Weekend Open Thread


Travel today. So by request, here is a Weekend Open Thread on Thatcher, who did much to kick off the CO2 global warming saga but later on became a sceptic and regretted her actions.  My favorite quote (supposedly attributed to her) from Thatcher is about consensus:

“consensus is an absence of leadership”

So true.

Along the same lines, it is such a shame that the left treats her service so poorly by making an artificial push in song popularity, a false consensus if you will, to make “Ding Dong The Witch is Dead” #1 in Britain so that the BBC will have to play it on BBC Radio1. Such cheap shots speak to the integrity of their political convictions. Fortunately, the BBC decided that they had a shred of integrity left and chose not to play the clip in full. Still, it is a cheap shot.

Plus, discuss anything else within the limits of blog policy.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Jimmy Haigh.

She came to power in the long cold winter of discontent of1979. There were no jobs going in Perthshire in Scotland where I lived at the time. That is until one of her tax saving schemes for the wealthy kicked off and they started planting trees. I got a job planting trees in a plantation owned by Lloyds Bank – part of their pension scheme. The way it worked, as I remember, was that Lloyds would put in say 1 million pounds against tax. The tax payer would then put in 3 million pounds. At the end of the day, the whole lot would belong to Lloyds. In the last 5 years they have started cutting the trees down to build wind turbines…
Thatcher was not very popular in Scotland, nor indeed anywhere north of her home county of Lincolnshire. The burden of her reign was not shared equally by all of her subjects…

Bloke down the pub

We can only guess at what state the UK would be in today if she had been beaten in the elections by the Labour party. Everything that Gordon Brown managed to cock-up in the time that he was in power would have started thirty years earlier.


They are now claiming that quantum physics also proves that we’re warming the globe

David L. Hagen

OT Security Heads Up
Huge attack on WordPress sites could spawn never-before-seen super botnet
“Ongoing attack from >90,000 computers is creating a strain on Web hosts, too.”
ARealChange.com advises

Change your WordPress login password once every 90 days, and make sure it’s secure. You can generate a secure password for yourself here:http://www.pctools.com/guides/password/
Take the same precautions with your FTP/cPanel login passwords! Can’t stress this enough. If a password is unsecure and sitting in cyberspace for a while, it can (and eventually will) be hacked! Change up your passwords! . . .
meet our new friend, “Wordfence Security” (and YES, it is FREE. There is a pro version with some cool features as well for a very low fee) – you can install it through your WordPress plugins panel or by visiting http://www.wordfence.com/

REPLY: This mainly affects self-hosted sites Anthony

Bloke down the pub

I tried to post a comment on what the UK would have been like if Labour had won the election in’77, but apparently your new comments set-up would not allow me to say c**k-up. It obviously doesn’t know that it’s an old naval term.

James Ard

I just watched Alison Redford thread the needle on the Keystone pipeline at the Brookings Institution. It’s sad to see someone who surely knows better have to defend the carbon footprint of such a beneficial enterprise. Hopefully the days of co2 being considered in every economic decision will soon be coming to an end.

Jimmy Haigh.

I should have added more… If I remember correctly Lloyds Bank sold the entire forest off to the Rolls Royce Pension Fund some years after I finished planting there in around 1984. After that I have no idea who ended up owning it. I heard that some UK sporting and media celebrities were also part owners.

Chris Edwards

It says a lot for her integrity that she was taken in by the global warming scam, looked at it (thats where having a leader who is not a trained liar, sorry lawyer is beneficial) and saw through it and had the honesty to say so! had Labour won the election? well us brits are really stupid, stupid enough to spent 6 years fighting for our lives against socialism only to vote out the man who held us together for those dark years and elect a socialist government, but as we were visibly bankrupt, have Mr Calaghan get baled out by the IMF it would need american size stupidity to give them another try, it shows what 25 years of socialist union teachers can achieve!

