Open Thread

[posted by autoscheduler] I’ll be offline and out of town for medical issues most of today and tomorrow, but may check in via my cellphone. If you have story ideas, news, etc be sure to flag the comment for a moderator’s attention. Moderators, feel free to post stories of interest.  – Thanks everybody, Anthony

open_thread

Advertisements

88 thoughts on “Open Thread

  1. ****Moderators****
    Here is a very interesting article on sea level rise: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,732303,00.html
    One paragraph has the following:
    “If the Greenland ice sheet, which is 3 kilometers (1.88 miles) thick in some places, were to melt completely, sea levels would rise by 7 meters on average. It would take many centuries before the 3 million cubic kilometers of glaciers ended up in the ocean. But people living near Germany’s North Sea coast would hardly even notice, because the sea level there would remain virtually unchanged. The water would even subside off the coast of Norway. “And, purely theoretically, the sea level would actually fall by several meters off the coast of Greenland,” Stammer explains. “

  2. I and my buddies have been deer hunting for 16 years. This November we noted an exceptional amount of fat reserves in the abdominal cavities of all 4 deer we harvested. Do the deer know something about the coming winter that we don’t?

  3. Before the BBC take this program down – you can see here how they are seeking to frame their refusal to properly report sceptical climate stories:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00wfnqg/Royal_Television_Society_Lecture_Huw_Wheldon_Lecture_2010_Science_a_challenge_to_TV_Orthodoxy/
    In the UK the presenter Brian Cox is a popular TV science figure – although the show isn’t overtly about Climate you can quickly see where they are ultimately heading.

  4. http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-satellites-reveal-differences-sea.html
    According to the new results, the annual world average sea level rise is about 1 millimeter, or about 0.04 of an inch. In some areas, such as the Pacific Ocean near the equator and the waters offshore from India and north of the Amazon River, the rise is larger. In some areas, such as the east coast of the United States, the sea level has actually dropped a bit over the past decade.
    Now listen to the fool Willis, who is by the way sitting on inconvenient ARGO data:
    “These effects are still small in today’s rising ocean, but as we look out over the next century, the patterns of sea level change due to melting ice will be magnified many times over as the ice sheets thin and melt,” Willis said.
    So the imminent catastrophe is being now extrapolated beyond 2100, because obviously none is going to happen in this century.

  5. C James says:
    December 3, 2010 at 8:12 am
    “Here is a very interesting article on sea level rise: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,732303,00.html

    It’s really interesting, but it also has the money quote:
    “But the scientist fears that this delicate balance could tip during a warmer future on greenhouse Earth. In addition, the computer models predict that the Gulf Stream will weaken by about 25 percent. Böning warns that this could cause the sea level to rise by about 20 centimeters in the North Sea.”
    I would really, really, really love to see all of these “it’s worse than we thought can i have another million pretty please” scientists to clean out a quarry once in a while. With their hands. Chained to the journalists.

  6. Mods, this is a beaut! I got this from Steve’s realscience site.
    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23903565-prince-charles-opens-pound-45m-climate-change-gallery-funded-by-shell.do
    “The objects on display include tree rings, stalagmite samples and three ice  cores which scientists have analysed to spot changes in the earth’s climate over time.
    The ice cores, drilled from the Antarctic icecap, have been installed in a glass-fronted freezer cabinet. One of them contains bubbles of air from the year 1410.”

    There’s so much to talk about in this story, I wouldn’t know where to start. Shell? The prince? Air bubbles born in 1410? Then there’s always the mainstay of tree rings!

  7. Tony
    The Economist is carrying data in this weeks’ magazine which purports to show how 2010 is one of the warmest ever, and the last decade the warmest on record.
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/12/climate_change
    I think there was some news recently that the UK Met Office had altered some data in the historical temperature record, which if I remember correctly, led to the downward revision of temperatures in the 90s, thus causing the lower temperatures in the 00s to keep the warming trend up. A nice bit of historical revisionism. But if someone could confirm this for me, or even if WUWT ran an article discussing this it would clear things up as to what is going on. Thanks.

  8. If the Great Global Warming is dying on a Caribbean beach, a new interesting controversy would be that happening between the “Flintstones’ Universe” settled science defenders and those of the “Electric Universe/Plasma Universe” theorists.

  9. Re James Sexton says: December 3, 2010 at 9:13 am
    Already being nicknamed the Rogue’s Gallery.

  10. I am curious what the status of the SurfaceStations.Org effort is. The last update is dated July 16th, 2009. Is there any on-line list that partitions the surveyed sites into CRN-1 through CRN-5? I’m just curious.

  11. I have questions, but no answers. How much CO2 is tied up in limestone? Is this CO2 C13 or C12? How do the amounts of carbon in limstone and coal/oil/gas compare?

