graphs have been obtained by incorrect handling of the physical data. The graphs are still widely referred to in the literature, and their misleading character has not yet been generally recognized. Readers are cautioned against drawing any conclusions, based upon these graphs, concerning the possible wisdom or futility of reducing the emissions of man-made greenhouse gases.”
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2004EO390005/abstract

    Full paper available here
    http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/DamonLaut2004.pdf

    Either way, it doesn’t reflect well on the competency of Climate Science?

  191. Bob F says:

    Apparent ly ice age ending CO2 release was 100x slower than current man made rise

    Seems to require almost never ending series of assumptions

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2683361/Giant-CO2-burp-triggered-end-ice-age-100-times-SLOWER-man-climate-change-claim-scientists.html

  192. Marc K says:

    No more government surplus trucks for rural fire departments because they don’t meet EPA emission standards.
    http://m.enidnews.com/ENE/db_265301/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=rRKhPRn6&full=true#display

  193. ferd berple says:

    a great story showing how fossil fuels are sustainable
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/partners/advsustainableenergy0514/sharing-risks-rewards-and-responsibilities-with-first-nations-partners/article18773632/#dashboard/follows/

    “We’ve been assessing every single facet of it and feel this is the right project for us in terms of its impact on the environment and its impact on rights and title, but most importantly because it can solve social problems we’ve been struggling with for a long time. We used to have 60 per cent unemployment, now we have 23-year-olds from the reserve getting mortgages and buying cars and travelling, which are things I struggled my whole life to do.

  194. Winston says:

    Here’s the way the BBC cut of air time for AGW skeptics is presented by the scientifically illiterate conformists. Perhaps the above-average scientifically literate contributors on the site should educate Lindsay Abrams:

    SUNDAY, JUL 6, 2014 03:14 PM MDT
    BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal airtime to climate deniers
    The network will stop airing “debates” featuring members of the anti-science fringe
    LINDSAY ABRAMS

    “Good news for viewers of BBC News: You’ll no longer be subjected to the unhinged ravings of climate deniers and other members of the anti-science fringe.”

  195. Sparks says:

    Ginger extinction due to Climate Change?

    Unbelievable.

  196. milodonharlani says:

    Now the Guardian finally gets the message on peer review:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/06/guardian-view-end-peer-review-scientific-journals

    I shudder to consider with what the Guardian would replace it, however. Probably even chummier pal review. Or CACA Commissar review.

  197. Gary says:

    Local forecast for Arkansas with maps from weatherbell.com, calling for a potential cool event. They admit it’s a long distance forecast, but it got my attention after we had what was probably the greatest weather for July 4th in my lifetime. http://www.katv.com/category/192879/arkansas-weather-blog

  198. el gordo says:

    The Oz carbon tax is about to get the chop, so AGW advocates are making stuff up on the run.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-07/giant-antarctic-ice-shelves-could-melt-faster-than-expected/5579678

  199. Rational Db8 says:

    There’s just so much we don’t know yet – and they keep turning up more and more things like this, which likely feed into the climate system and yet are totally unaccounted for….

    SAR11, oceans’ most abundant organism, has ability to create methane

    4 hours ago

    The oxygen-rich surface waters of the world’s major oceans are supersaturated with methane – a powerful greenhouse gas that is roughly 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide – yet little is known about the source of this methane.

    Now a new study by researchers at Oregon State University demonstrates the ability of some strains of the oceans’ most abundant organism – SAR11 – to generate methane as a byproduct of breaking down a compound for its phosphorus…

    “Anaerobic methane biogenesis was the only process known to produce methane in the oceans and that requires environments with very low levels of oxygen,” said Angelicque “Angel” White, a researcher in OSU’s College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences and co-author on the study. “In the vast central gyres of the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, the surface waters have lots of oxygen from mixing with the atmosphere – and yet they also have lots of methane, hence the term ‘marine methane paradox.’

    “We’ve now learned that certain strains of SAR11, when starved for phosphorus, turn to a compound known as methylphosphonic acid,” White added. “The organisms produce enzymes that can break this compound apart, freeing up phosphorus that can be used for growth – and leaving methane behind.”…

    …bottom line is that this shows phosphate-starved bacterioplankton have the capability of producing methane and doing so in oxygen-rich waters.”

    SAR11 is the smallest free-living cell known and also has the smallest genome, or genetic structure, of any independent cell. Yet it dominates life in the oceans, thrives where most other cells would die, and plays a huge role in the cycling of carbon on Earth….

    “Their ability to cleave off methane is an interesting finding because it provides a partial explanation for why methane is so abundant in the high-oxygen waters of the mid-ocean regions,” Giovannoni added. “Just how much they contribute to the methane budget still needs to be determined.”…

  200. RACookPE1978 says:

    Anthony: Adding to the subsidy battles on the “true cost” of fuel. This from Egypt on their REMOVAL of fuel subsidies by the new Egyptian government ….

    Egypt to raise fuel prices by up to 78 percent from midnight
    Reuters ^ | 04 July 2014

    Egypt was set to raise mainstream fuel prices by up to 78 percent from midnight on Friday, an Oil Ministry source told Reuters, in a long-awaited step to cut energy subsidies to ease the burden on its swelling budget deficit.

    Food and energy subsidies traditionally eat up a quarter of state spending. The government is cutting subsidies in hopes of reviving an economy battered by more than three years of political turmoil.

    Successive governments have failed to curb energy product subsidies, fearing backlash from a public used to cheap fuel.

    “The increase will start being implemented by midnight,” the source said.

    The source said the price of 92 octane gasoline would be 2.60 Egyptian pounds (36 cents) per liter, up 40 percent from its current price of 1.85 pounds, while 80 octane gasoline would rise to 1.60 pounds per liter, up 78 percent.

  201. Clovis Marcus says:

    If you need a good laugh have a look at this:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/310598/10087-2902315-TSO-Heatwave_Main_Plan_ACCESSIBLE.pdf

    This is advice for people living in a Northern Temperate climate where the March 2014 global anomaly* was +0.71C. I wonder how they manage to stay alive in the tropics?

