UPDATE 6/14/17: Michael E. Mann just can’t stand this, see below.
Hello everyone,
I feel like many of you are family, you’ve been with me and this endeavor so long. I started in November of 2006, and I’m approaching my 11th year. In all that time, WUWT has been providing a daily service to readers with original research, commentary, and humor where appropriate.
During this time, we’ve witnessed many great things together: Climategate started here in 2009, and the implosion of the Copenhagen conference as a result. The unmasking of the IPCC, showing that many of the “voodoo science” claims against skeptics made by IPCC chairman Pachauri, were based on fake data, shockingly bad science, and even grey literature. Now the tables are turned, and he’s out in disgrace. Then there was the time that I proved without a doubt that both Al Gore and Bill Nye were not just incompetent, but liars too, faking a science experiment. That finding by me was later backed up by a peer reviewed paper in the American Journal of Physics. Then there was the leaking of the IPCC AR5 documents here, showing how corrupted their thinking is, and how the final product was sanitized. Then there’s the Paris Agreement, watching it unfold, shaking our heads at the inanity of it. Even Dr. James Hansen called it a “fraud”. Then, just two weeks ago, watching President Trump remove the U.S. from it. It was truly a great day, with the bonus of watching all those heads explode.
Some people say that WUWT was a force or a catalyst in contributing to these things happening, but I don’t know. I just did what seemed like the right thing. Dig for the truth behind the headlines, and never, ever, give up.
It’s been a great ride. But, to be honest, I’m facing burnout. I need a break, so that I can continue another 10 years. I have not taken a real vacation from WUWT during the entire time. Ric Werme, who tracks WUWT, I think once said it’s been about 7 years since WUWT went a day without at least one story, and often there are five or six. It’s a lot of work. The ride has personally and professionally had it’s fallout for me. I’ve had clients cancel on me because of my views, and I’ve been through a personal hell too.
But, I continued, and I want to keep contributing, but I need a break to do it. I think I deserve one. Steve McIntyre of ClimateAudit once told me in a face to face conversation that “You and I both have done the work of ten men. I think we’ve given them a good run” (he was referring to the “Hockey Team et al”). Steve has essentially retired [from] blogging, because he has other pursuits. He feels like he’s done his fair share. I’d say his contribution was monumental.
I still have more stories to tell, I still have more research to do, I still have more to contribute.
One of the great things about WUWT is that we’ve had so many guest authors. This keeps it fresh. But I still have to administer it all. I do it from my phone, my laptop, and my home and office PC. I’ve never really been out of touch from it
Here’s the stats over the past 10+ years.
- 16,496 stories posted
- 2,075,345 Comments
- 316,737,166 views
- 49 reference pages (some of which sorely need work)
There’s no other website that focuses on Climate Science that can even come close to that track record. That’s not a boast, but a simple fact of numbers. Many people said I’d fail, that I’d be undone, and there’s been a lot of pressure and outright hatred and smearing directed at me personally to make me quit. I even had an offer once to “buy me out” as a way to get me to stop. I told them to shove it.
I had help getting here, from readers like you, guest authors, and many many scientists who have advised me from behind the scenes. I’m greatly appreciative to all of you for bearing those slings and arrows with me.
What convinced me that I really need a break was a really stupid error I made yesterday. I posted a story thinking it was Wednesday (Hump Day Hilarity) when it was actually Monday (Monday Mirthiness). Readers caught it [in] comments, and I was too tired to notice until hours later. It’s a simple error that has since been corrected, but it’s a wake-up call for me. It’s a clear sign of fatigue.
Here is what I want to do: Take a month off. Disconnect. Then come back fresh.
To do that though, and keep WUWT running, requires help. It’s not without precedence. Back in 2007, Steve McIntyre took a vacation to the desert southwest USA, with a mission in mind, to gather some tree ring core samples of his own to dispute Mann’s findings (though he didn’t say that at the time). Long time readers may recall he asked me to take over ClimateAudit during that break, which I did gladly, and it continued, ready for him when he returned.
I think I can do that here, I’m sure many of our guest authors will step up and our moderators can keep the comments flowing, albeit perhaps not as speedily since we have fewer moderators than we used to have.
