NOAA deletes an "inconvenient" kids science web page

Hadley CRU isn’t the only government agency that deletes web content related to climate. NOAA/NWS Southern Region Headquarters has gotten into the act. An interesting thing happened today. NOAA deleted an educational web page about an experiment you can do with CO2.

Ordinarily such a thing would go unnoticed, especially since it doesn’t impact anything particularly important like policy, or climate data. It’s just an experiment for kids in the classroom.

Fortunately, I still had the web page open in my browser. I had been looking at it yesterday, and I had been thinking I might try the experiment myself with a datalogging thermometer, just for fun.

Here’s the web page as it was open in my browser:

SRH_jetstream_CO2_page

click for full size image

And here is what the same URL looks like now:

SRH_jetstream_CO2_404

click for full size image

You can try it out for yourself:

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstream/atmos/ll_gas.htm

What could cause NOAA to pull a web page like this on a moment’s notice?

Two things.

1 It was featured on Climate Depot yesterday.

2 It had this passage that must not have agreed with somebody higher up in the NOAA food chain:

It has been thought that an increase in carbon dioxide will lead to global warming. While carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been increasing over the past 100 years, there is no evidence that it is causing an increase in global temperatures.

Or maybe it was this one:

The behavior of the atmosphere is extremely complex. Therefore, discovering the validity of global warming is complex as well. How much effect will the increase in carbon dioxide will have is unclear or even if we recognize the effects of any increase.

So rather than corrupt young minds with a simple science experiment with some inconvenient language attached to it, NOAA simply deleted it. Of course nothing is really deleted on the Internet anymore. NOAA looks pretty silly thinking it would go away with a simple delete.

The Wayback machine has the missing web page for posterity:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060129154229/http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstream/atmos/ll_gas.htm

Now it looks like I’ll have to run their simple experiment. Stay tuned.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mark T

Wouldn’t the simple fact that the bottle with seltzer in it has more mass imply more energy transferred from the lamps and thus, a higher temperature, irrespective of whether or not it there was more CO2? I would think the experiment would only be valid for the purpose they are attempting to illustrate if you had the same amount of mass in each bottle (gas and liquid).
Mark

Kevin Kilty

Oh, Boy. A completely open field to romp through.
This looks really, really difficult to get reasonable data out of. The CO2 path is short, lamps are not very uniform, what do they mean by equal distance, and temperature is tough to measure in the first place to the sort of resolution required. Might have to do a lot of randomized replications.
Other than all that the experiment is fine.

Mark T

Actually, thinking even deeper, PV = nRT, worked out for each gas present, using partial pressures and proper mass (n), correct?
Mark

REPLY:
with seltzer, there is mostly only CO2 present, being heavier than air, it would likely fill the bottle and force out the other gases. -A

Tim Channon

“The Wayback machine has the missing web page for posterity:”
So it’s in NOAA’s arc?

Pamela Gray

I am guessing the chemical reaction that causes the fizz fizz of the seltzer tablets builds up quite a head of heat. I use a similar experiment to shoot the lids off old plastic film canisters with a legoman sitting on top.

I did a double-take on the last 2 paragraphs.
Had to page up to check the logo.

Kim Moore

It’s interesting that the commentary following the experiment doesn’t offer the result as proof of global warming. Also the comments about the 1997 NASA report that satellite data showed no warming but rather a cooling was a surprise.
Maybe someone at NASA and NOAA has good sense but not enough rank.

I thought something was amiss when the page went missing so fast. Gavin-boy must have racked up the phone charges. I can see the wife shutting the study door so the kids don’t hear daddy cussing like a sailor, “GET THAT $%^&*I S4@7 OFF THE EFFING SERVER NAO!!!”
We need to find out who loses their job over this and make him or her a cause celebre.

Zeke

What about the Venus info panel on the side? Doesn’t Venus reflect 85% of the Sun’s rays back into space? Doesn’t it periodically re-surface itself with magma, erasing all of the craters that MUST have been there? Is the runaway greenhouse effect on Venus settled science?
Denier Power!

David Ermer

Maybe suspended particulates or a colloid solution? Or an exothermic reaction as previously mentioned?

Ray Boorman

I saw that webpage the other day too, & wondered about that experiment. Since they do not mention equalising the air pressure in both bottles, wouldn’t the higher pressure in the CO2 one result in higher temperatures with all else being equal?