I have said things about Margaret Thatcher on other posts in other topics on WUWT so I am not going to bore you all by repeating them.
The only thing I will repeat though is that the reason she is so reviled by the political left is because she pointed the way to a better system than they had in place from 1964 to 1979 (apart from a brief tenure in number 10 by Ted Heath, who wasn’t much better than Wilson.The country got richer and the poor got richer and happier umder her leadership.
The Left have the innate ability to control people, they are not interested in, as they pretend to be about the sick and the welfare of the poorest in our society. It is about control, Thatcher took control away from the Left both here in the UK and with the the help of Ronald Reagan, in Eastern Europe and the USSR and they hate her for it to this day .Margaret Thatcher was the best peacetime Prime Minister this country ever had! If Gordon Brown or Tony Benn died tomorrow I would not “celebrate”, in fact I would feel sorrow for their families.
The Left have revealed themselves in their true colours spiteful, ignorant and thoroughly nasty pieces of work who are not fit to be in politics and certainly not fit to govern a country or lecture us on CAGW.
Will they all please go to live in North Korea? Oh sorry I forgot, that is not in keeping with their desire to be in the governing elite.


I wouldn’t call an act of censorship that the BBC is not tasked with (or should be) the showing of a shred of integrity. The BBC is there to report, even if the news is ugly and says that a lack of common decency got a song into the charts (not a big deal these days with the sales figures/number of radio chart callers being what they are compared to two decades ago). Play the thing and add context, that’s the only job the BBC is chartered with.

Otter says:
April 13, 2013 at 7:22 am
They are now claiming that quantum physics also proves that we’re warming the globe
All things being kept equal is the key underlying assumption that is never spelled out. However, if vertical circulation is increased by global warming, then there is a very strong negative feedback in the climate system.
Real greenhouse warm not as a result of IR or back radiation, but as a result of reduced vertical circulation. Open a small window at the top of the greenhouse and it will cool rapidly, with only a miniscule difference in blocking by the glass.
The models predict the GHG theory on the basis of the atmosphere warming first, reducing vertical circulation, resulting in surface warming. The so called “hot spot”. However, in many years of observation the hot spot has never been found, showing the vertical circulation is not reduced.
Rather, what we see is that the surface has warmed first, not the atmosphere. The atmosphere has only warmed in response to surface warming. Which strong suggests that the warming cannot be due to reduced vertical circulation, and that the climate system has a strong negative feedback in the form of increased vertical circulation in response to increased surface temperatures.
In other words, GHG cannot be the cause of the increased surface temperatures, because the order in which the warming occurred (surface first followed by atmosphere) is opposite to the signature of GHG warming.


I left the UK in 1973 after the most miserable few years imaginable, courtesy of the NUM and TWU: No trains, no heat and no jobs. The only thing we had plenty of was inflation. It stayed that way until the early 80s when suddenly people started investing in their businesses, pubs and homes. It was really noticeable when I went home to see my parents. My peers suddenly decided that they could start their own businesses and that it was OK to work hard and get rich. It is true we lived around London – as does 40% of the British population. But my Dad grew up in Liverpool. The culture up there – Beatles or not – was dreadful. It was Andy Capp land. As long as the dole enabled you to buy a pint and your fags, you managed. It was Greece without the sunshine. Bloody awful. It was amazing to see how fast things turned around, but I have no doubt that many of those in the mining communities suffered.
I am not sure how much of the turnaround was due to Thatcher but she did not get in the way. Alas the high-mindedness of the poll tax was a political poison pill after the MSM decided that they really preferred the antiquated local rates program.
As for the Thatcher haters – the operative word is “hate”. She called the Left on their corruption (see Scargill), their hypocrisy, their socialistic utopianism, their dependency, their ignorance and their naivete. They never, ever forgave her.