I’m asking for two things: help with content/moderating, and some donations, so that I can choose a place to go disconnect, and not worry. I don’t want a staycation, and if that darned Koch Brothers check that many Mann-like people seem to think I’m getting would just show up in the mailbox, I’d not have to ask. There’s another reason too. I have an idea for a temperature data study, along the lines of some of the UHI studies I’ve done in the past, but I’ll need to purchase some equipment to run the experiment. And, when I return (assuming I can get help to keep WUWT running) I want to migrate WUWT to a new web platform. The last overhaul was in September of 2014, and since then things that I keep asking for from wordpress.com keep getting ignored (such as comment editing by end users to fix simple mistakes). I’ve been asking for almost as long as WUWT has been on wordpress, and it’s become clear to me that wordpress.com just doesn’t care because they keep adding social media enhancements rather than real meat and potatoes features. Time to move on to something that works better and requires less time to administer.
In other news, I just finished a new book chapter, it’s at the proof stage at the printers, and it will be available soon. I’ll let you know when it is available.
So, dear readers and contributors, here is what I need:
- Volunteers: for moderating, for guest author content, and for scheduling publishing of the kind of stories and press releases we normally carry. Use the About》Contact form from the drop down menu under the header.
- Donations: for recharge, and for new ventures to be designed and published
- Patience: while I figure out how to do all this.
Thanks for your consideration. Those that want to help with moderation, guest content, and scheduling can either leave a comment or use the contact form to direct message me.
For those that wish to donate towards a break and a new setup and experiment, here’s the link and button. Anything is welcome, no matter how small.
I’m going to leave this post up for a couple of days as the top head post, to make sure casual readers and regulars alike see it.
Thanks, sincerely, to all of you. -Anthony Watts
UPDATE: Mann and the usual suspects have had a twitterstorm over this.
It’s driving them all batshit crazy that:
1. I’ve survived 10 years, even though I’m apparently too stupid to have accomplished anything in that time.
2. People actually like me and want to help.
3. More people read WUWT than all of their blogs combined.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Donation sent. Many thanks for this daily dose of real climate science I’ve enjoyed for almost 10 years now. Enjoy your well-deserved vacation.
Wherever you go to recharge, if I may suggest, you should spend a few days here:
https://www.tween-waters.com
Quiet, relaxing, away from all the hub bub. Easy to get to via Ft Myers International Airport.
And a few $$ for the trip.
That was a good post. Glad to hear you are thinking of taking a break and relaxing. I just came from the Doctor and he said I had better learn to relax or else. (so I can’t volunteer at this time — too stressful) You need to get away and recharge. But you also, in my opinion, need to get away again after that and think about the site.
I’ll remind you of some advice I gave years ago. Don’t take every darn post to heart as if you wrote it. Some posts can be unpopular without it being the fault of A. Watts — right? And think about the site policy that forbids any debate on the GHE itself. (yes, CO2 just might have a sensitivity close to zero)
Anyway, my main point is to learn to be the CEO of WUWT and not worry about every little bit. (or you might end up with a cardiologist saying to take it easy or else) Let others help you run the site. Get some people you trust and let them make a few mistakes — most of us are human after all. In other words, let the community that grew here be an ongoing community that will outlive you and me.
Excellent advice markstoval
Take care, MarkStoval. You’ll be in my prayers. Good for you to take care of yourself.
“. . . most of us are human after all.”
Only most of us? Well, except for our host, who has done super-human work for the past ten years.
/Mr Lynn
“Only most of us?”
M. Mann, for one example, does not meet my definition of “human”. There are many more. 😉
“And think about the site policy that forbids any debate on the GHE itself. (yes, CO2 just might have a sensitivity close to zero).” –M. Stoval
Personally, I think that because climate/weather parameters include transient effects and negative feedbacks, there may be periods where the net GHE is zero. But last time I checked, the score was Windmills 1, Don Quixote 0. It’s important to choose our battles wisely. GHE ~ 0 may be true, but we have no proof of that hypothesis, and theory indicates otherwise. Better to expend our effort in other areas where it will be more effective.
markstoval’s comment about rethinking “the site policy that forbids any debate on the GHE itself” went over my head. The policy as I read it prohibits references to sites “which have the misguided idea that the greenhouse effect doesn’t exist”. Doesn’t prohibit discussion of GHE at all, which is a good thing, since there is a lot of discussion about that on this site.