Spartacus

That page was a joy! Mark T already pointed the PV=nRT balance. No one knows what is the relative pressure of the gaseous fraction of each bottle. Presumably, the one with the seltzer tablet will have a much higher pressure in the gaseous fraction. Considering that the volume will, approximately, stays equal to the other bottle, temperature will surely rise, no matter if it’s CO2 or any other gas. But this is not the most jokey part of the erased page. Pay attention to the Planet Venus “fact” green box. Clearly there’s a complete ignorance about the physical conditions about the Venusian atmosphere. Venus has a pressure, near the planet’s surface, of about 90 atm (earth = 1 atm). This is the main factor that makes venus atmosphere so hot, even ignoring that is closer to the sun than earth, thus it receives more radiation. As a matter of fact, during the Magellan missions, the variation of the temperature of the venus atmosphere with the altitude was measured. At an altitude where the pressure of the Venusian atmosphere is about the same pressure as the earth atmosphere, which occurs at about 49.5km from the planet’s surface, the temperature was about 57ºC. For these reasons, venus atmosphere cannot be used as a simplistic example to explain the paper of the “so called” greenhouse gases.

John Trigge

Wouldn’t the temperature also rise due to the increase in pressure from the CO2, particularly as the seltzer would probably release gas even without the heat lamp?

Oops; too popular Anth! – getting “all our circuits are busy now” message from wayback machine:

Failed Connection.
We’re sorry. Your request failed to connect to our servers. This may be due to temporary problems in our data center, or difficulty serving a higher-than-usual volume of traffic.

.
.
.

Spartacus

“with seltzer, there is mostly only CO2 present, being heavier than air, it would likely fill the bottle and force out the other gases. -A”
Check that the experiment talks about sealing the top of the bottle with molding clay. This way no gas is forced out and potentially rising the pressure of the gaseous fraction. I’m saying this because the experiment does not refer if the sealing is made after all seltzer tablet is consumed.

chris y

Anthony, it will be interesting to hear your test results. I see a lot of problems with this experiment. My prediction is that any temperature difference seen will have absolutely nothing to do with the >10,000 ppm CO2 concentration in the gaseous volume above the liquid.
On the other hand, its a perfect science fair experiment, with plenty of opportunities to learn about how difficult it is to design a clean experiment.

Adam

Anthony,
Deepclimate may be the culprit…
http://deepclimate.org/2009/11/02/contrarian-education-noa/

Back2Bat

OT,
Stop breathing or we’ll kill the fish.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091102171559.htm
I am beginning to wonder what the difference between a government scientist and a prostitute is.

Bob Shapiro

The waybackmachine link gave me a “Failed Connection” error page.

gt

Speaking of experiments, has there been ANY lab-scale experiment done to verify the GH effect of CO2 and the likelihood of positive feedback mechanism through increased water vaporization?

Capn Jack Walker

I know the dog ate my homework excuse is lame.
But the dog ate the homework I set the class from a teacher, is a cacker.

Layne Blanchard

Using Venus to demonstrate C02 as a GHG is ridiculous. Venus’ orbit is .72 AU, so due to the inverse square law receives roughly double the intensity of sunlight. Add a 243 day period of rotation, and a nearly pure C02 atmosphere, and the day side literally cooks for months on end.
Hardly representative of earth’s situation.

haha, great work Anthony! this is funny — and very embarassing for NOAA. With 2 million hits per month, and rising, more embarrassment for NOAA?

Rob M.

That’s a great ‘model’,showing how CO2 in the’atmosphere’ comes from outgassing of the comparitively large body of water beneath it….and not a fossil fuel in sight!

Layne Blanchard (21:30:32) :
Using Venus to demonstrate C02 as a GHG is ridiculous. Venus’ orbit is .72 AU, so due to the inverse square law receives roughly double the intensity of sunlight. Add a 243 day period of rotation, and a nearly pure C02 atmosphere, and the day side literally cooks for months on end.
Hardly representative of earth’s situation.

The Venusian atmosphere itself rotates in about four days, the temperatures are pretty uniform on both day and night side of the planet. Still comparing today’s earth with Venus is like comparing apples to pears, two completely different planets and a sun that is not strong enough to deliver the required amounts of watts per square meter to cause a positive watervapour feedback that eventually leeds to CO2 outgassing of rocks.
But it is a future that awaits our own planet in a pretty distant future, perhaps in a billion years time when the sun gets hot enough to start a runaway greenhouse here on earth. Nothing to worry about for a long time, a very long time. In the highly unlikely event that we are still around during that time the only option is to move place.
In other words, a scare story in the current “Global Warming Hysteria”.