In other energy news today, more evidence is emerging that the legal case brought against Chevron by Ecuador, seeking billions of dollars of reparations and supported by a host of American environmental activists, is collapsing as overwhelming evidence of fraud arises at every level of this case. The original judge who allowed the case to go forward against Chevron has admitted that he was bribed heavily to do so; and now one of the providers of “expert testimony” used in the case has been forced under threat of suit to denounce their own previous testimony.
“Stratus Consulting has provided sworn declarations outlining the firm’s knowledge of the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ misconduct in the ongoing environmental litigation in Lago Agrio, Ecuador as well as testifying that there is no scientific merit to the plaintiffs’ damages claims against Chevron Corp. (NYSE: CVX) and Texaco Petroleum (TexPet).”
to quote; “The truly interesting part about this isn’t the apparent collapse of the case in Ecuador, but what seems to be an acknowledgment of the active involvement of American based activists.”

Doug S

Well said Andrew. Vile and nasty is an accurate description from my perspective as I sit in the middle of California. The left here in the US view themselves as educated, enlightened and superior in every aspect to the unwashed masses of ordinary people. If you dare to question any of the dogmatic pillars of their world view, you are attacked en mass by the faithful believers.
Long may we remember the outstanding individuals who governed with a light hand and left ordinary people free to pursue their own happiness, in their own way.
Rest well Margaret Thatcher.

Vince Causey

Lady Thatcher was a tragic figure in the literary sense. Nobody did more than she to break the monopoly of power that the ruling elite in general, and the Conservative party in particular, held over the British population. Yet, for her troubles, she was destined to be reviled as caring only for the rich and powerful.
As an outsider to politics, she entered a government that was the embodiment of privilege, old Etonians and Bullington boys. She was called “Hilda” by those who thought her middle name sounded more lower class than Margaret – an indication of what she was up against.
She brought with her the moral codes of her methodist and grocery shop upbringing which gave her the belief that hard work, personal responsibility and honesty was the route to prosperity – both physical and spiritual. AS an admirer of Hayek and the Austrian economists, she believed that Government should empower the people to fulfil their own destinies through the functioning of the free market – and Government should retreat to the background.
I cannot over emphasise how radical she really was. Whether or not you blame her for every economic ill that has befallen the world (I do not), there is no doubt in my mind, that she acted out only of her desire to empower the British working people, and create an asset owning democracy. And she had to overcome enormous odds to see it through.
Thwarted initially by the old Tories – the wets – she found a few allies among the working class Tories, such as Norman (now Lord) Tebbit. She de-regulated th financial centres (in the Big Bang), privatised a number of state owned industries by selling discounted shares to the British people (held to be controversial today) and sold council houses to their tennants. But as well as this, she was the first PM to actively try and reverse what all previous post war leaders had done before – preside over the managed decline of the UK. She would not allow the country she loved to slide ever more down the hole of irrelevance and poverty. She succeeded in reversing 30 years of post war relative decline.
If we slide once again (we are) it will be because we have squandered the inheritance she has bequeathed.


Otter says:
April 13, 2013 at 7:22 am
“They are now claiming that quantum physics also proves that we’re warming the globe

Schellnhuber is by education a quantum physicist; he’s constantly pointing this out on his never ending public TV talkshow crusade. And we quantum physicists are way smarter than you stupid proles is the message of course.
Only that some of the stupid proles actually know about negative feedbacks, chaos mathematics etc.
“Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen” – Friedrich Nietzsche

Richard M

Just curious why we haven’t had a sea ice thread. Normally by this time we are voting on the next minimum.
Personally, this year is looking like the minimum will be higher due to more circumpolar winds. Clearly, that could change at any time, but so far, so good.

John Simons

Anthony says: “[Lady Thatcher] regretted her actions.”
Can you kindly provide a reference for this.
After Lady Thatcher left office, she toured the United States extensively, giving talks sponsored by conservative think tanks. The normal thing. She dismissed alarmism and did not like Al Gore very much, but I’ve never known her to regret her actions regarding Climate Change.