  12. Tony says:
    December 3, 2010 at 8:18 am ‘The U.N. is saying “2010 among 3 hottest years”. . . But then I keep reading here that we’ve been cooling for the past 8 years.’
    There are a four major keepers of temperature trends: UAH, RSS, HadCru and GISS. (Some say there are five, but NOAA is more of a subset of GISS.) The one that I use the most is UAH, and you can find its data at http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt
    Please keep in mind that a Global Average Temperature is a questionable concept. Seldom do climate issues depend upon a global average, but rather upon regional trends. Moreover, the assumptions and adjustments to develop long-term trends can be very questionable. There are fewer questionable adjustments in satellite data (UAH and RSS), but they have issues of their own, and they go back only to 1979.
    It is not contradictory for 2010 to one of the three hottest years and for the last decade to be cooling. There is little disagreement that for the last 150 years or so, we have been emerging from the Little Ice Age. Therefore temperatures in this current decade would be expected to be among the highest on record because records essentially started as temperature starting warming as the Little Ice Age faded. Temperatures spiked in 1998 with a very strong El Nino, and the global average drifted downward slightly since then. The image of downward drift is heavily influenced by a strong La Nina in at the end fo 2007. Now in 2010, we had not only a strong El Nino, but also prolonged stationary fronts which have caused global temperatures to rebound from the dip experienced in the 2007 La Nina. Most commentators on this blob consider the 2010 circumstances to be temporary, expecting the downward drift to return in 2011, and therefore they continue to talk about global cooling. Current developments as 2010 draws to a close seem to confirm their expectations.

  13. I got a deer in Upper Michigan and my brother noted the same thing about high abdominal fat in the deer. I attributed it to the exceptional acorn crop … acorns are very high calorie preferred food for deer. The acorns are still scattered all over the ground, usually they’ve been picked clean by critters by now.

  14. edward tregembo says:
    December 3, 2010 at 10:16 am
    That’s really pitiful. And I wonder how are they doing all the more than 14 million people who lost their houses in the US, where are they going to live/survive next winter?
    No news about this.

  15. Sonic Frog: UAH is out for November, and the number is truly surprising. It is +.38. I cannot get anything close to +.38 with the daily readings that are available. Perhaps, Dr. Spencer will enlighten us soon.

  16. Why not do something for science that is not, apparently, considered all that sciency?
    How ’bout make an argument or two to get scientist to actually communicate, properly and honestly, to the “rest”? Like for instance when bone head hippies are speaking, or writing, about temperature anomalies they also include the actual temperature referenced by those anomalies by their relation, rather then just 0, zip, nill and frakking null? Or would that be too much to ask for for the puny scientists?

  17. Tony
    RE: 2010 being the 3 rd warmest despite cooling for 12 years.
    First of all here is the actual data for UAH, GISS, and CRU with a handy graphing tool to extract trends. Plug in your own values !
    I love it [ woodfor trees.org] because it takes the data out of the hands of the “cardinals of climate change” and lets the average Joe analyze it.
    Here is the trend from 2005 to 2010 which is sharply downward.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:2005/to:2010/plot/uah/from:2005/to:2010/trend
    Don’t let appearances fool you the fairest way to assess a trend is not just to take the first point and the last point and draw a line through them. That is how a child would do it. A high or low point in the last data point causes you to make incorrect conclusions.
    For Example: Visualize a sine wave going nowhere with no upward or downward trend, Now draw a line from the lowest point on the sine wave to the highest point where you end the data. You could incorrectly deduce there is a huge warming or cooling trend when there was no trend at all.
    Scientists and engineers have long been familiar with the problem which fools little children every day. The solution is called the least mean squares method which I will describe below.
    A much more scientific method is called the least mean squares method which is much less subject to “cherry picking”. It consists of drawing a line through the data and minimizing the square of the distance of each data point to the trend line.
    If you do that using whatever method you prefer you see a downward trend in the temperature from 2001 to 2010. The blip in 2010 caused by an El Nino is factored in as it should be logically.
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:2001/to:2009/plot/uah/from:2001/to:2009/trend
    You can do the same graph using UAH.EDU data and an Excel spreadsheet if you have the time.
    http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/public/msu/t2lt/tltg lhmam_5.3
    So you see there is no problem seeing that it cooled slightly for 12 years but there was an El Nino in early 2010 making 2010 kick upward, the trend is still going down sharply from 2005 to 2010.

  18. Tony says:
    December 3, 2010 at 8:18 am
    The U.N. is saying “2010 among 3 hottest years”. (read this here: http://www.wral.com/weather/story/8714527/)
    But then I keep reading here that we’ve been cooling for the past 8 years.
    Can anyone point me to the data that shows the leveling off & cooling trends?

  19. Billy Blofeld says:
    December 3, 2010 at 8:42 am
    Unfortunately, Billy, if you live outside the UK you cannot use iPlayer. Perhaps you could give us the essence of it.

  20. Warren in Minnesota says:
    I have questions, but no answers. How much CO2 is tied up in limestone? Is this CO2 C13 or C12? How do the amounts of carbon in limstone and coal/oil/gas compare?