    The only thing that stopped my sides splitting was that my taxes paid for it.

    *based on suspect data

  202. Cam_S says:

    Have you ever heard of “environmental neuroethics”? Well, apparently there is such a field of study.

    True field of science? Or more academics riding the global warming gravy train?

    Climate right for environmental neuroethics
    http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/Opinion+Climate+right+environmental+neuroethics/10008658/story.html

  203. Clovis Marcus says:

    @milodonharlani says:

    July 7, 2014 at 2:01 pm

    This is the alternative to peer review:
    http://www.academia.edu/hiring/mission

    Of course what that means is that if you are going to cite a paper in your research you’d better be sure it is quality. No defence saying “It was peer reviewed so it must have been right”

  204. Cam_S says:

    The floods in Saskatchewan and Manitoba now caused by global warming…

    Changing climate at root of ‘utterly unprecedented’ summer flood
    http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/environment/Changing+climate+root+utterly+unprecedented/10008801/story.html

  205. Frank says:

    http://www.nature.com/news/science-joins-push-to-screen-statistics-in-papers-1.15509?WT.ec_id=NEWS-20140708

    Science joins push to screen statistics in papers
    New policy follows efforts by other journals to bolster standards of data analysis.

    The journal Science is adding an extra round of statistical checks to its peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt announced today. The policy follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings.

    “Readers must have confidence in the conclusions published in our journal,” writes McNutt in an editorial today1. Working with the American Statistical Association, the journal has appointed seven experts to a statistics board of reviewing editors (SBoRE). Manuscript will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the journal’s internal editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors (more than 100 scientists whom the journal regularly consults on papers) or by outside peer reviewers. The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these manuscripts.

    Asked whether any particular papers had impelled the change, McNutt said: “The creation of the [statistics board] was motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis in scientific research and is part of Science’s overall drive to increase reproducibility in the research we publish.”

    Giovanni Parmigiani, a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, is a member of the SBoRE group. He says he expects the board to “play primarily an advisory role”. He agreed to join because he “found the foresight behind the establishment of the SBoRE to be novel, unique and likely to have a lasting impact. This impact will not only be through the publications in Science itself, but hopefully through a larger group of publishing venues that may want to model their approach after Science.”

    John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology at Stanford University in California, says that the policy is “a most welcome step forward” and “long overdue”. “Most journals are weak in statistical review, and this damages the quality of what they publish. I think that for the majority of scientific papers nowadays statistical review is more essential than expert review,” he says, but he noted that biomedical journals such as Annals of Internal Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet pay strong attention to statistical review.

    Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyse data, but statistical errors are alarmingly common in published research, according to David Vaux, a cell biologist at the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research in Parkville, Australia. Researchers should improve their standards, he wrote in Nature in 2012, but journals should also take a tougher line, “engaging reviewers who are statistically literate and editors who can verify the process”2. Vaux says that Science’s idea to pass some papers to statisticians “has some merit, but a weakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify [the papers that need scrutiny] in the first place”.

    Journal reform is starting to happen, says Bernd Pulverer, chief editor of the EMBO Journal in Heidelberg, Germany. “We have been discussing the level of statistics in our papers for some time. All too often, data in molecular cell-biology papers are indeed still published with ill-defined, underpowered or plain wrong statistics,” he says. But Pulverer adds that the EMBO Journal and other publications are planning to launch checklists of basic statistical information that should be reported in research papers, and it also plans to add statistics experts to its editorial board.

    Statistical checklists are emerging as standards after workshops organized by the US National Institutes of Health in 2012 to discuss the problems leading to irreproducible research findings. In April 2013, for example, Nature announced it that had created such a checklist, and that to help improve the statistical robustness of its papers, it would employ statisticians “as consultants on certain papers, at the editors’ discretion and as suggested by referees”3. (Nature’s news and comment team is editorially independent of its research editorial team.)

    “Nature and Science have shared their experiences of measures to improve their systems,” says Veronique Kiermer, executive editor at Nature. “We welcome their new initiative, just as we welcome any undertakings by publishers to improve statistical analyses.”

  206. Kip Hansen says:

    Anthony — Have you seen this from Berkley Earth?

    http://static.berkeleyearth.org/pdf/skeptics-guide-to-climate-change.pdf

    “A skeptic’s guide to climate change”

    Kip Hansen

    (Searched WUWT in the search box but found nothing…. and don’t remember seeing it)

  207. Rick Morcom says:

    Interesting article in the Guardian today linking the demise of whales with global warming, and their recent recovery being related to the “pause”.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/whale-poo-reverse-climate-change

  208. Keith Minto says:

    Refreshing headline,

    Volcanoes Cooled Earth Less Than Thought

    from http://www.livescience.com/46696-volcanoes-cooling-antarctic-ice-cores.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Livesciencecom+%28LiveScience.com+Science+Headline+Feed%29

    The original article in Nature Climate Science is a little more circumspect. It seems that the Volcanic record prior to 1500 has been overestimated.

    Whereas agreement with existing reconstructions is excellent after 1500, we found a substantially different history of volcanic aerosol deposition before 1500; for example, global aerosol forcing values from some of the largest eruptions (for example, 1257 and 1458) previously were overestimated by 20–30% and others underestimated by 20–50%.

    http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2293.html

    Still, good to see a “less than thought” headline than the opposite.

  209. Lewis P Buckingham says:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/09/usa-china-climatechange-idUSL4N0PK1MJ20140709
    China and the US discuss technologies for the capture of CO2, extraction of oil from gaseous coal and presumably the burning of such gas products.
    Also covered ‘food security’.
    This appears the area of agreement concerning security between these powers.

  210. Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter) says:

    Just a thought:

    This section is for tips and notes. What about…. a section which people could view, for suggestions on things they themselves might have an interest in researching?

    Example: It occurred to me, that the spike in tornados in 2011, might be a precursor to the wind shifts which brought about the polar vortex dropping down into NA. That led back to the idea that perhaps the big tornado spike in 1974, was a precursor to the coldest winter on record, which also saw the descent of the polar vortex.