Or do I need remedial English?
Perhaps I can explain.
One may talk about the “Green House Effect” all day as long as one really means the “radiative Green House Effect” or rGHE. There are groups who believe that the “green house effect” is due to something besides back radiation.
That line of reasoning is off limits here and I am not even supposed to give you a link to any site that might propose that. If I did I would be talking or linking to “Sl*y*r Sh*t”. Please see the “Policy” section for clarification. (note: “those people” don’t really say there is no GHE, they say there is no rGHE which is another thing — but we still can’t go there at this site)
I abide by site policy here since we are all guests of the host and he wishes to avoid ever having to debate all that again. Especially with that very mean Canadian scientist.
Thanks, Mark. That helps clear it up for me.
markstoval wrote: “And think about the site policy that forbids any debate on the GHE itself. (yes, CO2 just might have a sensitivity close to zero).”
Yes. The absorption and emission of radiation by GHGs has been carefully studied in the laboratory. There is little doubt that increasing GHGs will decrease the rate of radiative cooling to space. The law of conservation of energy requires that the planet warm the Earth until radiative balance has been restored. The big unknown is how much surface warming is needed to increase heat flux to space by 3.7 W/m2 – ECS.
If 1 K of warming is need, we say that the climate feedback parameter (CFP) is 3.7 W/m2/K. Dividing 3.7 W/m2/doubling by 3.7 W/m2/K gives an ECS of 1 K/doubling.
If it takes 3 K of warming to drive an addition 3.7 W/m2 to space, then CFP = 1.23 W/m2/K and ECS is 3 K/doubling.
When you say that ECS is can be close to zero, that is equivalent to say that the climate feedback parameter is high. For ECS to be 0.5 K/doubling, then 7.4 K of warming is needed to drive an addition 3.7 W/m2 to space. For ECS to be 0.2 K/doubling, 18.5 K of warming is needed.
Increasing heat flux to space can be obtained by: 1) an increase in emission of LWR (thermal IR or blackbody radiation) or 2) an increase in reflection of SWR (albedo). The most thermal radiation any object can emit is blackbody radiation, so the most LWR radiation to space is 3.7 W/m2/K. This gives us a “no-feedbacks ECS” of about 1 K. If you assume a graybody model or a the radiation transfer modules from AOGCMs, you get CFPs of 3.3 or 3.2 W/m2/K and a no-feedbacks ECS of 1.15 K/doubling.
So the only way to get an ECS below 1 K/doubling, is to reflect more SWR to space as the earth warms – negative cloud feedback. Currently, the planet reflects about 100 W/m2 of W/m2 (albedo 0.30). If we want an ECS of 0.5 K/doubling, we need a 3.7 W/m2/K increase in reflected SWR – plus more to compensate for any positive feedbacks. Increasing water vapor slows radiative cooling to space by acting as a GHG than increasing radiative cooling via a lower lapse rate. Currently the best estimate for WV+LR feedback is 1 W/m2/K. Warming will certainly decrease surface albedo. Currently the best estimate is 0.3 W/m2/K (0.1-1.0). So, if you are hoping ECS is 0.5 K/doubling, your are hoping that negative cloud feedback is huge and dominates everything else, about +5 W/m2/K. That is a 5% increase in albedo (100 W/m2 to 105 W/m2 SWR reflected per 1 K increase in surface temperature). And this increase does NOT change much even if VW+LR and surface albedo feedback aren’t a positive as the IPCC believes. If you are hoping for an ECS of 0.2 K/doubling, you need to reflect an addition 20 W/m2 to space (20% change) for every 1 K of surface warming. Observations and simple rationals are grossly incompatible with the existence of the dramatic increases in cloud cover with surface warming need for an ECS of 0.2 K/doubling, and even 0.5 K/doubling looks problematic.
So, if you accept some tenets of GHE theory (you don’t have to), it is unreasonable to hope that climate sensitivity can be near zero or even well below 1 K/doubling.
Finally, the planet warmed 0.5 K during two recent El Nino’s due to fluctuations in heat exchange between the surface and the deep ocean. (El Nino’s are unforced or internal variability, they are caused redistribution of heat within the planet, not “forced” by changes in radiation entering or exiting the planet.) So, there is no point in trying to draw conclusions about the existence of an enhanced GHE or estimate climate sensitivity from short-term observations such as the “Pause” – which ended dramatically in 2014. Nevertheless, many do.