    See here:
    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/clathrate-to-production/
    This chart:
    http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/gas-hydrates/gas-hydrates-3.gif
    Note the caption that says rocks are not on the chart as they are 1000 times more than all the other carbon combined.
    Per C12 / C13 ratios. You’d have to speculate as there as massive quantities of rock that have not been drilled and characterized. If you google it “Limestone C12 C13) you get a lot of old references. They tend to report about 0.9 so it’s C13 enriched. For what was tested. But who knows how much it varied based on the air at the time of formation.
    Oh, and as a side bar, I’d just note that we’ve recently discovered that some fish excrete “gut rocks” made from carbonates, and we’re not real clear on that C12 / C13 ratio either, so the recent ratio changes in the air could just be from all the fish we harvested no long pooping out the stones…
    But “the bottom line” is that WAY before you do anything else, you need to figure out what is going on with the carbonate rock geology and volcanoes, including those under the sea, as they are 100,000% of the problem, while “air” is down in the 4/18800% range.
    (Hopefully I’ve done the decimal point shift right. It’s a 1000 x for the rocks of a 100% non-rock with “atmosphere” being 3.6 Gtons while the rest of that 100% chart total to about 18,800 of that 100%, so I think that makes it 1000 x 100% for the rocks, or 100,000% and 3.6/18,800% for the air or 0.0000191% . Really, though, it ought to be stated as ‘nearly’ 100% for rocks and 0.00002% for the air with rounding up. And it’s 18,776.6 total for the chart but given the round 10,000 and 5000 I think that has some false precision in it…)
    But the bottom line is that the air is just not even an error term on the geological processes that dominate CO2 and C12 / C13 ratios.

  21. Juraj V. says: December 3, 2010 at 8:58 am
    http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-satellites-reveal-differences-sea.html
    “According to the new results, the annual world average sea level rise is about 1 millimeter, or about 0.04 of an inch.”
    The 1mm/yr component is from meltwater only and does not include thermal expansion (about 2mm/yr). From the article: “that average annual rise in sea level rise due to meltwater entering the ocean is about 1 millimeter, but that an additional rise will come from that fact that as the average temperature rises so does the ocean temperature, which in turn causes the volume of the ocean to increase.”

  22. To add insult to injury, years after the EU[SSR] started to prohibit incandescent light bulbs, now the German Umweltbundesamt (UBA) (Environmental Federal Office)
    FOUND OUT THAT ENERGY SAVING BULBS CONTAIN MERCURY and warns accordingly.
    German:
    http://www.rtl.de/cms/ratgeber/haus-und-wohnen/gefaehrliche-energiesparlampen.html
    Geniusses. One of them must have surfed the blogosphere during working hours. Or maybe they want to prepare us for the return of candlelight.

  23. I’m also puzzled by this proclamation re 2010 being one of the or even the warmest year. I understand the PR value of this announcement for the climate summit but nonetheless I’d like to know:
    Throughout the Southern Hemisphere Winter a number of articles here and elsewhere reported record cold snaps and generally a much colder Winter than average – reportedly Spring in Australia has also been cooler than normal, so did the Northern Hemisphere Summer completely balance this out? How are the figures added up for this (theoretical) global average temperature for 2010? Or was the Southern Winter really above average temperaturewise with only very localised cold spells?
    And how can this announcement be made based on only 10 months of data?

  24. scott says:
    December 3, 2010 at 10:47 am
    I got a deer in Upper Michigan and my brother noted the same thing about high abdominal fat in the deer. I attributed it to the exceptional acorn crop … acorns are very high calorie preferred food for deer. The acorns are still scattered all over the ground, usually they’ve been picked clean by critters by now.”
    The oaks in Eastern PA this past fall shed more acorns than I can remember. No wonder the deer are getting fat!

  25. Vicky Pope, of the UK Met Office, cannot fly to Cancun to announce the hottest year of all time because …… her flight from the UK has been cancelled due to the cold and snow. AH, life’s sweet ironies.

  26. AGW Quiz.
    Name that “one graph”.
    1. Snowmann’s graph.
    2. Womann’s graph.
    3. Unmanned graph.
    4. None of the above.
    “*The panel said one graph, that showed the extent of global warming and was circulated around the world, was “misleading” because it failed to explain how the information was gathered.”
    …-
    “*Prince Charles defends ‘climategate’ scientists”
    “The Prince of Wales has come out in support of the British scientists embroiled in the “Climategate” saga, describing their treatment as “appalling”.”
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8179778/Prince-Charles-defends-climategate-scientists.html
    …-
    “Mercury falls in Britian(sic), travel woes continue in Europe”
    “Five of Britain’s 19 nuclear reactors were also out of action Thursday because of the bad weather. And the country’s biggest store of natural gas could be empty within weeks if the wintry weather lasts into the New Year, the report said.”
    http://sify.com/news/mercury-falls-in-britian-travel-woes-continue-in-europe-news-international-kmdsIbaefgg.html
    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi

  27. Maren says:
    December 3, 2010 at 2:16 pm
    “And how can this announcement be made based on only 10 months of data?”
    Oh, they already got all the data for the 12 months…

  28. Robert Austin and his buddies are marveling at the fat deer. Scotty attributed it to the great acorn crop.
    Does that mean oak trees respond positively to increase CO2 levels?