    It is just a thought, but, I myself may do some looking into it.

  211. rogerknights says:

    Earth’s magnetic field weakening–more cosmic rays intruding:
    http://www.livescience.com/46694-magnetic-field-weakens.html

  212. Taphonomic says:

    Rasmussen poll reveals that:

    U.S. Voters strongly believe the debate about global warming is not over yet and reject the decision by some news organizations to ban comments from those who deny that global warming is a problem.

    Only 20% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Sixty-three percent (63%) disagree and say the debate about global warming is not over. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/july_2014/only_20_think_debate_about_global_warming_is_over

  213. Cam_S says:

    Humans are pushing sea-level rise
    By Thomas F. Pedersen, executive director
    Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions
    University of Victoria
    http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/letters/humans-are-pushing-sea-level-rise-1.1198459

    Is a rebuttal to this article…

    Global warming doesn’t have to ruin economies
    http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/op-ed/comment-global-warming-doesn-t-have-to-ruin-economies-1.1197009

    Which is a rebuttal to Risky Business.

  214. Chris says:

    Settled Science, Exoplanet Division:

    Newfound Frozen World Orbits in Binary Star System

    “This greatly expands the potential locations to discover habitable planets in the future,” said Scott Gaudi, professor of astronomy at Ohio State. “Half the stars in the galaxy are in binary systems. We had no idea if Earth-like planets in Earth-like orbits could even form in these systems.”

    http://www.asdnews.com/news-55776/Newfound_Frozen_World_Orbits_in_Binary_Star_System.htm?utm_source=ASDNews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Channel_42_09_07#ixzz36zlG4DEs

  215. Former Chancellor Nigel Lawson: ‘BBC Have Banned Me’
    July 09, 2014 , by Nick Hallett
    Former UK Chancellor Nigel Lawson has launched a scathing attack on the BBC after it said he should not appear on its programming again to discuss climate change. Lawson, who served as Chancellor of Exchequer in Margaret Thatcher’s government from 1983 to 1989, is a leading sceptic of man-made global warming and has even founded a think tank on the subject.
    The BBC Trust ruled, however, that he should not have been allowed to take part in a debate on Radio 4 in February in which he questioned climate policy, after receiving what Lawson describes as a “well-organised deluge of complaints”.
    Lawson says the Trust made this ruling on the basis of an inaccurate complaint by a Green Party activist, Chit Chong, who said that Lawson claimed global warming was a “conspiracy”. Lord Lawson points out that he did not say this, as is clear from the transcript.
    Nonetheless, the BBC upheld the complaint without even contacting Lawson. Writing in the Daily Mail, he says:
    “Needless to say, while apparently in active correspondence with the Green Party politician and non-scientist Mr Chong about the iniquity of allowing me to appear on the Today programme, at least not without emphasising that, as a non-scientist, no one should take any notice of what I may have to say, at no time has either the head of the Editorial Complaints Unit or anyone else from the BBC sought to get in touch with me about all this.
    “Had they done so, I might not only have sought gently to educate them on a subject about which they clearly know very little.”
    Lord Lawson added that if he is to be banned from debating the subject on the basis he is not a scientist, perhaps the BBC would also like to ban non-scientists who advocate the theory of man-made global warming:
    “I might have suggested, too, that if there is to be a ban on non-scientists discussing climate change issues (which I do not, of course, support), this should in the best BBC tradition be an even-handed one.
    “That is to say, they should also ban non-scientists such as Energy Secretary Ed Davey, Ed Miliband, Lord Deben (chairman of the Government’s Climate Advisory Committee), Lord Stern (former adviser to the Government on the Economics of Climate Change and Development) and all the others who are regularly invited to appear.”
    He also took up the cause of a colleague of his, Matt Ridley, who is leading science writer and yet has never been interviewed on the BBC since he challenges the consensus view on man-made global warming.
    “The truth is that the BBC’s outrageous behaviour is nothing whatever to do with whether I am a climate scientist or not. Indeed, it is not about me at all.
    “Matt Ridley, for example, is arguably this country’s — indeed, the English-speaking world’s — leading science writer who has researched the climate change issue and reached a conclusion which is very close to my own.
    “(He is also among the unpaid members of the Academic Advisory Council of my think-tank.)
    “Not once has he been invited to discuss any aspect of the issue on Radio 4’s Today programme.”
    Lord Lawson’s conclusion is scathing, accusing the BBC of outright censorship that violates its commitment to impartiality:
    “The fact is that, on this issue, the BBC has its own party line (indistinguishable from that of the Green Party) which it imposes with quasi-Stalinist thoroughness.
    “The one occasion, last February, on which it permitted a balanced and civilised discussion is now seen by the Corporation as a colossal error for which it must grovel and undertake never to repeat.
    “This amounts to a policy of outright political censorship.
    “It is hard to imagine a more blatant breach of its charter, which commits it to political balance, or a more blatant betrayal of the people’s trust, on which the continuation of its licence fee depends.
    “The BBC justifies its unique compulsory funding model — a television tax — by claiming that it provides a fair and balanced public service. Its treatment of climate change shows this is simply not the case.
    “It is little wonder that a recent poll found most people would like to see the licence fee scrapped.”
    A poll by ComRes at the weekend found that 51 percent of the public think the BBC licence fee, which is compulsory for all people who own a TV set in the UK, should be scrapped. The research found that the public support this even if it means a cut in the amount of original programming produced by the corporation, and advertisement breaks in the middle of programmes.
    Chris Whitehouse of Whitehouse Consultancy, who commissioned the poll, said: “These figures show the huge job of work still be done by the BBC if it is to have a strong hand in the future in renegotiating the licence fee and justifying why the public should continue to pay it.”
    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/07/09/Former-Chancellor-Lawson-BBC-Have-Banned-Me

  216. milodonharlani says:

    Confessions of a climate modeler, who writes on tweaking to get desired results:

    http://online.wsj.com/articles/confessions-of-a-computer-modeler-1404861351

    Log In required if not a subscriber.

  217. milodonharlani says:

    I mean subscription required.