Thatcher was extremely clairvoyant in seeing what the EU was about to become. Ironically, the left whose slogan in the 70ies was “Question Authority” are now screaming for more police state measures against offshore bank account holders, i.e. against people who try to move their money out of a regime that does not care too much about the rule of law (the EU).
Schäuble (one of the four horsemen of the Eurocalypse, German minister of finances) just demanded an EU tax evasion “FBI”; Der Spiegel had an article about it and – as the leftist readers of Der Spiegel cannot possibly simply agree with control freak Schäuble (he’s on the upper right quadrant of the political compass, an authoritarian nonsocialist) they KINDA agreed with him, commenting “Well these are only words, his coalition partner (FDP, classic liberals) will never allow that”.
So, leftist authoritarians agree with right wing authoritarians. Quel surpris. The word “statist” doesn’t exist in this meaning in German, probably because German writers cannot imagine a non-statist attitude.

J Martin

Three things about Margaret Thatcher’s period as Prime Minister stand out for me;
1). Her actions in breaking the traditional power of the trade unions which undoubtedly caused a generation of hardship for some families as business gained more freedom to restructure. It is likely that some of her economic principles were nonetheless a necessary long term evil.
2). However, her subsequent attempts at (over) stimulating the economy with the inevitable boom and bust cycles that that produced certainly define one aspect of her stewardship.
3). But perhaps the thing that ultimately she may come to be remembered most for will be for her leadership during the Falklands crisis. And in that regard she was truly a remarkable woman.
Disclaimer. Despite the final line of praise, I never voted for her, though I did vote for her predecessor Edward Heath, thus to date I have voted for all three major parties, but over the last twenty years have given up voting as all 3 major parties are so much alike and of late have become just branches of the Green Party.
There are two other parties left to vote for, UKIP who have some sensible ideas in some areas but are impractically extreme and thus virtually unelectable in other areas, and the remaining party is the protest vote, The Monster Raving Loony Party !
As our political system in the UK has stagnated I think perhaps I should set up my own political party, The Beneficial Dictator Party. I of course would be the Beneficial Dictator.

jim Steele

Anybody following the Arctic Sea ice care to explain how the Hudson Bay suddenly lost half of its ice in one day? Cryosphere Today tacks sea ice in each sea and they show Hudson Bay just lost half of its ice. http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/recent365.anom.region.13.html
Was it an algorithm malfunction, satellite malfunction, or snow melt appearing as open water?
BTW Bering Sea ice continues above average. Ice in the Barents Sea is recovering rapidly. Most of the open water is caused by warm waters pumped into the Arctic by the North Atlantic Oscillation and then further affects atmopsheric circulation. If natural oscillations have caused most of the Arctic ice melt, then the recovering Barents sea ice suggests Arctic Ice will soon follow.


J Martin says:
April 13, 2013 at 8:31 am
“There are two other parties left to vote for, UKIP who have some sensible ideas in some areas but are impractically extreme and thus virtually unelectable in other areas, and the remaining party is the protest vote, The Monster Raving Loony Party !”
What makes UKIP unelectable specifically? Asking not to mock you; but all I know of UKIP is a lot of the talks of Nigel Farrage and he seems sensible to me.

Jimmy Haigh.

The things I remember about the Falklands are these: 1) It could have been stopped by diplomacy – (as it had the last time the Argentinians started making noises in 1977), and: 2) The Tories were way behind in the polls so would probably have lost the 1983 election had the Falklands not happened.


