I’m remiss in getting this up until now, as Leif sent it back on May 12th. Prep, travel and recovery for ICCC4 took up quite a bit of my time, but I’m pleased to be able to offer this from Dr. Svalgaard now.
Cartoon from community.acs.org
Dr. Svalgaard writes:
Back in October WUWT had an article about my paper ‘Heliomagnetic Magnetic Field 1835-2009‘.
The paper has now gone through extensive peer review. I promised to let people in on the review process and can now do that. They contain a mixture of arcane technical points and general whining. The review history may be of general interest, at least as far the ‘flavor’ and tone of the reviews are concerned.
The entire review is condensed into a PDF file, which can be viewed below:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Rich Matarese says:
May 31, 2010 at 4:19 pm
I agree with your futher comments. I obviously didn’t “put too damned much time and effort into polishing” my thought processes before commenting!
“”” CRS, Dr.P.H. says:
May 29, 2010 at 2:55 pm
….ahhh, yes, the perils of “publish or perish!”
Since my BS tolerance level is very low, I rarely publish in peer-reviewed journals and have no aspirations for faculty tenure.
The university tenure system is badly broken anyway, and probably contributes to some of the “scientific consensus” aspects of AGW, since young associate professors have to play the game and tailor their research & publications towards the mainstream if they want full professorship appointments.
This momentum is so powerful, I really doubt if we’ll find true scientific dissent in the literature regarding warming. Dr. Lindzen does a great job swimming against the tide, but he’s really an exception. “””
Dr. P.H.
The system will stay broke too, if those of us on the outside looking in, do nothing but bash the apparent miscreants, like the Hansens, Joneses, and Manns for what we may perceive (rightly or wrongly I suppose) to be the errors of their ways.
We also need to be supportive of those like Professor Lindzen who dare to stick their head out of the fox hole at the risk of getting it shot off.
If we are able to follow and hopefully understand their scholarly outputs; it behoves us to let it be known that we are persuaded by their arguments.
There’s not much point in telling the MSM what we believe; for we have no standing at all with them; compared to giants like AlGore.
But they can’t ignore the Lindzens and the Fred Singers, and Tim Balls; who have credibility even among the opposition; so if we agree with stuff they put out; we need to let the MSM know that these arguments are persuasive; and they (the MSM) ignore them at the peril oftheir insignificance as news sources.
I haven’t read Leif’s missive yet; but I’m looking forward to doing that. We can’t be letting old sol out of his climate job, and putting all the load on H2O.
I got out of Academia a half century ago; for pretty much the same reasons you cite.
“”” Joe Lalonde says:
May 29, 2010 at 6:37 pm
Suranda says:
May 29, 2010 at 4:50 pm
You too eh?
How can a supposedly solid iron core through an iron shell create an electro-magnetic field when iron has no energy of it’s own. Where did this evidence of iron come from when you cannot sample the core. (Iron going through iron to show a new molecularly dense iron molecule when it is suppose to be pulled down by gravity)
No sense at all. This iron took time to go to the center to make the core would mean we had no magnetic field…hense no gravity only centrifugal force. “””
I’m not sure who said what here; or whether this is Physics or perhaps a recipe for genetically modified shoes.
I’m given to understand that Ferromagnetics is a bit over my head, when you get down to the nitty gritty; I have to stop at the stick in the sand level.
But it seems to me, that there is this thing called the Curie Temperature; and that Ferromagnetism does not exist above that Temperature in that particular material.
And by all accounts, the Temperature of at least the core of planet earth; which is believed to be mostly Iron; is way the heck above the Curie Temperature of Iron; so don’t go blaming any iron core for some Ferromagnetic effect on earth. But Iron at least is a reasonable electrical conductor, and some part of the core is supposed to be liquid, which therefore is capable of movement. To the extent that any of that iron is thermally ionised; and at that Temperature, who wouldn’t be; then a rotating core can make a magnetic field; even sans Ferromagnetism.
I have no idea what the status might be for either diamagnetism, or paramagnetism, in iron above the Curie Temperature; but I doubt that you need either of those to explain an earth magnetic field. Same goes for the sun I assume; no need for some mythical iron cored sun to get a solar magnetic field. I dunno how many times Dr Svalgaard has told us all that.
And one failing of modern theories of everything, si the failure to link Gravity, with any oif the other forces of nature; including electromagnetism; so how the hell can a magnetic field be responsible for gravity; about the only thing they have in common is they both have infinite range.
Dear Dr Svalgaard,
I have read your “review story” like a detective novel. Thank you! 🙂
As I see, you had bad luck to meet a person, who never can say “stop discussion” and holds by an opinion: “best defence is offence”. It was mainly not scientific discussion, but fight of mindsets.
Dear Suranda,
> “Today there was a geomagnetic storm with NO SOLAR WIND and the proton flux was nil. How is this possible?”
You are not quite right when you say there was NO SOLAR WIND. There was a sharp increase of solar wind density on 28 May and than very strong southward IMF on 29 May. I have collected a lot of such events and concluded that well-known combination “high solar wind velocity + strong negative IMF Bz-component” successfully works for strong geomagnetic storms, but weak and mild storms do not obey this rule. An additional rule is: “sharp solar wind density increase + consequent negative IMF Bz = weak or moderate geomagnetic storm” (see http://ics8.ca/proc_files/khabarova.pdf and http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0805/0805.0547.pdf ).