  218. Neil Jordan says:

    Article in the Opinion section of this morning’s Wall Street Journal about Tom Steyer:
    Business World by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
    http://online.wsj.com/articles/holman-jenkins-a-climate-activist-bags-himself-1404861051
    [excerpts]
    “The New York Times is the latest to investigate his former hedge fund’s investments to increase the output of Indonesian and Australian coal mines to feed China during a period when China surpassed the U.S. as the world’s biggest carbon-dioxide emitter.”

    “Many stories are festooned with environmentalist statements lamenting the damage Mr. Steyer did to the planet before he decided to save it.”

    Mr. Steyer made his money wherever money was to be made. Then when he wanted to start a new career, claimed to have experienced a “road to Damascus” conversion on climate and energy at age 55.”

    “And we do mean pseudo-influence. He vilifies the Koch Brothers (“evil persons”), and lobbies universities and foundations to dump their fossil energy holdings, though the only effect is to transfer those holdings to investors like Mr. Steyer’s former hedge fund that are immune to pressure and unwilling to forgo the profits from meeting the world’s wholly non-illusory demand for energy.”

    “Mr. Steyer will be able to say of his impact on the climate debate: I softened up the public to be milked for green handouts that did nothing for climate change.”
    [end excerpts]

  219. milodonharlani says:

    With apologies to the WSJ for any possible copyright infringement:

    Confessions of a Computer Modeler

    Any model, including those predicting climate doom, can be tweaked to yield a desired result. I should know.

    By
    Robert J. Caprara
    July 8, 2014 7:15 p.m. ET

    The climate debate is heating up again as business leaders, politicians and academics bombard us with the results of computer models that predict costly and dramatic changes in the years ahead. I can offer some insight into the use of computer models for public-policy debates, and a recommendation for the general public.

    After earning a master’s degree in environmental engineering in 1982, I spent most of the next 10 years building large-scale environmental computer models. My first job was as a consultant to the Environmental Protection Agency. I was hired to build a model to assess the impact of its Construction Grants Program, a nationwide effort in the 1970s and 1980s to upgrade sewer-treatment plants.

    The computer model was huge—it analyzed every river, sewer treatment plant and drinking-water intake (the places in rivers where municipalities draw their water) in the country. I’ll spare you the details, but the model showed huge gains from the program as water quality improved dramatically. By the late 1980s, however, any gains from upgrading sewer treatments would be offset by the additional pollution load coming from people who moved from on-site septic tanks to public sewers, which dump the waste into rivers. Basically the model said we had hit the point of diminishing returns.

    When I presented the results to the EPA official in charge, he said that I should go back and “sharpen my pencil.” I did. I reviewed assumptions, tweaked coefficients and recalibrated data. But when I reran everything the numbers didn’t change much. At our next meeting he told me to run the numbers again.

    After three iterations I finally blurted out, “What number are you looking for?” He didn’t miss a beat: He told me that he needed to show $2 billion of benefits to get the program renewed. I finally turned enough knobs to get the answer he wanted, and everyone was happy.

    Was the EPA official asking me to lie? I have to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he believed in the value of continuing the program. (Congress ended the grants in 1990.) He certainly didn’t give any indications otherwise. I also assume he understood the inherent inaccuracies of these types of models. There are no exact values for the coefficients in models such as these. There are only ranges of potential values. By moving a bunch of these parameters to one side or the other you can usually get very different results, often (surprise) in line with your initial beliefs.

    I realized that my work for the EPA wasn’t that of a scientist, at least in the popular imagination of what a scientist does. It was more like that of a lawyer. My job, as a modeler, was to build the best case for my client’s position. The opposition will build its best case for the counter argument and ultimately the truth should prevail.

    If opponents don’t like what I did with the coefficients, then they should challenge them. And during my decade as an environmental consultant, I was often hired to do just that to someone else’s model. But there is no denying that anyone who makes a living building computer models likely does so for the cause of advocacy, not the search for truth.

    Surely the scientific community wouldn’t succumb to these pressures like us money-grabbing consultants. Aren’t they laboring for knowledge instead of profit? If you believe that, boy do I have a computer model to sell you.

    The academic community competes for grants, tenure and recognition; consultants compete for clients. And you should understand that the lines between academia and consultancy are very blurry as many professors moonlight as consultants, authors, talking heads, etc.

    Let’s be clear: I am not saying this is a bad thing. The legal system is adversarial and for the most part functions well. The same is true for science. So here is my advice: Those who are convinced that humans are drastically changing the climate for the worse and those who aren’t should accept and welcome a vibrant, robust back-and-forth. Let each side make its best case and trust that the truth will emerge.

    Those who do believe that humans are driving climate change retort that the science is “settled” and those who don’t agree are “deniers” and “flat-earthers.” Even the president mocks anyone who disagrees. But I have been doing this for a long time, and the one thing I have learned is how hard it is to convince people with a computer model. The vast majority of your audience will never, ever understand the math behind it. This does not mean people are dumb. They usually have great BS detectors, and when they see one side of a debate trying to shut down the other side, they will most likely assume it has something to hide, has the weaker argument, or both.

    Eventually I got out of the environmental consulting business. In the 1990s I went into a completely different industry, one that was also data intensive and I thought couldn’t be nearly as controversial: health care. But that’s another story.

    Mr. Caprara is chief methodologist for PSKW LLC, which provides marketing programs for pharmaceutical firms.

  220. John F. Hultquist says:

    Avista testing batteries that store wind, solar energy

    That’s a headline that seems funny to me. In the State of Washington with hydro power producing electricity on demand 24/7, the “State” thinks it wise to spend $3.2 Million on a project designed to store “energy from wind, solar and other renewable sources.” I have read that hydro is not part of the definition of renewable.

    http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/jul/09/avista-testing-batteries-that-store-wind-solar/

    This is a test and “Researchers from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, where the battery technology was developed, will work with Avista on the project, analyzing data from the tests.” The site for this is in Pullman, home of WSU and the Cougars.