  29. James Sexton said:
    There’s so much to talk about in this story, I wouldn’t know where to start. Shell? The prince? Air bubbles born in 1410? Then there’s always the mainstay of tree rings!
    ———————————————————————————
    It’s a corker, James. I especially love the exactly 600 year old air bubbles, put on display just in time for this important birthday! So thoughtful.
    Did Charlie blow out the candles for them?

  30. DirkH @2:10 says:
    To add insult to injury, years after the EU[SSR] started to prohibit incandescent light bulbs, now the German Umweltbundesamt (UBA) (Environmental Federal Office)
    FOUND OUT THAT ENERGY SAVING BULBS CONTAIN MERCURY and warns accordingly.

    I have been scanning comments by people who use these Congressional Light sources containing the neurotoxin, mercury (CFLs), and posters report that they are subject to explode, catch fire, or short out and smoke. Here is an example:
    GE Helical 20W Bulb Failure
    Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2009-06-13 16:20.
    Just had the same problem with the same bulb in my bathroom; there was a red glow (small fire?) coming from the tube. I had the breathe in some of the smoke that emited from the bulb to turn off the light witch. I wonder what the fire and health risks are…?
    (The thread is interesting and has a side discussion about multiphasic sleep patterns.)
    More and more local fire departments are carrying information about mercury spills because of these Congressional Lights:
    Fire Department > Mercury Safety
    And one or two lawyers are beginning to handle Congressional Light (CFLs*) failures and poisoning.
    *I can’t figure out what the F stands for.

  31. Sean Peake says:
    December 3, 2010 at 12:35 pm
    Is it just me or is there a Happy Face on the sun’s back side?
    http://solarcycle24.com/stereobehind.htm
    Uhhmm… Sean, If it really is the sun’s Happy Face (and it sure looks like one!), it can’t be the sun’s ‘backside’! Unless, of course, the sun has it’s proverbial head up its arse….
    Still, if the back side is really the sun’s happy face, then are we faced with his sunny side ‘moon shot’??!!!!!!
    I realize it would be a bum jest to make old sol the butt of a joke but we must get to the bottom of this backside smirk, lest anyone suggest we ‘turn the other cheek’ before we are assured of the first one. I’m so confused!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    };>)

  32. Zeke the Sneak says:
    December 3, 2010 at 4:26 pm
    “GE Helical 20W Bulb Failure
    Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2009-06-13 16:20.
    Just had the same problem with the same bulb in my bathroom; there was a red glow (small fire?) coming from the tube. I had the breathe in some of the smoke that emited from the bulb to turn off the light witch. I wonder what the fire and health risks are…?”
    The health risks? Oh nothing.
    Forget about it.
    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/733465
    Forget. Dig it? Uahahaha…

  33. FROM JOE BASTARDI: CORE OF PUNISHING COLD WILL SHIFT SOUTHEAST FOR DEC 10-20
    That does not mean beach weather for Ireland and England, it means it wont be as bad as what is going to develop over the central Europe for the mid month. I will post more on this later, but some of you not caught in the cold now, get ready, this is expanding and centering itself further southeast with time.
    Look at it this way.. Santa is coming three weeks from tomorrow and he will have weather more suited for him in much of the northern hemisphere population centers.. the US and the far east should still be cold too.
    Ice fairs on the Thames, anyone?
    ciao for now
    FRIDAY MORNING WHILE YOU WERE ASLEEP
    IT’S THE SUN VIS THE OCEAN, AND TO HECK WITH THE CO2
    The brawl for the winter in Europe is coming down to the Enso signal which supports the reversal to a more normal to warm pattern in the north, while the push of the cold southeast that is starting now more or less maintains itself and grows most harsh in midwinter, vis the low solar activity and perhaps some wild carding of volcanic activity from two winters ago in Siberia and Alaska, which is known to have a lag time in its reaction of several years.
    In this winter, folks, the last thing you are going to be worried about is warming from CO2. While I wish no harm on anyone from the cold, perhaps the punishing cold that is growing more frequent in winter (wait till the AMO changes) will serve as a reminder to the masses to wake up, and not just have an agenda shoved down their throat by folks who think they know better. Of course a lot of them have been in Cancun, which though recently cooler than normal, is not as bad as here.
    However, the guru of the sun and its possible effects, Piers Corbyn (you would be well advised to read this man’s ideas; he is someone that though technically I compete with, I think ups the level of the playing field as far as the search for the right answer in weather and climate. I respect and actually cherish people that will help up levels! I have no problem in complementing people like this, especially with some of the vitriol that is thrown his way sometimes) has really issued a startling and much colder look at the winter in the northwest than I have. Granted, we have little argument farther southeast, but it’s interesting to see tonight’s run of the ECMWF model try to re-charge the blocking for one more go around mid December to mid January, not only for Europe, but for much of the eastern U.S. This certainly runs counter to my ideas, which say we are going to break this and reverse it in the north. While I do think the sun plays a huge longer term role in the climate, the shorter term is not as clear to me, though it is part of my triple crown of cooling that I have been arguing will turn the tide, perhaps in a dramatic fashion, in the next few decades. In any case, it’s short term solar vs the Enso.
    Btw… there is a La Nina, at least here in the States, that occurred several years after the major Siberian Volcano of 1912, that was brutal here in the States. That was the winter of 1916-1917, and the SOI this year in the fall was as close to that as I have ever seen.
    In closing, the words of Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull from Aqualung come to mind…
    “Do you still remember, December’s Foggy Freeze?”
    Written in the ’70s, when there was talk of a coming ice age, no matter what they try to tell you.
    I wonder if Piers listens to any Tull?
    Ciao for now. ***
    http://www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.asp?partner=accuweather