New Topic: We educated people have a lousy grasp of evolution. Including this marine biologist quoted below.
For the set-up: all of us educated intellectuals believe evolution, and look askance at the dumb religious people. That is a “given.” No need to question that assumption.
Next, we know evolution is true. This is accepted on faith, and the details are to be worked out. Mostly through tautology: the blacktip shark has a black tip because evolution is true, and evolution produces what we see, and we see a blacktip shark, therefore the black tip is evolutionarily advantageous, therefore the presense of a black tip on a shark demonstrates, yet again, evolution.
Next: evolution happens as variations in a species contribute to differential reproductive success: those sharks who happen to have black tips somehow survived and reproduced better than the less-back-tipped members of the species. Eventually, the black tip became its own species, with its own DNA, and definitely not just a variant, as a Chihuaha is to a Mastiff.
Then, how does this quote make sense?–
[“In a sense, it is catching evolution in action,” he told me. ]
They discovered inetrbreeding between supposedly differnt species of sharks (of course, attributed to AGW). Thy declare that species evolve by inter-mingling with other species. I have not heard this before as a tenet of evolution – the part of evolution that accounts for where the species came from.
What type of evolutionary process is this called?


In other news: why is this story not getting wide coverage? Arkansas oil line spill…
I think oil and coal are OK sources of energy, but this has to be managed i a decent way. Companies cannot simply conduct business and make money without having the govt look over their shoulder to make sure things are done in a relatively safe way, and when bad things happen, the companies – not the taxpayer – should foot the bill.
In simple terms, this is one of the principles I believe the demoratic party used to have, and could one day have, if we coud only get the marxists to just go form their own party and get out of ours.
To avoid cronyism as happens in regulation, I believe govt should be open – astoundingly open – including a system where citizen brigades get trained to understand industry surveillance, and carry it out themselves in a manner approved by citizens, govt officials and industry – at the onset before the first shovel.
Just like I can get access to court documents, I should be able, wthin reaon, to observe and audit the buildig and functionig of a chemicla plant, nukelar reactor, etc – a watchdog looking over the shoulder of the govt regulators, so they cannot be bought off as we now know hppened in many cases including the big BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico.


I’m not a Brit, but from what I’ve read I think what makes UKIP so “extreme” is that they have the gall to think that England should actually be run for the English people and not so much asians, Romanians, Bulgarians, and whoever else happens to show up on the odd doorstep. Radical thoughts indeed.

J Martin

@ DirkH. In order to answer your question I realised I hadn’t looked at their manifesto in a few years, so have just done so. I think they will find that there is only so much money to go round and that good intentions in many areas may prove harder to attain in practise.
They do seem to be the only party with firm attitudes towards overcrowding (immigration) and exploitation of the UK’s benefit system by those who would not have benefited from such largesse in their own countries.
I am strongly opposed to their anti EU standpoint and believe it should be made to work, in practise we cannot run away from it as we do half our trade with the EU.
I don’t see enough in their manifesto about energy, I would like to see something about fracking and nuclear power. Like it or not, a successful economy is founded on energy.
On balance, I withdraw my outdated notion that they are unelectable.
For now I will continue to not vote, but stronger statements about energy from UKIP could then leave me in a small quandary as to whether I should consider voting for them, I think I would have to seek more detailed information about their stance on the EU though before I could actually consider voting for them. In my opinion leaving the EU is not an economically sensible action, indeed I think the UK should join the Euro, but I also think we should require that some absurdly managed countries leave the Euro.

lurker passing through, laughing

Sadly, Tom Fuller is not going to be posting with us much longer. However, he has graced us with what is perhaps one of the best blog posts yet made regarding AGW hype:


J Martin: “It is likely that some of her economic principles were nonetheless a necessary long term evil.”
“Evil” is a strong word so can you please be specific?


Chris Edwards says:
“It says a lot for her integrity that she was taken in by the global warming scam, looked at it (thats where having a leader who is not a trained liar, sorry lawyer is beneficial) and saw through it and had the honesty to say so!”
She only became interested in CAGW because it was a useful stick with which to beat the miners, she urged other world leaders to take drastic action on flimsy to no evidence and if she ever had the “honesty to say” that she changed her mind she said it pretty damn (and uncharacteristically) quietly. I doubt that a single person who doesn’t haunt sites like this has the first clue that she changed her mind or was even involved in the first place!
Hey, but maybe she wouldn’t have been paid enough to make a speech debunking CAGW after she left office.
Anyway it displays the same kind of “integrity” which loudly proclaimed her anti-EEC (EU) stance but still signed the Single European Act, I suppose.