    Ellensburg – small town with a university in central WA – had 5 different types of windmills erected for a test. I’ve not heard that they actually got any data. Last year one of the things blew over in a relatively mild wind. The Kittitas Valley – Ellensburg is near the center – is noted for its strong and long duration winds. The local paper carried the story and since then nothing. The City used other people’s money but when it came time to continue using money the City had collected from its citizens the elected officials refrained.

  221. Frank says:

    Robert Caprara: As Stephen Schneider wrote: “…as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts.” There is nothing scientific about modeling if you don’t include the uncertainty arising from parameter uncertainty in your output.

  222. Ben D says:

    I know he is from Kentucky and there may be a hillbilly factor but this is just so funny….

  223. Clovis Marcus says:

    Type senna the soothsayer into a google search and look at the first result. I don’t know how it was done but I bet the met office are having a conniption.

  224. anna v says:

    Hi Anthony et al

    Have you seen this : http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-014-1184-2

    The heat waves of 2003 in Western Europe and 2010 in Russia, commonly labelled as rare climatic anomalies outside of previous experience, are often taken as harbingers of more frequent extremes in the global warming-influenced future. However, a recent reconstruction of spring–summer temperatures for WE resulted in the likelihood of significantly higher temperatures in 1540. In order to check the plausibility of this result we investigated the severity of the 1540 drought by putting forward the argument of the known soil desiccation-temperature feedback. Based on more than 300 first-hand documentary weather report sources originating from an area of 2 to 3 million km2, we show that Europe was affected by an unprecedented 11-month-long Megadrought. The estimated number of precipitation days and precipitation amount for Central and Western Europe in 1540 is significantly lower than the 100-year minima of the instrumental measurement period for spring, summer and autumn. This result is supported by independent documentary evidence about extremely low river flows and Europe-wide wild-, forest- and settlement fires. We found that an event of this severity cannot be simulated by state-of-the-art climate models.

  225. anna v says:

    Hi Anthony et al

    Have you seen this : http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-014-1184-2

    The heat waves of 2003 in Western Europe and 2010 in Russia, commonly labelled as rare climatic anomalies outside of previous experience, are often taken as harbingers of more frequent extremes in the global warming-influenced future. However, a recent reconstruction of spring–summer temperatures for WE resulted in the likelihood of significantly higher temperatures in 1540. In order to check the plausibility of this result we investigated the severity of the 1540 drought by putting forward the argument of the known soil desiccation-temperature feedback. Based on more than 300 first-hand documentary weather report sources originating from an area of 2 to 3 million km2, we show that Europe was affected by an unprecedented 11-month-long Megadrought. The estimated number of precipitation days and precipitation amount for Central and Western Europe in 1540 is significantly lower than the 100-year minima of the instrumental measurement period for spring, summer and autumn. This result is supported by independent documentary evidence about extremely low river flows and Europe-wide wild-, forest- and settlement fires. We found that an event of this severity cannot be simulated by state-of-the-art climate models.

  226. StuartMcL says:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/earths-magnetic-field-is-weakening-10-times-faster/

    “While changes in magnetic field strength are part of this normal flipping cycle, data from Swarm have shown the field is starting to weaken faster than in the past. Previously, researchers estimated the field was weakening about 5 percent per century, but the new data revealed the field is actually weakening at 5 percent per decade, or 10 times faster than thought. As such, rather than the full flip occurring in about 2,000 years, as was predicted, the new data suggest it could happen sooner.”

  227. Johanus says:

    Everyone thinks that Solar Cycle 24 is over. Not so fast. It is still going strong (for a small cycle), hitting a peak 200 SFI with M5 “fanflare”!

    http://www.solen.info/solar/

    It is starting to look a lot like a time-reversed twin of Solar Cycle 20, also runt-sized (1965-1975).

    http://www.spaceweather.ca/solarflux/sx-6-mavg-eng.php

    SC20 started with a roar and then diminished. Perhaps SC24 will have a much grander finale?

  228. Nylo says:

    Hello,

    Someone brought to my attention this article by Kinnard et al. 2011, where they claim to have done a reconstruction of the arctic sea ice extent for the last 1400 years:
    http://gizmo.geotop.uqam.ca/devernalA/Kinnard_et_al_nature_2011.pdf

    I have not seen it discussed in WUWT before, so that I bring it. The reconstruction itself is laughable (shows minimum arctic ice extent during the Little Ice Age), and presents lots of technical flaws, the first of which is being based in proxies which are, ALL of them, on land and rather far from the ocean (tree rings, ice cores, lake sediments).

    I think bringing it to pieces would be quite interesting and entertaining for the readers here. I, unfortunately, do not feel capable of doing it. I can identify more or less where the problems with the paper are, but correctly explaining why it is incorrect from a technical point of view is another story.

  229. Pointman says:

    “There is a growing body of opinion that we might be moving out of our interglacial and back into a colder world, perhaps a very much colder one. That’s happened many times before and there’s absolutely nothing to prevent it happening again. Should that turn out to be the case, this article speculates on our total energy unpreparedness for that scenario and the possible geopolitical ramifications of such a global change.”

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2014/07/10/dances-with-unicorns/

    Pointman

  230. Keith Sketchley says:

    Great article on economics of warming:
    http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/op-ed/comment-global-warming-doesn-t-have-to-ruin-economies-1.1197009 Global warming doesn’t have to ruin economies

    With a rebuttal attempt that is interesting:
    http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/letters/humans-are-pushing-sea-level-rise-1.1198459 Humans are pushing sea level rise

    Note he uses rise rate data close to real, unlike many alarmists, but claims a trend that he claims is caused by humans. He’s significantly slick.

  231. Mark Hladik says:

    Hi Anthony (or Mods, or ANYONE with Meteorology knowledge and expertise … ):

    At the outset of this inquiry, I would like to state that I am NOT a ‘chemtrail’ believer, or any other kind of wacko — – I was laid off from my Air Taxi Pilot position in 2008, and now I teach Math and Science (Geology, specifically) at our local community college.

    For the past two weeks, there has been something unusual, in regards to the normal contrails behind high-flying turbojet aircraft. I track air carrier aircraft on a website called , which lets one view specific airport activity, or you can track a specific flight.