  34. From the bottom of the CNN site in PJBs comment above
    London, United Kingdom Weather forecast
    HI -1°LO 1°
    WUWT

  35. According FOX News today, “One of the most compelling dangers, (Judith) Curry says, is the West Antarctic Ice Sheet which could raise sea levels 19 feet if it slips into the ocean. She calls that a looming catastrophe that could happen in the next few generations …”
    Is Dr Curry currently in Cancun? Did she really say that? Sounds alarmist to me! What do readers at WUWT think of Dr. Curry’s prediction? She seems highly respected by many on this blog.

  36. Zeke the Sneak says:
    DirkH @2:10 says:
    To add insult to injury, years after the EU[SSR] started to prohibit incandescent light bulbs, now the German Umweltbundesamt (UBA) (Environmental Federal Office)
    FOUND OUT THAT ENERGY SAVING BULBS CONTAIN MERCURY and warns accordingly.
    I have been scanning comments by people who use these Congressional Light sources containing the neurotoxin, mercury (CFLs), and posters report that they are subject to explode, catch fire, or short out and smoke. Here is an example:

    Or you can just fumble one when doing the replacement cycle and have it shatter on landing, putting a load of mercury into your home… But not to worry, mercury doesn’t do much, other than poison living things when it’s not making them gay…
    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/gay-bulbs/

  37. Shocking news. Look who’s greasing whose wheels for Cancun:
    “EU hands China €500m clean tech loan
    European Investment Bank provides financial backing for up to 15 low-carbon projects
    The prospects of an international deal on new climate financing mechanisms received a boost earlier today, when the European Investment Bank (EIB) announced it has granted €500m (£425m) to China to support the development of low-carbon projects.”
    http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/1930032/eu-hands-china-eur500m-clean-tech-loan

  38. My project for 2011. There is a conveyor belt of people who are paid to invent and implement schemes to take money from your pockets and hand it to the government, usually less a transaction fee and often with a deal to share in part of the returns.
    We are not talking about a regular, legislated tax. We are talking about schemes such as smart meters for electricity, where the citizen does not get to own the meter which attracts a periodic payment; the purpose of the smart meters is to provide more money to regulators, at your expense.
    These conveyor belt people are not doing useful work. They are not producing tangible, useful goods or participating in the efficient enhancement of any natural advantage of a country.
    My project is to identify, name and shame these people. They are parasitic by nature and they are neither a necessary nor desirable part of the employment structure. Mentally, I liken them to freel riders and carpetbaggers. They have multiplied so fast that are are now a real and expensive threat.
    So, if you agree, name and shame. Tell any friends who are parasitic that they are parasitic and ought to do decent things. Cut off the air supply and let it collapse.

  39. And how can this announcement be made based on only 10 months of data?

    They’ve probably got a preliminary figure for Nov., and they’re making the assessment for the “meteorological year,” which starts on Dec. 1.

  40. R. de Haan says:
    December 3, 2010 at 5:52 pm
    FROM JOE BASTARDI: CORE OF PUNISHING COLD WILL SHIFT SOUTHEAST FOR DEC 10-20
    Thanks Ron, Joe is on the same page as many of us, but I suspect he has a missing link in his data that he uses to predict the NH winter. Joe is expecting the NAO to reverse soon, but we are in a world of 210 years ago. I think the low solar EUV will keep the NAO firmly in the negative….this index could be one to watch over the next few months

  41. Looking at the Sea Ice page and in particular at the side by side comparisons of 2007 and 2010, I can’t help but wonder if the ice on Hudson Bay is being counted as arctic sea ice. If so, why? Otherwise it seems 2010 is well above 2007.

  42. From reading numerous blogs I have come to a tentative hypothesis that SWR is far more important long term to the earths energy balance then LWIR.
    It is really very simple, but I do not find it discussed. The simple statement is that the greater the “residence time” is of any WL heat entering the earths atmosphere, ocean or land, the greater long term effect any change, positive or negative, in that radiation will have. It is reasoned thus with a simple traffic analogy:
    On a highway if ten cars per hour enter the highway, and the cars are on the road for ten hours before exiting, there will be 100 cars on the road and as long as these factors remain the same the system is in balance. If you change the input to eleven cars per hour, then over a ten hour period the system will increase from 100 cars to 110 cars before a balance is restored. The same effect can be achieved by either slowing the cars down 10% or by lengthening the road 10%. In either case you have increased the energy in the system by ten percent by either increasing the residence time or the input.
    Now lets us take the case of a very slow or long road with the same input. Ten cars per hour input, 1000 hours on the road, now you have ten thousand cars on the road. Now lets us increase the input to eleven cars per hour just as we did on the road with a ten hour residence time. Over a 1,000 hour period we have the same 10% increase in cars (energy) How ever due to the greater capacity on that road the cars, (energy) have increased 100 times, (1,000 verse 10 ) Any change in the input or the residence time on this 1,000 hour road will have a 100 times greater effect then on the 10 hour road. This is cogent to climate in that the 10 hour road is the atmosphere, and the 1000 hour road is the oceans.