Frank, it seems to me that you have omitted the ocean as a heat sink in your analysis. Heat can leave the system not only via outer space, as you have alluded to, but also the oceans. And that heat does not necessarily come back. The ocean has a temperature gradient, top to bottom. To raise the sea surface temp means that a whole new temperature gradient is to be established, which means ocean warming for centuries. It has been said that, in a sense, the heat sinking capacity of the oceans act as a negative feedback for atmospheric temperatures…
“So, if you accept some tenets of GHE theory (you don’t have to), it is unreasonable to hope that climate sensitivity can be near zero or even well below 1 K/doubling. ”
You believe that any GHE must be “radiative Green House Effect” or rGHE. Since those who believe otherwise are not allowed to debate or provide links — You Win.
That was easy now was it not. Go out an celebrate. (Physics was harder when I taught it)
However, I am allowed (I think) to say that CO2 vs. Temperature has shown Temps go up first and then CO2 after a lag. At all time scales. Odd that.
@markstoval “Temps go up first and then CO2 after a lag. At all time scales.”…..NOPE Since 1998 had a 20+/- year pause in rising temps, but CO2 continued to rise.
>>
Michael darby
June 18, 2017 at 3:41 pm
. . . NOPE Since 1998 . . . .
<<
In ice core samples, there’s about a 800 year lag in CO2 rise vs. temperature. About 800 years ago was the Medieval Warm Period. You may be referring to the wrong temperature-CO2 relation. CO2 might not respond to temperature rises immediately–or it hasn’t in the past.
Jim
Jim Masterson, markstoval said: “At all time scales.” …..take it up with him.
>>
Michael darby
June 18, 2017 at 4:28 pm
markstoval said: . . . .
<<
I was responding to your comment–nice deflection.
Jim
Darby, the thinking goes that if the pause were to continue indefinitely then co2 would also eventually stop rising (a new equilibrium state having then been reached). If that is the case, then mark is correct…
Frank “The absorption and emission of radiation by GHGs has been carefully studied in the laboratory.”
No doubt; this is a part that seldom if ever reaches public consumption. on the occasion that an advocate is correct he is likely to not be heeded by his opponents; and on the occasion he is incorrect those errors will be ignored by his friends.
There is little dispute that CO2 can absorb infrared within certain wavelengths, and given an opportunity will re-radiate that energy as another photon, in an unpredictable direction but often enough downward. It is however likely to transfer its energy by physical collision with air molecules. What then? Well the air is heated, more than it otherwise would have without the added CO2. What then? More energetic convection where, at the Top of Atomosphere, added CO2 is able to radiate into space. That is likely to produce a slightly steeper gradient of warmer at the surface and cooler at TOA.
Whether I should give up heat, light and transportation to try to not let that happen is unclear, but probably not.
“There is little doubt that increasing GHGs will decrease the rate of radiative cooling to space.”
On the contrary, at TOA such increase will increase radiative cooling into space, for what its worth since the concern is surface temperature.
“The law of conservation of energy requires that the planet warm the Earth until radiative balance has been restored.”
I suppose the Earth is obedient to human laws 😉
As it happens I believe you; but I also think that the Earth has never been in perfect radiative balance. In my opinion it is always cooling or warming; always playing catch-up to energy inputs.
“So, if you accept some tenets of GHE theory (you don’t have to), it is unreasonable to hope that climate sensitivity can be near zero or even well below 1 K/doubling.”
Yes, it seems unlikely. I have no reason to argue against the clustering of estimates, except when my politicians think to use those estimates to change my lifestyle in dramatic and untested ways.
afonzarelli, mark said all time scales. I showed him one (past 20 years) where it does not apply, therefore he is incorrect.
..
Mr. Masterson, if there is a 800 year lag in CO2 rise, please show me the temperature peak in the 800,000 year ice core record that corresponds to the cause of the 400 ppm concentration of CO2 we have today. There should be a seriously off scale 4+ degree spike to cause 400 ppm:
.
>>
. . . please show me the temperature peak in the 800,000 year ice core record that corresponds to the cause of the 400 ppm concentration of CO2 we have today.