    At first sight, you would think that you are seeing something similar to what Air Traffic Control sees at their radar screens, but in reality, what you see is lagged about 10 minutes (sometimes less), so the presentation is where the aircraft “was” a few minutes ago. I have learned to compensate for this lag.

    If I am watching a particular flight on the website, and it is going to pass overhead, or very nearly so, I wait until the appropriate to begin looking for it; more specifically, I look for the contrail, which shows the location of the aircraft. Of late, there are virtually NO contrails at all, making it difficult to actually see the aircraft passage. Everyday, I wait for an Air France Airbus 380 – 800 series, as it passes overhead, usually at FL 380 or FL 400 (38,000 feet and 40,000 feet respectively, for the non-aviation inclined reading this), where the air temperature must be at or below minus 40 Celsius, and the contrail cannot help but form. Point of fact, with several hundred air carrier jets flying over, there have been NO contrails at all.

    This might normally happen for a few hours, but with the movement of air masses, seeing this “condition” for several days in a row (coming onto two weeks now), I am stymied.

    I come up with two hypotheses:

    1) We have a very large, very extensive, exceptionally dry air mass, stuck in place over the Intermountain West;

    2) all aircraft fuel, including foreign carriers, has been suddenly reformulated, such that contrails are a thing of the past.

    Occam’s Razor says the former is the simpler, and most likely correct hypothesis, but some evaluation from a Meteorologist would help.

    Thanks in advance,

    Mark H.

    [You will have a few minutes to save this text to own computer for your future use, then it will be removed. This site will not discuss chemtrail speculation. .mod]

  232. Mark Hladik says:

    For unknown reasons, the website did not post, but it is flightaware dot com .

  233. Ed, Mr. Jones says:

    “http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/10/scholarly-journal-retracts-60-articles-smashes-peer-review-ring/”

  234. Catcracking says:

    Anthony,
    The climate community isn’t the only group to cook the books on peer review. A scholarly journal has retracted 60 papers due to fraud in the peer review process.

    “Every now and then a scholarly journal retracts an article because of errors or outright fraud. In academic circles, and sometimes beyond, each retraction is a big deal.

    Now comes word of a journal retracting 60 articles at once.

    The reason for the mass retraction is mind-blowing: A “peer review and citation ring” was apparently rigging the review process to get articles published.

    You’ve heard of prostitution rings, gambling rings and extortion rings. Now there’s a “peer review ring.”

    The publication is the Journal of Vibration and Control (JVC). It publishes papers with names like “Hydraulic enginge mounts: a survey” and “Reduction of wheel force variations with magnetorheological devices.”

    It’s field is highly technical:

    Analytical, computational and experimental studies of vibration phenomena and their control. The scope encompasses all linear and nonlinear vibration phenomena and covers topics such as: vibration and control of structures and machinery, signal analysis, aeroelasticity, neural networks, structural control and acoustics, noise and noise control, waves in solids and fluids and shock waves.

    JVC is part of the SAGE group of academic publications.

    An announcement from SAGE published July 8 explained what happened, albeit somewhat opaquely.

    In 2013, the editor of JVC, Ali H. Nayfeh, became aware of people using “fabricated identities” to manipulate an online system called SAGE Track by which scholars review the work of other scholars prior to publication.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/10/scholarly-journal-retracts-60-articles-smashes-peer-review-ring/

  235. Mark Hladik says:

    Hello to the Mod responding to my initial inquiry:

    The question is not about “chemtrails”. It is about the absence of normal, white contrails behind high-flying jets.

    I stated that I do not believe in the “chemtrail” wacko-ness.

  236. Paul Westhaver says:

    Very cold, maybe record cold, anticipated for USA and Canada North East next week.

  237. Gary says:

    I posted earlier about a summer cooling event. Here is another article – calling it – wait for it – a poor man’s POLAR VOREX!

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2014/07/10/poor-mans-polar-vortex-to-make-shocking-summer-return-in-eastern-u-s-next-week/

  238. Patrick (the other one) says:

    Climate change may bring more kidney stones
    http://www.chop.edu/news/climate-change-may-bring-more-kidney-stones.html

    It’s worse than we thought.

  239. milodonharlani says:

    From the author of the upcoming book, “In Global Warming We Trust: A Heretic’s Guide to Climate Science”:

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/why-the-former-ice-age-became-global-warming-then-climate-change/article/2550565

  240. Mary Brown says:

    Be interested to see how the skeptics attack this one…

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/10/us-usa-sealevel-flood-idUSKBN0FF20220140710

  241. TonyK says:

    And from the ‘We could have told you that if you had bothered listening to reason’ department…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-28229430

    One down, umpteen thousand to go…

  242. Steve Ferwerda says:

    I thought this was very humorous as I was watching Cuomo on the news last night:

    http://thevane.gawker.com/gov-cuomo-talks-about-tornadoes-knows-nothing-about-t-1602480574

  243. milodonharlani says:

    A puzzling thing in origin of life natural science:

    Which came first, the virus or the cell?

    http://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20140710-hints-of-lifes-start-found-in-a-giant-virus/

  244. milodonharlani says:

    Mary Brown says:
    July 10, 2014 at 1:20 pm

    The Eastern Seaboard of the US is sinking due to post-glacial rebound in Canada & subsidence in areas lifted up by the weight of the now gone but eventually to return Laurentide Ice Sheet (which spread out from the area of Hudson Bay, which exists because of depression from its mass).

    Also, cities & structures have expanded into vulnerable areas. That combined with about a foot of sea level rise since the depths of the LIA (the rate of which is slowing) have made flooding easier, if not less common. OTOH, it was a lot stormier during the cold LIA than warmer present.