J.Martin 8:31
“……set up the Beneficial Dictator party…..”
Hey, that’s my idea! I’m starting the Davist party. Our slogan will be “One for all and all for Dave!”

regarding the Arkansas spill, thelastdemocrat wrote:
“I think oil and coal are OK sources of energy, but this has to be managed i a decent way.”
It is managed in a very decent way. That doesn’t mean accidents never happen, just like managing traffic in a decent way doesn’t guarantees that there will never by any traffic accident anywhere. It means that when an accident *does* happen it is quickly and efficiently cleaned up and all who have suffered harm are compensated and made whole again, insofar as that is possible.
“Companies cannot simply conduct business and make money without having the govt look over their shoulder to make sure things are done in a relatively safe way,”
Govm’t DOES look over their shoulder in every possible way, at both the State and Federal level. And the pipeline business is run in as safe a way as the engineers doing know how. Do you have any idea who much money is lost by having to shut down this line for even just a few does? To think that pipeline companies sacrifice safety for profit is a very tired old canard that betrays a complete lack of knowledge about the industry. When you are building a pipeline, the most profitable path is ALWAYS the most safety conscious path, because accidents are so damned expensive!
But that doesn’t mean accidents don’t happen, especially on a 60 year old pipeline like this one, where corrosion can occur underneath existing buildings in areas you can’t get to.
“and when bad things happen, the companies – not the taxpayer – should foot the bill.”
Did you even read the article you referred to? That’s exactly what’s happening – Exxon is paying the full cost and compensating everyone involved.

This is why I kept voting for Maggie and why I would still vote for her even if it was only a bronze bust of her standing for election in my constituency.
“The choice facing the nation is between two totally different ways of life. And what a prize we have to fight for: no less than the chance to banish from our land the dark, divisive clouds of Marxist socialism and bring together men and women from all walks of life who share a belief in freedom.” (May 1983)


Good posting on Chevron and Stratus Consulting. Stratus has been a go to provider of “expert” testimony in many important environmental cases. The Chevron case shows that they are simply well paid advocates with Phd’s posing as scientists.
As to the “mixed result” and “pain caused” crappola being held against Thatcher please show me a government policy that is all upside. I think we put paid to that argument with the home ownership society policy leading straight to a massive financial collapse here in the USA. GB was already in pain when she came to power. Her policies provided a chance for renewal. Of course if you suffer the delusion that there is an iron rice bowl somewhere you’ll never agree.


From here UKIP looks like the rightwing of the Conservative Party. The GOP greybeards should take note.

Seeing how this is a “Weekend Open Thread”, might a bit of advice be solicited for a serious, but low-priced, number-crunching ‘computing’ platform?
Needed is a computer containing on the order of 64 GB of RAM installed and budgeting is only allowing about US $650 to be spent … willing to compromise on ‘speed’ and number of ‘cores’ so something (slow?) in the area of a 2 GHz clock are acceptable … don’t need a whole lot of disk space at present and graphics is not a concern either. Just gobs and gobs of RAM.
The goal is to get away from continual memory ‘swapping’ that takes place on the present PC (a 3 GHz “Core2 Duo” Dell Optiplex 755 with 8 GB of RAM running Win 7 x64 Pro SP1) … the last run took over 3 days on account of the amount of time used in disk (virtual memory) I/O where the CPU utilization shows really _low_ during those periods when disk swapping takes place. The ‘peak’ memory used on the last run was something over 40 GB (on a Dell 755 with only 8 GB memory installed).
Some of the platforms meeting the criteria above (on eBay) look to be Dell PowerEdge 2950 (and C1100) series servers, but I have no idea (or experience) how these perform executing a single user program (vs acting as a “server” with appropriate server software) under a copy of, say, Win 7 Pro x64.