I am guessing the chemical reaction that causes the fizz fizz of the seltzer tablets builds up quite a head of heat. I use a similar experiment to shoot the lids off old plastic film canisters with a legoman sitting on top.

So that’s what passes for entertainment in Oregon these days? 😉

SteveBrooklineMA
Mark

Speaking of this experiment, I’ve always wanted to know what would happen to air temperature if a bunch of equal sized rooms (or bottles or whatever) were filled with air and different amounts CO2 and placed in an area where the get equal amounts of solar radiation. I’d also like to see this done with different amounts of water vapor, from 0 to 100% humidity.
Does anybody know if this has ever been tried?

Ray

I think we have a mole! Maybe someone at NOAA is reading this site daily. Yesterday I put the following comments in the tips section and today it’s gone…
Anthony, I would suggest that you do the experiment with and without the cap on the bottle and also with and without the lamp…. just to prove the point that the pressure is responsible for the temperature rise.
From yesterday:
Ray (12:13:18) :
Looks like the guys at NOAA put up their definitive proof experiment up on their site: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstream/atmos/ll_gas.htm
The funny thing about the reaction (i.e. citric acid + baking soda) is that it is endothermic (absorbs heat). Yet, they claim that the temperature increases due to the presence of CO2 in the bottle and the light that shines on it. At the end they again tell how complicated climate science is and bring back the idea that the Venus atmosphere is hot because it is 96% CO2. They don’t say anything about the effect of gas pressure on the temperature of the gas. In their little experiment that “proves” global warming is due to CO2, I suspect that the increase of the pressure in the bottle makes the temperature increase to such extend that it also provides heat to the endothermic reaction. This is a so pathetic experiment that high school chemistry teachers will show that demo to their students and conclude that CO2 = Anthropogenic Global Warming.
2
11
2009
Ray (12:16:14) :
Just to add to my post… maybe you should take a sceenshot of that page at NOAA… they might remove it once the bad science is exposed… I bet that doing this in the dark will also have the temperature increase in the bottle containg the Alka-Seltzer since it is a pressure effect that is suspected.

Boffin
gtrip

OT but what’s up with the current lack of “weather”? Current North American cloud cover and storm systems are practically nil. Record daily high temps for the first three days of November in Phoenix. Nothing on the horizon coming down from the Great White North….

Tenuc

So it seems that someone in NOAA knows that the hypothesis of CAGW has been falsified!
Perhaps they should point this out to the IPCC ?

Flints

PV=kT

Max

Back2Bat (21:15:29) wanted to know “what the difference between a government scientist and a prostitute is.”
Easy. The pension plan.

Ray

SteveBrooklineMA (22:15:40) :
So many things are wrong with that experiment.
1. Pure CO2 compared to an atmosphere containing 350 ppm. How real is this for the Earth?
2. A black sheet of carboard at the bottom of the tanks that represents the surface of the Earth… I did not know we lived on a black body!
3. Since it contains pure CO2, the water vapour pressure is near zero, thus only CO2 will absorb the infrared radiation.
4. Removing the water vapour from the tank containg pure CO2 will permit more radiation to reach the black carboard, thus it will get warmer in the dry tank.
5. I would expect the same results if the tank was filled with dry nitrogen.

Steve S.

Boy are you getting a dose of what Oregon is ALL about.
Of course that was taken down for it’s blasphemous content.
It’s a little surprising it was there in the first place. But my point about Oregon is there is not a single government entity where anything remotely contradictory or outside the agenda is tolerated. For a long time.
Not at any level. Not the municipal, county, regional or state level.
Now that former Oregon State University Professor Jane Lubchenco heads NOAA she’s cleaning things up the Oregon way.
Next you’ll see a new and broadening campaign by NOAA to better educate the public. The Oregon way.
It’s so bad here that our former yet sitting Secretary of State traveled the state giving Al Gore power point presentations.