  245. Chris says:

    Climate Research data sharing polices being adopted by other scientific disciplines

  246. neillusion says:

    30,000 dollars if you can disprove global warming by the scientific method…

    http://blog.physicsworld.com/2014/07/04/a-huge-cycle-in-sheffield-30000-for-falsifying-global-warming-and-another-physicist-goes-into-advertising/

    Great conference in vegas by the way.
    N

  247. neillusion says:

    physics world report/article Christopher Keating challenge
    30000dollars to prove manmade GW not exist

    http://blog.physicsworld.com/2014/07/04/a-huge-cycle-in-sheffield-30000-for-falsifying-global-warming-and-another-physicist-goes-into-advertising/

    1. I will award $30,000 of my own money to anyone that can prove, via the scientific method, that man-made global climate change is not occurring;

    http://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com.au/p/1000-global-warming-skeptic-challenge.html

    Mod feel free to delete this post…just a heads up for interest…

    [See the thread already established on this topic. .mod]

  248. George Lloyd says:

    Hi Anthony this is a little dated but it seems that the National Science Foundation is well and truly out of control – look what they are doing with your money (both from campus reform.org):

    $5 million to the University of Wisconsin to create climate change fairytale -http://campusreform.org/?ID=5649

    Columbia University to spend $5.7 million on taxpayer funded climate change games – http://campusreform.org/?ID=5641

  249. James says:

    I found the slide show in this huff po article revealing:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/09/fossil-fuel-subsidies_n_5572346.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green&utm_hp_ref=green

    Basically, to lower your “contribution to climate” (whatever the *bleeep* that means) we should:

    -not have kids
    -not have pets
    -not vote republican
    -not fly
    -not have (christmas) lights
    -not eat meat
    -not take a shower
    -not use AC
    -not drive (alone)

    I have not seen such a concise collection of the future green nightmare anywhere else.

    James

  250. M Courtney says:

    I know this is faith and not science but isn’t that what AGW is all about?

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/11/world-council-of-churches-pulls-fossil-fuel-investments

    Also, for comparison:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitoid

  251. ecowan says:

    ” Carl “Bear” Bussjaeger says: July 5, 2014 at 2:55 pm
    Not only do these idiots not understand climate, simple genetics and mutation confuses the heck out of them:
    Climate change could make red hair a thing of the past if Scotland gets sunnier……..’
    —–
    http://spectator.org/articles/59910/don%E2%80%99t-say-goodbye-redheads-yet
    Don’t Say Goodbye to Redheads Yet … Global warming won’t put them out to pasture……Dr. Moffatt, whoever he may be, seems to be making a fundamental confusion here between two very important scientific concepts, ultraviolet and infrared radiation, or as we might call them, “sunlight” and “heat.” If global warming meant more sunburn-causing ultraviolet radiation were reaching the earth, then redheads might be in for a hard time. But ultraviolet has nothing to do with global warming.
    The theory of global warming instead says that increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will trap infrared radiation — heat — normally reflecting back into space, therefore warming the earth — the so-called “greenhouse effect.” So redheads won’t be impacted more than anyone else.
    Granted, Moffatt gets around this by arguing that cloud cover will be the controlling factor. Decreased cloud cover, he says, will let in more sunlight, which will make the low-melanin, redheaded gene superfluous. But nobody has any idea whether a hypothetical warming earth would have more or less cloud cover. In fact, Richard Lindzen, perhaps the world’s most prominent global warming skeptic, argues precisely that increased warming will create more cloud cover and that this will be enough to offset the whole earth-overheating scenario.
    Actually, if you think about it long enough and want to engage in the kind of off-the-wall speculations that characterize most global warming “science,” you could argue that red hair will become more important. Red hair is a recessive gene that has emerged mostly in northern latitudes such as Denmark and Scotland where the Gulf Stream keeps the weather tolerably warm while sunlight remains relatively weak. Now if the earth’s middle latitudes start becoming intolerably hot and people start migrating toward places like Canada and Siberia, then red hair is going to become more adaptive.
    Well, this is just another far-out speculation of the kind that says we should be closing down whole sectors of the economy because of what the weather is going to be like 50 years from now. In any case, I’m not worried that my grandchildren will become evolutionarily obsolete. (Red hair seems to skip generations.) I’m much more worried that there won’t be much left of the American economy if we base our future on predictions like this one.

  252. Robert of Ottawa says:

    Another stupid piece of warmista propaganda

    Abstract

    Previous research has identified the interaction between political orientation and education as an important predictor of climate change beliefs. Using data from the 2010 General Social Survey, this article looks at the moderating effect of party identification on income in predicting climate change beliefs in the U.S. Probing this interaction reveals that increased income predicts a higher probability of dismissing climate dangers among Republican-leaning individuals when compared with Independents and Democrats. Alternatively, increased income predicts a higher probability of ranking climate change as the most important environmental problem facing the United States among Democratic-leaning individuals compared with Republicans. The results indicate that income only predicts climate change beliefs in the presence of certain political orientations, with poorer Republicans less likely to dismiss climate change dangers than their affluent counterparts.

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-014-1198-9

    People get paid for this?

  253. Tim Southgate says:

    http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/redheads-scotland-could-face-extinction-due-global-warming-dna-expert-warns-1456082

    Oh no, floods and famines I can cope with, but no redheads. Somebody do something!

  254. Mary Brown says:

    This proves what many have been saying for a long time… that global warming may make the world a better place, not worse.

    No more redheads? Definite improvement.

  255. Federico says:

    According to Scientific American, “summers in Helena, Mont., will warm by nearly 12°F, making it feel like Riverside, Calif.”… They even have a handy global warming calculator!

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/1-001-blistering-future-summers-will-yours-feel-like-texas/

  256. Bill P. says:

    My employer is based in Canada, and involved in enviromental engineering. I see a lot of news items regarding Canadian government regulations, etc., therefore, and noticed a link to this document on our company portal:

    http://env.gov.bc.ca/cas/adaptation/pdf/SLR-Primer.pdf

    There must be a “talking points memo” somewhere that suggests all discussion of “global warming” alarm must conclude, in the first paragraph of any document, the phrase “Climate change is HERE.”

    I find it interesting they are predicting a rise on the southern B.C. coast of “between 80 and 120 cm by 2100,” which they claim will cause “Coastal inundation and reduced drainage capacity; Coastal erosion; Changes to coastal habitats and loss of wetlands such as salt marshes; Reduction in coastal sea ice; and…”

    OF COURSE!!!