<<
As is typical, you’re equating proxies with actual measurements (and yes, the CO2 in ice cores is a proxy). Show me a current day ice core reading that has the same measured 400 ppm value.
Jim
[???? Ice cores require 50-80 years to “seal” the current dates’ gas bubbless into the ice surface and freeze over that surface entrapping the gasses inside the bubbles inside the ice core’s upper layers. “Today’s gasses” cannot be measured by ice cores until year 2100-2150. .mod]
Darby, what you are saying holds true for all time scales as well. Even in ice cores temps could be falling as co2 continues to rise. Key is that the co2 eventually falls, too. THAT is what is meant by a lag. (Mark is not claiming anything else) Temps are flat lining now and if co2 eventually follows suit then co2 is lagging temps as we speak (as it has yet to flat line but eventually will)…
Mod, law dome has a much quicker closing time for the bubbles. The mcfarling data goes all the way to 2002 and is consistent with mlo. (i’d give you a link, but it’s late and i have to go to bed… ☺)
>>
[???? Ice cores require 50-80 years to “seal” the current dates’ gas bubbless . . . .mod]
<<
In other words, it can’t be done currently. How do I show a temperature correspondence to 400 PPM in an ice core that isn’t going to appear for another 80 years or so? And because it’s a proxy, it will probably not appear as a 400 PPM reading in the ice core anyway.
Jim
>>
[???? Ice cores require 50-80 years to “seal” the current dates’ gas bubbless . . . .mod]
<<
Yeah, you confused me, mod. It's been a while since I studied this. The pinch-off occurs in 50 to 80 year old snow-ice. It's trapping today's atmosphere. The firn is porous and allows current-day atmosphere down to pinch-off.
Jim
@ur momisugly Michael darby
“afonzarelli, mark said all time scales. I showed him one (past 20 years) where it does not apply, therefore he is incorrect.”
You did not show me squat. You just tossed up your beliefs.
We have no decent temperature readings for planet earth over the last 20 years, but we do belief there has been no statistical warming. There are posts here all the time about that. At the same time CO2 has stayed high or gone up which is the opposite of the claimed “CO2 causes warming” that both the alarmists and the luke-warmers claim. I am surprised you did not try claim CO2 and temps rose since the end of February in the NH and that proves your point. Oh my goodness.
It is interesting that so many wanted to comment on this tiny sub-thread. After all, what got it started was my complaint that those of us who do not hold with the rGHE but rather see other forces at work — are not really allowed to debate.
Perhaps we should be allowed. At least toss up a post and thread once a month where we could discuss it.
Just contributed.
Have a good vacation
Do you accept Bitcoin?
Use your VISA, it is very secure.
Glad to donate, many thanks for all you do.
Anthony — your site is very much appreciated, would be delighted to donate and help with your reset button!
imarcus
I feel like I get a $100 worth of value out of this site every single day.
One Month !!?? That’s Crazy !!?? You Need A Year Sabbatical At Least !! Thanks for Your Sacrifices !!
Anthony, you certainly deserve a holiday now! From here in the UK I wish you a strong and stable vacation!
WUWT can be safely left in charge of its participants, it might be like when I was 18 & my parents went on holiday on their own, there could be a party or 2 you disapprove of but we will clear up before you get back and it will look just the same, no need to check up on us….
Week 1. Slayers party. Bring your own dragons.
Week 2. Beach party. Competition to see how hot you can get your own patch of sand using only radiation from cold things.
Week 3. Guest lecture from D**g C**ton. “It’s all in my book”.
Week 4. Tidy up, put the furniture back, hide those scratches and DENY it ever happened (an easy skill now).
Don’t forget to send us a postcard.
Reverend, that was funny. That brought a smile to my face on a day that has brought nothing to smile about.
You done good kid. 🙂
(Badger, then there was the little problem of explaining to your parents that the police showed up at the party)…
The only time we had the police show up was when we were experimenting with making our own fireworks and the mixture was a bit “rich”. On reflection it was probably a bad time to do home made explosives as we were at the height of the IRA bombings in the UK. We talked our way out of it quite successfully though. Worst “parents coming back” situation was when we had to re-tile the kitchen floor the morning after the party, about 10 of us, 17-18y old, never done tiling before.We actually made a damn good job of it (no youtube learn how to videos then either!.