John F. Hultquist

It may be that someone actually read this “experiment” and thought it was a bunch of hooey – thus, then removing it. If what it claims to show isn’t true, that would be embarrassing. Posters here at WUWT seem to think it isn’t true – thus it should not have been put up, or, having been put up, should be removed as soon as its low science coefficient was realized.
So, what’s up with the “table top lamp” that is used as “a source of heat”? How close is it supposed to be to the bottles? Is it supposed to heat with the shortwave light? Or what? An oven heated brick or cement block would be a better representation of Earth than a light bulb.
Anyway, the whole thing is odd – from the experiment, its Venus sidebar, and its removal. But maybe I don’t understand this as well as NOAA; they, in case you have missed it, are a:
“. . . society that uses a comprehensive understanding of the role of the oceans, coasts, and atmosphere in the global ecosystem . . .” and “. . . understand and predict changes in Earth’s environment. . . ”

Pamela Gray

gtrip, we are getting weather alerts for a cold front heading our way from the northern Pacific. This is a big one with major ocean swells. NE Oregon temps have been below normal.

Ripper

Boffin (22:45:09) :
The page still exists on the NOAA website at http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/yos/resource/JetStream/atmos/ll_gas.htm
That one has gone too now.

John F. Hultquist

gtrip (22:46:19) “weather”?
Watch your language! A large moisture laden storm is due Thursday on the PNW coast. I’ll go out and do a dance and see if I can’t redirect it your way if that will make you happy.

Ray

More on my previous comment…
If you look at this plot of the emission spectrum of a tungsten lamp, you will notice that the maximum emission is around 1 micron. Now, if you superimpose this emission spectrum to that of the absorption of water and also CO2 ( http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/atmospheric_spectral_absorption.png ) you can see that the water vapours will absorb more radiation than CO2 will. Absorption of infrared radiation does not necessarily mean increase of temperature… so this could support that removing the water vapours from the tank (by displacement) will have the black body absorb more radiations and as it is a black body, the gas above it will heat up more if the tank is dry.

Pamela Gray

Old man winter is about to bite us in the arse. And you thought nothing is going on with the weather. Who washed their car? That’s what I want to know.
SPECIAL WEATHER STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE PORTLAND OR
407 PM PST TUE NOV 3 2009
ORZ001>014-WAZ019>023-039-040-040815-
NORTH OREGON COAST-CENTRAL OREGON COAST-
COAST RANGE OF NORTHWEST OREGON-
CENTRAL COAST RANGE OF WESTERN OREGON-LOWER COLUMBIA-
GREATER PORTLAND METRO AREA-CENTRAL WILLAMETTE VALLEY-
SOUTH WILLAMETTE VALLEY-WESTERN COLUMBIA RIVER GORGE-
NORTHERN OREGON CASCADE FOOTHILLS-NORTHERN OREGON CASCADES-
CASCADE FOOTHILLS IN LANE COUNTY-CASCADES IN LANE COUNTY-
UPPER HOOD RIVER VALLEY-SOUTH WASHINGTON CASCADES-WILLAPA HILLS-
SOUTH WASHINGTON COAST-I-5 CORRIDOR IN COWLITZ COUNTY-
GREATER VANCOUVER AREA-SOUTH WASHINGTON CASCADE FOOTHILLS-
INCLUDING THE CITIES OF…ASTORIA…CANNON BEACH…TILLAMOOK…
LINCOLN CITY…NEWPORT…FLORENCE…VERNONIA…JEWELL…TRASK…
GRANDE RONDE…TIDEWATER…SWISSHOME…ST. HELENS…CLATSKANIE…
HILLSBORO…PORTLAND…OREGON CITY…GRESHAM…SALEM…
MCMINNVILLE…DALLAS…EUGENE…CORVALLIS…ALBANY…HOOD RIVER…
CASCADE LOCKS…MULTNOMAH FALLS…SANDY…
SILVER FALLS STATE PARK…SWEET HOME…GOVERNMENT CAMP…
DETROIT…SANTIAM PASS…VIDA…LOWELL…COTTAGE GROVE…
MCKENZIE BRIDGE…OAKRIDGE…WILLAMETTE PASS…PARKDALE…ODELL…
COLDWATER RIDGE VISITORS CENTER…MOUNT ST. HELENS…FRANCES…
RYDERWOOD…RAYMOND…LONG BEACH…CATHLAMET…LONGVIEW…KELSO…
CASTLE ROCK…STEVENSON…SKAMANIA…VANCOUVER…BATTLE GROUND…
WASHOUGAL…TOUTLE…ARIEL…COUGAR
407 PM PST TUE NOV 3 2009
…STRONG COLD FRONT TO IMPACT REGION WITH RAIN…WIND…AND HEAVY
SWELLS ALONG THE BEACHES LATE THIS WEEK…
A STRONG LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM IS BEGINNING TO GET ORGANIZED IN THE
GULF OF ALASKA TODAY…AND WILL RAPIDLY STRENGTHEN INTO A POWERFUL
STORM TONIGHT AND WEDNESDAY. WHILE THE CENTER OF THIS LOW PRESSURE
SYSTEM IS EXPECTED TO REMAIN IN THE GULF OF ALASKA…IT WILL PUSH
A STRONG COLD FRONT ONSHORE INTO THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST THURSDAY.
WINDS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FRONT MAY GUST AS HIGH AS 50 TO 60 MPH
NEAR THE BEACHES AND COASTAL HEADLANDS THURSDAY…AS WELL AS
ACROSS THE HIGHER TERRAIN OF THE COAST RANGE AND CASCADES. THE
FRONT WILL LIKELY BE ACCOMPANIED BY A PERIOD OF HEAVY RAIN…
ESPECIALLY IN THE COAST RANGE WHERE UP TO 2 TO 3 INCHES OF RAIN
ARE POSSIBLE THURSDAY THROUGH THURSDAY NIGHT.
SNOW LEVELS WILL START OFF WELL ABOVE THE CASCADE PASSES EARLY
THURSDAY…BUT ARE EXPECTED TO FALL QUICKLY AS THE FRONT MOVES
ACROSS THE CASCADES THURSDAY AFTERNOON AND EVENING. BY FRIDAY
MORNING…ACCUMULATING SNOW IS POSSIBLE AS LOW AS SOME OF THE
CASCADE PASSES. WITH COOL UNSETTLED WEATHER EXPECTED TO CONTINUE
FOR SEVERAL DAYS BEHIND THE FRONT…SNOW SHOWERS MAY CONTINUE
THROUGH THE WEEKEND AS LOW AS 3000 TO 4000 FEET IN ELEVATION.
ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT ASPECT OF THE GULF OF ALASKA STORM SYSTEM WILL
BE THE VERY LARGE OCEAN SWELL EXPECTED TO DEVELOP AS THE STORM
STRENGTHENS WEDNESDAY. THIS SWELL MAY BEGIN IMPACTING THE SOUTH
WASHINGTON AND NORTH OREGON COAST WITH HIGH SURF AS EARLY AS
THURSDAY MORNING…WITH THE STRONGEST WAVES IMPACTING THE BEACHES
THURSDAY NIGHT THROUGH SATURDAY. THE HEAVY SURF MAY PROVIDE THE
POSSIBILITY FOR MINOR COASTAL FLOODING DURING HIGH TIDE…AND THE
LARGE BREAKERS MAY PRODUCE HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS ALONG THE
BEACHES.