    “More frequent and intense storms, storm surge and wave action.”

    I would have thought that by now, the Alarmists would dispense with the “more frequent and intense storms” pitch, since there are NO statistical analyses of any reputable kind that have indicated this, and it’s obvious alarmism, but you can’t keep a good FALSE MEME down, I suppose.

  257. Lewis P Buckingham says:

    I know its just weather, but its cold in Queensland with record low this morning.
    I wonder if this will delay the El Nino?
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-12/brisbane-records-coldest-morning-103-years/5591890

  258. Bill P. says:

    The Carbon Tax vs. Unemployment/Economic “Growth”:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/07/australia_green_australia_unemployed.html

    Correlation? You tell me.

  259. dccowboy says:

    It’s BACK! and better than before

    Just clicked on the Unisys page and they have reposted the page using the higher resolution product. It is a thing of beauty.

    http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sfc_daily.php?plot=ssa&inv=0&t=cur

  260. ShrNfr says:

    Oh the horror. Fridges and TVs cause climate change. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10962434/Stop-buying-big-fridges-middle-class-families-told.html Brought to you by Department for Energy and Climate Change in Britain of course. On another note, the drek being smeared around by Bloomberg et al. with the title “We Are All Texans Tomorrow: 1,001 Blistering Future Summers” proclaiming that we are all toast by 2100 notes: “Summers in most of the U.S. are already warmer than they were in the 1970s. ” Well, yes they are, but were not the same folks calling for the oncoming ice age in the 1970s?

    As an overall comment, the 55″ LED tv that I use as a monitor because of some vision problems uses all of 60 watts. That will certainly toast the planet in no time.

  261. R Taylor says:

    According to Prince Chuckles, as of July 12 we have only 36 months until planetary condemnation. So little time, so much ego …

  262. John Brisbin says:

    Geothermal activity described as weather (which we all know is just ‘little’ climate):
    http://www.accuweather.com/en/features/trend/yellowstone_heat_road_melts/30238184

    Oddly, the other stories I read about this did not involve the weather at all.

    Example quotes:
    “Yellowstone National Park’s Firehole Lake Drive was closed Thursday, July 10, as portions of the roadway’s asphalt melted amid the summer’s recent heat in the Northwest.”

    “As temperatures soared in the park this week, the extreme heat from the thermal areas surrounding Firehole Lake Drive caused thick oil to bubble to the roadway’s surface, inducing major and dangerous damage to the blacktop.”

  263. Neil Jordan says:

    A colleague sent this link and article to me:
    http://rt.com/usa/171896-universe-light-photon-underproduction/
    “Scientists now believe that a tremendous amount of light that would otherwise be illuminating our universe is mysteriously absent.”

    “How much light exactly? According to new research conducted by a team of international scientists and funded in part by NASA, the National Science Foundation and the Ahmanson Foundation, around 80 percent of the universe’s light is nowhere to be found.”
    [end quote]
    My colleague suggested (\carc) that the missing light was caused by human technology. I emphatically responded that the missing light is hiding in the abyssal ocean, right next to CAGW’s missing heat.

  264. Joel O'Bryan says:

    Earth magnetic field strength rapidly decreasing… more than previously thought.
    ESA satellites as data source, so GISS can’t hide this one.
    http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/Swarm_reveals_Earth_s_changing_magnetism

  265. Zeke says:

    RUSTON, La. — Peach orchards at Mitcham Farms, near the north Louisiana city of Ruston, have survived winter freezes, droughts and dangerous hail storms. But they evidently will not survive the Environmental Protection Agency and its regulations.

    The family-owned business, established in 1946 and featured in tourism magazines, is Louisiana’s largest peach orchard,according to its website, but owner Joe Mitcham expects he’ll close up shop in only a few years.

    In 2005, the federal government completed its phase out of a chemical known as methyl bromide, used to control pests in peach trees and other plants. This has given Mitcham no choice but to close, as most of his trees won’t survive without it. In fact, many already have.

    The EPA claims using this chemical threatens the earth’s ozone layer and that the U.S. had to discontinue its use because of the Montreal Protocol On Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer and because of the Clean Air Act.

    http://dailysignal.com/2014/07/12/epa-regs-likely-kill-68-year-old-louisiana-peach-orchard/

  266. Zeke says:

    Strawberry growers and the recently EPA-outlawed methyl bromide:

    “California is the top strawberry growing state producing 2-3 billion pounds per year. California accounts for 20% of the world’s production of strawberries. Since about 1965, approximately 90% of strawberry land in California has been fumigated before each crop is planted. Statewide average strawberry yields tripled following the adoption of fumigation. Generally, the increase in strawberry yield is credited to effective control of the soilborne fungal disease, verticillium wilt, which attacks the water-conducting tissue of the plant. In recent years, the use of fumigants in California has been under intense regulatory review with a phaseout of methyl bromide and use restrictions which could include expanded buffer zones in strawberry fields where fumigation will not be permitted. A recent working group in California assessed the status of nonfumigant alternatives……”

    http://pesticideguy.org/2013/07/09/to-remain-viable-california-strawberry-growers-will-need-to-use-fumigants-for-years-to-come/

  267. Zeke says:

    Methyl bromides occur in nature:
    “Bromomethane originates from both natural and human sources. In the ocean, marine organisms are estimated to produce 1-2 billion kilograms annually.[2] It is also produced in small quantities by certain terrestrial plants, such as members of the Brassicaceae family. It is manufactured for agricultural and industrial use by reacting methanol with hydrogen bromide:

    CH3OH + HBr → CH3Br + H2O”

    That is pathetic. All of the elements are present in sea water as well, and yet these environmentalists ban the use of simple Nitrogen, Potassium, and Phosphorous fertilizers because some of it might get into the ocean! And notice that the fertilizers are used by wild microbes and organisms as well. Not only that, methane is produced by plants abundantly in the presence of UV light. Why are we banning the use of chemicals that are produced and used by the wild plants and animals, and which are present in the ocean in uniform quantities? How can this be?

  268. Michael D says:

    Al Gore is on BBC

Leave a Reply

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