  43. Re Juraj V. says:
    December 3, 2010 at 8:58 am
    I do not think “grace” is properly vetted technology yet so I do not accept their results either way. What are their error margins? Can changes in the mantel afffect their readings?

  44. From Joe Bastardi
    SATURDAY AFTERNOON: ANSWER TO QUESTION IN TELEGRAPH ABOUT WHY YOUR ARE FREEZING.
    In case you did not read the article, here is the question:
    Are we freezing because of global warming?
    Here is the answer: No, you are freezing, and get used to it, because the cyclical nature of climate is heading for colder times.
    Several years ago, here in the states on the O’Reilly Factor TV show, I revealed a chart entitled the triple crown of cooling. Natural Oceanic cycles, Solar cycles and volcanic activity. Why is it, that when the PDO has changed, the sun is much less active than it has been in previous times ( the time of Victoria was referenced, and lo and behold, perhaps we are getting weather like that) and two major arctic volcanoes go off and with them, their natural lag time for cooling which is evolving now, the very answers that are logical are ignored in such articles.
    It is amazing how we are expected to swallow such things.
    I will give an example of the basic difference between what I do, and what the global warming community does. The post below explains that the NSIDC ideas are above board, when I had posted my suspicions on them and showed the evidence as I saw it. When they took the time to email and show me exactly what they were doing, what did I do? Immediately made sure you knew I had seen that and corrected for it. Not simply say, no its still as I say.
    Yet NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS WITH THESE FOLKS AS FAR AS THE EARTHS TEMPS there is no getting around the fact they will claim they are right, and do so to a point where they seek to shut down debate.
    Now perhaps in this Alice in Wonderland weather world, if the earths temps drop as I say, we will find that up is down and down is up. But if its me, and I have said this many many times, if you want a reason to push the agenda of alternative energy, you better darn well understand that what I am saying, that the earth cools back to the 70s, given the population and economies of the planet, is much more a pressing issue than if we warm it up. And simply shutting off the current sources that help in the advancement of mankind because of some unproven argument, is only going to lead to increased misery on our planet.. of our own making, and it wont be because of an increase in co2.
    Again, for my euro readers, using the football argument..if we follow the logic put forth in this article, then the more your team scores, the more they will fall behind.
    ciao for now ****
    SATURDAY MORNING
    INTERESTING LETTER FROM NSIDC TO ME.
    The US based snow and ice measuring center took the time out to email me and address issues I raised last week on their measurements and for that I am grateful, since I wish to be above board. While I continue to point out the other sites are either on top of, or slightly ahead of the death spiral year (2007), they rightly point out that on those sites the lowest measurement at this time of the year is 2006, which we are ahead of now. And there are different ways of measuring. After reading their email, I believe they are simply recording the ice the way they see it, even if it may appear less than the others.
    The very fact that they took the time out to inform me, leads me to believe this is not part of any conspiracy, but is simply one organization measuring something the way they feel best. It takes very little for me to believe the best of people, and taking time out like that means while I will continue to show where their readings are, there will be no questioning of motivation. On the other hand, it is what it is, and you should look at all the graphs yourself and watch this, and also continue to monitor this globally.
    But I want to publicly thank the folks at NSIDC for their attention to this matter and I will make sure their graphs are shown and treated as another set of observations like all the others, with respect, and gratitude for having the chance to observe this.
    I do believe that alot of us in this debate are honest brokers, simply searching for the right answer, and whether I agree with what they believe the answer is or not, I do believe their motives are not to rewrite or change what they are observing.
    There have been questions about the NSIDC raised by many, and some of you may be thinking that I am a soft touch here, but I dont believe that is the case. I believe what they explained to me, and so their graph will be judged as an honest broker, and in reference to itself as I think its all above board
    Besides, if the ice does what I am saying it will, it will look even more impressive on that site!
    In the meantime, its getting darn cold in alot of places that arent in the arctic, so back to that.
    ciao for now
    http://www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.asp?partner=accuweather