Ray

the emission spectrum of a tungsten lamp:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intdept/i42/Planckspect.gif

Richard111

I fancy one of those data logger thingies. How do I get one in the UK?
Tried an experiment some months ago. Suspended a one foot diameter quarter inch thick piece of boiler plate one inch above a container of water. The steel plate plate was heated until a drop of water sizzled, (somewhere around 100C). Was unable to read any change on a mecury thermometer. Oh, and the water container is insulated on sides and bottom. The object was to see if infrared radiation would heat water. Fun anyway.

Jeff B.

I am guessing the chemical reaction that causes the fizz fizz of the seltzer tablets builds up quite a head of heat. I use a similar experiment to shoot the lids off old plastic film canisters with a legoman sitting on top.
So that’s what passes for entertainment in Oregon these days? 😉

With the very Progressive government in Oregon, and thus one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, they’ve got to come up with something to pass the time.

Ron de Haan

I wonder if they have sacked the person responsible for this site.
One thing is for sure, the Green establishment is watching WUWT and Climate Depot like a hawk and the moment one of their “domains” is walking out of pace, be sure they get an angry phone call.

Indiana Bones

“how much effect will the increase in carbon dioxide will have is unclear or even if we recognize the effects of any increase.”
Sorry. Has the English teacher in cadet school gone missing??

Back2Bat

“Who washed their car?” Pam who am in Oregon.
Pam,
I prayed for cold weather but only on the AGW crowd and their accomplishes. Oregon should be safe shouldn’t it?

Important questions:
Will Congress cap and tax seltzer?
Will the EPA declare seltzer to be a dangerous pollutant?
Will there eventually a black market for seltzer?
I plan to stock up and secretly hoard the stuff starting tomorrow.

Suzanne