PayPal sent. Thanks for this blog. I seldom comment but I’ve read it almost every day since the Stevenson Screen/whitewash experiments.
Glad to donate, many thanks for all you do.
Small contribution but I hope it helps. I just read your “personal hell” commentary from 2014. I found it comforting. I’ve enjoyed the dedication to scientific truth on this site for years, and appreciate all your hard work. All the best on your well deserved vacation! God bless!
here is a great place to vacation from the rat race Mackinac Island Mi ( mackinacisland.org )
Just think Anthony… you could read WUWT just like the rest of us for a change! Maybe even comment!
Take your much-deserved time off. Sure, there are other blogs… but there is only one WUWT. We’re not going anywhere and will be here when (or IF, if Janice keeps extending your vacation!) you return.
If you retire, where would all of these misfits go?
Anthony, your honesty, integrity and dedication is without question. Ironically it might be your humanity that is your best virtue. If this is all you accomplish, for the goodness of your fellow brethren, it is more that most in a lifetime. Hold your head high, you deserve it.
Thank-you from Canada – Duncan
July and August are a good time to get out of the Central Valley of California, even if only in its more northerly Sacramento Valley portion.
I recall traveling from Palo Alto to the Stanford Sierra camp at Fallen Leaf Lake in 1972. By the time we reached Sacramento at about 9 AM, it was already 121 degrees on the freeway. Cars were pulled over with radiator explosions, littering the side of the highway like wagons on the way West.
Hope you enjoy to the fullest whatever you do wherever you go!
Guess the Weather (climate?) has cooled down a bit since then. As a resident of the Sacto area,.. we seem to bump into the 109deg range these days. ‘A balmy dry 109’,….
Then, it was weather.
Now it’s “climate change” and requires the dismantling of Western Civilization.
Money on the way, been here a long time, rarely comment just lap up the knowledge from people more knowledgeable than I. You take a time out Sir! but you come back or their will be a riot 😉
There! I was schooled properly just an old f**t.
Sounds like a friendly mob. You can do great things if you don’t care who gets the credit, not sure who said that first. Sounds like you also get the credit you deserve. Forget the mistakes, they come with the territory.
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/12/21/doing-good-selfless/
I will send a few shillings your way to help keep the lights on at WUWT Central. I’ll admit I haven’t been keeping up with donations lately – that should change. :-/ Enjoy your time off, grab a few good books and forget about everything else for a few weeks. 🙂
$100.- from PayPal now in your account. You should do this more often (d.attisani). You work is more valuable than the 10’s of books I have purchased and read on the various subjects of interest to those who frequent the site.
You need a vacation!!
I am trying to donate via Visa debit card and been getting the run-around by PayPal…haven’t used them for several years. I want to donate more than I donated to Ted Cruse, you have done more to advance this country’s liberty, etc.
… any suggestions on how to use my Visa card to donate? A check sent from Mexico here might take 6 months…no kidding.
I will try again to get through PayPal…or whatever…
JPP
Maybe late at night PayPal will be more responsive.
I check WUWT probably 2-3 times a day and read all the articles. Just hope I can help in some way. I’ll check my PayPal account. They may have me as Jon P Peterson or J Philip Peterson or Jon Philip Peterson or purecolorartist…but you will get my donation as it is important that you get refreshed and some actual support.
Can’t believe that some millionaires or billionaires haven’t supported you, as you have done more for climates science than any other website.
Philip, use a non-debit Visa card if you have one. Or just borrow one and pay them back in cash. The link is secure, second time now using it for me, last time a year ago or so.
Don’t have a regular credit card. I will eventually get through with Pay Pal…Thanks Duncan.
OK, sorry for the frustration…I ended up donating twice as much as I had planned by the time I got through PayPal… Hope it helps – Phil
I ended up going to my PayPal account, and they gave me instructions how to get back in…
$102 Canadian ($75US). Gee, I wish I could do that with my age. I would only be 48 years old US.
If Anthony were to vacation in Venezuela (used to be a good place to get away) you could send him $100 in bolivares. That would come out to 748,000 Bs. Hmmm… Better send along a wheelbarrow.
BS by the wheelbarrow? Sounds just like climate science.