  45. Inre Congressional Light sources containing the neurotoxin mercury (CFLs)
    EM Smith, in your post you point out that there are two ways of becoming exposed to the neurotoxin mercury from a CFL. If you fumble and drop a cold bulb you will be exposed to the Quicksilver in the amount roughly equal to the period on the end of this sentence. That is a far greater amount than state authorities have set for safe exposures in the home or school.
    I am neither a chemist nor the son of a chemist, but it seems to me that the exposure to the mercury vapor from a light that is switched on is where another true hazard lies. As you say in your blog, “And we all know that compact fluorescent bulbs (CFL) contain mercury. (It’s actually a mercury vapor arc inside that makes UV, which then hits the phosphors that make visible light).”
    The lab safety website Mercury in the Laboratory states:
    “The rate of mercury volatilization is directly related to temperature. Whenever elevated temperatures are involved special care must be exercised to provide adequate ventilation. A common occurrence is the breaking of thermometers in ovens due to bumping or raising the oven above the thermometer’s capacity.”
    If these bulbs have a tendency to smoke, short, explode and have fires, or if there is a potential for a slow, undetected leak, then it seems to me that this is a fast track to exposing the entire population of the United States to temperature volitized mercury vapor. Remember the bulbs cannot be in enclosed or recessed spaces, they must be open and exposed.
    Mercury is known to be toxic to the kidneys and the central nervous system.
    Effects of exposure to mercury include tremors, depression, irritability, emotional instability, insomnia, and death.
    Texas Republican Reps. Joe Barton and Michael Burgess, along with Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), have introduced H.R.6144 – Better Use of Light Bulbs Act
    to repeal the ban on incandescent bulbs.

  46. DirkH says:
    December 3, 2010 at 4:53 pm
    ‘Although the evidence that mercury plays a role in AD, and possibly other neurodegenerative disorders, is “strongly suggestive,” the study authors acknowledge that some links are missing. Nevertheless, they argue this should not stand in the way of taking action to prevent human exposure to mercury.’
    I think we can still safely use it in industry, but it certainly does not belong in the home.
    PS, I have a paper I want to purchase and read but it is in German. Can you give me a hand? I will link it up over on Tallbloke’s Suggestion thread.

  47. Geoff Sherrington,
    “My project is to identify, name and shame these people. They are parasitic by nature and they are neither a necessary nor desirable part of the employment structure.”
    I think we are moving to a new form of society, post capitalism. Call it parisitism. Parisitism is the logical outcome of big government societies, since parasitism requires government power to make it possible.

  48. David L says:
    December 3, 2010 at 2:39 pm
    Maybe in the Upper Peninsula the deer are more dependent on the acorn crop but in Southern Ontario deer can feast on bountiful fields of corn and soy beans. I have also seen other years when the acorn production in our area has been a lot greater than this year, where the ground is literally carpeted with acorns below the oak trees. I would rate this years acorn production as average here. So when deer have no limits on available food, what causes the variation in fat storage?

  49. Although this messaging tactic is unethical, it may give fellow environmentalists cause to pause and realize that climate alarmism can make things much, much, much worse:
    “As climate talks drag on, experts ponder tech fixes”
    http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20101204/climate-talks-cancun-101204/
    Once bright environmentalists start analyzing climate data in careful detail, it might become possible to get the environmental movement back to playing a constructive role in society – for example advocating parks & natural forests and opposing toxic pollution. Rather than making untenable assumptions about nature, I invite fellow environmentalists to study it first hand (& carefully).
    Paul Vaughan, B.Sc., M.Sc.
    Ecologist & Climate Researcher.

  50. Zeke the Sneak says:
    December 4, 2010 at 9:52 am
    “PS, I have a paper I want to purchase and read but it is in German. Can you give me a hand? I will link it up over on Tallbloke’s Suggestion thread.”
    I will watch out. See you there.

  51. BBC refurbishes “Green Room” (which was their CleanTech/AGW brainwashing dungeon, giving environmentalists, green NGO’s and subsidy rent seekers a soapbox) into something that “looks around the web for what’s new. They go so far as to mention Judith Curry’s blog and the word ClimateGate.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/seealso/2010/12/green_room.html
    Looks like a little bit of Perestroika. You know what happened to the Warsaw Pact after Perestroika started…

  52. Prof. Brian Cox, previously, a young hero of mine, presented the Huw Weldon lecture on BBC2 Thurs. night.
    He quotes Feynman and then defends AGW with consensus science. He attacks climate sceptics and declares the peer review process is the gold standard – for climatology!
    He clearly has done no personal investigation of sceptical arguments nor can he have read any of the Climategate e-mails.
    Very, very disappointing and I expected better from Prof. Cox.
    Is he afraid of having his television career curtailed like David Bellamy so decided not to ruffle the waters? Still time to do a bit of reading, Bri. The longer you delay the more embarrassing it will be.

  53. I heard that Gene Simmons, one time member of KISS, who is a self-described fiscally conservative/socially liberal guy, voted for Obama and now wants his vote back. That man is still rockin after all these years.
    So I am suggesting a new greeting sign between folks who want their vote back. Hang out your tongue!!!!!

  54. Dear Anthony,
    you have been mentioned by S. Rahmsdorf in a non nice way . .
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/12/coldest-winter-in-1000-years-cometh-–-not/
    “Oktober, 4. The “climate sceptics” website wattsupwiththat, noted for their false reports, ”
    (these “false reports” turn out to have nothing to do whatsoever with WUWT, if at all with surfacestations.org, but you know the story better than me, you wrote it)
    I guess they have a hard time, that they have no influence on the climate blog No. 1 🙂
    Nethertheless, I? think you should try to comment on that misrepresentation over there!
    Cheers and all the best,
    LoN

  55. Dr T G Watkins says:
    December 4, 2010 at 1:25 pm
    well said! I have enjoyed some of his stuff on Tv – but he does tend to tow the party line. Whether thats due to his ‘keeping up appearances’ to keep in TV or whatever, I wouldn’t know – but it’s funny that he, along with Michio Kaku, Hawkins et al – have all kind of felt the need to comment on AGW? – but clearly, in a less than fully informed manner. Still, maybe their minds are the same as computers – GIGO!