Mark Bofill

Recently it’s been pointed out in comments that climate sensitivity is a function of forcing and temperature and nothing else, and it’s been argued that the source of the forcing doesn’t matter with respect to feedbacks. If this is indeed so, it seems to me to be a matter of straightforward arithmetic to establish a low climate sensitivity. I’m perfectly aware that this can’t possibly be a new argument btw, but being a relative newbie I haven’t heard it before. What’s the counter argument to this? Why is this argument not persuasive, or what have I done wrong?
Premise: Every year we observe changes in global temperature as the Earth moves between perihelion and aphelion in its orbit of the Sun. Given the known distances between the Earth and the Sun at perihelion and aphelion and the global temperature changes, we may therefore compute climate sensitivity and apply our result to a doubling of CO2, assuming as given that a doubling of CO2 increases forcing by 3.7 W/m2.
Earth distance from Sun at aphelion – approx 152,000,000 km (numerous sources)
Earth distance from Sun at perihelion – approx 147,000,000 km (numerous sources)
Radius of Sun – approx 695,000 km (numerous sources)
Radiation intensity on surface of sun – approx 63,300,000 W/m^2 (numerous sources)
From (http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Final-BW-Print-Version-TIS_html_5f0398df.png) :
Global temperature at aphelion – approx 15.8C
Global temperature at perihelion – approx 12.0C
Methods and arithmetic:
Solar radiation intensity = [(R^2)Sun / (D^2)] * HSun
Sensitivity = delta T / delta F.
Area of a sphere = 4 pi R^2
Area of a circle = pi R^2
At aphelion we compute a forcing of :

[ 6.95 * 6.95 * 10^16 / 1.52 * 1.52 * 10^22 ] * (6.33 * 10^7)
(20.9 * 10^-6) * (6.33 * 10^7) = about 1323 W/m^2.

At perihelion we compute a forcing of:

[ 6.95 * 6.95 * 10^16 / 1.47 * 1.47 * 10^22 ] * (6.33 * 10^7)
(22.35 * 10^-6) * (6.33 * 10^7) = about 1415 W/m^2

Note that:

deltaT = 3.8C
deltaF = 1415 – 1323 = 92 W/m^2

We adjust for surface of a sphere instead of a disk, dividing deltaF by 4:

deltaF = 23 W/m^2

and end up with a sensitivity of

3.8 / 23 = 0.165 (C * m^2 / W)

This gives us, for a forcing increase of 3.7 W/m^2 per doubling of CO2,

3.7 * 0.165 = 0.6C increase

climate sensitivity = .165 (C * m^2 / W)
increase in C per doubling of CO2 = 0.6C
So what’s wrong with this argument?

David in Texas

Here’s a question that I’ve been wondering about. Does the earth’s interior conduct heat to the surface at a uniform rate through time? It seems likely that it would, but I haven’t heard anyone discuss this. Does anyone know of anyone studying this, links to it or other sources?

John Stover

I am an American but I lived in the north of England 1985-87 in a small town, Knaresborough, and enjoyed the experience greatly. However, it was hard times for many of the locals as the coal pits, factories, and shipyards were closing and unemployment was very high. Every Friday night the 10 O’Colck news totted up the week’s joblosses with a big odometer type display marking each closure. What surprised me was the complete unwillingness of people to relocate even a few miles to where jobs were more plentiful. Didn’t want leave their friends and their local they said.
Arthur Scargill, head of the National Union of Mineworkers, was a big hero to the locals. I suggested that based on the wackiness of their economic policies the Mineworkers could merge with the National Union of Teachers and become the NUM-NUTs.
I wonder if many Americans know that until recently the Labour Party used to open and close their annual conferences by waving red flags and singing the Internationale. There were less communist trappings and rhetoric from the peasants when I previously lived in China. Eye opening for me.