  56. To the – moderator – this need to see the light of day.
    WHY AM I SURPRISED?
    MORE SHOCKING WIKILEAKS ON CLIMATE DISCUSSIONS
    HERE IS A BOMB SHELL AND SHOULD CONCERN SKEPTICS AND WARMERS. IT REVEALS THE UNDERHANDED LENGTHS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WILL GO TO, TO GET IT’S WAY WITH THE UN CLIMATE CHANGE AGENDA AND OUR TAX DOLLARS.
    WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord
    Abbreviated:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/dec/03/wikileaks-us-manipulated-climate-accord
    Damian Carrington
    guardian.co.uk, Friday 3 December 2010
    Embassy dispatches show America used spying, threats and promises of aid to get support for Copenhagen accord
    Hidden behind the save-the-world rhetoric of the global climate change negotiations lies the mucky realpolitik: money and threats buy political support; spying and cyber warfare are used to seek out leverage.
    The US diplomatic cables reveal diplomatic wheeling and dealing showing how the US seeks dirt on nations opposed to its approach to tackling global warming; how financial and other aid is used by countries to gain political backing; how distrust, broken promises and creative accounting dog negotiations; and how the US mounted a secret global diplomatic offensive to overwhelm.
    Seeking negotiating chips, the US state department sent a secret cable on 31 July 2009 seeking human intelligence from UN diplomats across a range of issues, including CLIMATE CHANGE.
    A diplomatic offensive was launched. Diplomatic cables flew thick and fast between the end of Copenhagen in December 2009 and late February 2010, when the leaked cables end.
    Getting as many countries as possible to associate themselves with the accord strongly served US interests, by boosting the likelihood it would be officially adopted.
    Omaha’s US administration sent confidential cables that records blunt threats and overtures to back the accord by offering aid money as political leverage. Stating sign the accord or discussions end now!
    Questions were raised whether the US aid would be all cash? Countries were seen as vulnerable to financial pressure. . Any linking of the billions of dollars of aid to political support is extremely controversial – nations most threatened by climate change see the aid as a right, not a reward!
    Some countries needed little persuading. The accord promised $30bn (£19bn) in aid for the poorest nations hit by global warming they had not caused.
    The cables obtained by WikiLeaks finish at the end of February 2010. US diplomatic wheeling and dealing may, it seems, be bearing fruit.

  57. “The accord promised $30bn (£19bn) in aid for the poorest nations hit by global warming they had not caused.”
    Without the evil capitalist caused increase in CO2 some of their people would have starved.
    What proof is their that any nation was harmed by the increase in CO2?
    The benefits are KNOWN.
    The projected disaster is ever in the future, and yet to appear.

  58. Sweden enters the Dark Ages:
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZtc2ma2GEQ&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3]

  59. Anthony as a follower of this site wish you and all your family well.
    As this is an open thread I have a couple of questions
    1- Age of Universe v Age of Solar System
    The universe is commonly estimate at 16 Billion years. The Solar system is 5 billion years old. Here on Earth we have natural elements up 92 Uraniuam. Elements over 26 Iron are only supposed to form after a supernovae . I think it is cutting it a it fine for a star to supernova, produce the elemetns and then coalesce under gravitational force into a solar system. It would make more sense if the age if the Universe was much greater, say 30 billion years.
    2 – Time travel
    If travel in time is possible, then one has the problem of travelling in space as well. If you travel backwards in time you will be in the same place. The earth rotates goes around the the sun at 68,000 m.p.h. and the sun is currently heading towards Vega at 1.5 million m.p.h.. Get your time space co-odrinates wrong and you will end up either 100 ft entombed in solid rock or 100 ft above plummeting towards the earths surface.
    Which will solve the conundrum of what happens if you kill your own parents before you are born.
    Finally on climate/weather generally I will have more respect for any scientist who has read and understood the implications of micrometerology and this on meterological measurements after reading Rudolf Geiger’s text ” The Climate Near the Ground”.

  60. What if the Caroniferous Period had never Happened?
    The Carbonfierous period was a unique time on Earth. The climate was stable for long periods of time. The plants grew in an environment where insects and animals were unable to consume their high contents of lignin. The result, large coalfields across the planet. Without large amounts of coal I would think that industrial development would have peaked at Tudor ( 1500 -1600) development. No coal means minimal amounts of steel, hence no industrialised world.
    Earth has been particularly blessed ( one way or the other)with an assortment of elements to promote technology: iron, aluminium lead, mercury, copper, uranium. If we lived on a planet with few metallic resources we would still be in caves. As an alternative ,consider another planet where the concentrations of the metallic elements was much greater. Is it not more probable that on these planets that technology would develop to a much higher level? As an open thread I was just trying to stimulate some comment aside from climate change ( which is natural and on the evidence not man-made).

Comments are closed.