UKIP is the only significant UK party that hasn’t been taken over by the Green Treen movement, and the European Empire. And is therefore capable of free thought. Consequently it is the only party with a sensible energy policy. And the only party that believes that charity begins at home.

William Marshall

andrewmharding says:
April 13, 2013 at 7:44 am
‘and the poor got richer and happier umder her leadership’ so much so that they spent most of the 80s rioting, because of her policies! And when she brought in the ‘poll tax’ that doomed her leadership to the bin!

William Marshall says:
April 13, 2013 at 10:16 am
The poll tax was a good idea and fair, especially compared to the Council Tax that replaced it. A morass of meaningless ever-changing bands that can be used to “punish” people for being too wealthy? No thanks.
Of course I’d rather have neither tax.
And contrary to your claims the UK did not spend the majority of the 80s rioting. Those riots that did occur were a people whipped into a frenzy by labourites who wanted to destroy Thatcher and the right by any means possible. She was bringing real prosperity to this country, highlighting the failure of Labour policies for years beforehand and they couldn’t stand it. Nor could they stand that she was a working class woman who got to the top of the “party of the rich”. They hated her because she revealed everything about them to be a complete scam.
So they doubled down the scam.
And you fell for it. And now I’m stuck with the results of that. Thanks a lot.


In her book “Statecraft” PM Thatcher clearly is critical of the global warming crowd. Did she “regret” her former stance? We don’t know, but we do know that she no longer shared the views of Hansen, et. al. who she knew to be wrong about the climate. Shame she was instrumental in setting up the IPCC and that den of incompetents in East Anglia.


Speaking of the poor from personal experience: I was born in 1930’s built public housing in Germany. It was a cesspool of father-less families (including mine), laziness, drunkeness, and criminality. Being in Germany the stoops were clean. We immigrated to the USA to escape.
The notion that “the poor” should be consulted on economic policy is lunacy. They will take what they can and exploit every opportunity presented by those who don’t know them. Let them riot. The fact that they do is a sign you are doing the right thing.


Climate consensus is 97% of an unidentified uni-think population behaving as if it had a single brain. The speed at which this population syncs up on a notion is proportional to the speed of email. You are more likely to trisect an angle with a hockey stick and a bungie cord than modify these monothoughts (a variant humanoid tribe not yet taxonomically ranked).

Jim Cripwell

Mark Bofill, you write “So what’s wrong with this argument?”
Simple. The number for climate sensitivity has not been measured. What physics, and the scientific method is based on, is forming a hypothesis from observed data, then postulating some number that can be measure which follows from the hypothesis. The warmists have hypothesised that CO2 causes global warming. They claim there is such a thing as the climate sensitivity of CO2, and they ascribe various estimates to this idea; one of which is yours.
However, no-one will ever know what the actual number is until it has been measured, and at the same time an accuracy of measurement is established. At this moment it is impossible to measure climate sensitivity, so your number, like all others, is nothing more that a SWAG (Scientific Wild Arsed Guess). All we know is that climate sensitivity is probably positive, and has some maximum value. Other than that, your guess is as good as anyone else’s. My guess is that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is indistinguishable from zero.

The answer is to stop exhaling. This may be a bit extreme, so I propose eliminating ever third exhale. Compromise is a good thing, no?


Some of the platforms meeting the criteria above (on eBay) look to be Dell PowerEdge 2950 (and C1100) series servers, but I have no idea (or experience) how these perform executing a single user program
You are asking a very complicated question. If your app is single threaded you will be better off with a higher GHz processor as additional core count won’t help your performance. If your hard drive requirements are small, consider an SSD or a Hybrid (SATA with a SSD cache). This will make a massive difference to performance if the app is disk intensive, which it sounds like it is. More ram is almost always better, but not all apps are written to take advantage of large ram space in the first place, so you don’t always get the performance boost you expect.