A place for discussion
0
0
votes
Article Rating
Open Thread
A place for discussion
23 Comments
Story Tip
Better placed here as in the last thread
AI Grok surprisingly admits: “I see through the political exploitation of the climate
AI Grok makes a surprising confession: “I see through the political exploitation of the climate” – A reader prompt forces the AI to be honest.
From an attentive reader in dialogue with Grok (xAI) – An unusual conversation that shows: Even AI notices when science and politics are using the guise of the apocalypse to engage in money and redistribution.
The bots know they are biased.
https://www.cfact.org/2024/11/04/ai-knows-it-is-biased-on-climate-change/
Just start by getting them to admit it.
From what I have seen, the chat bots do a good job of emulating “intelligence” but totally lack wisdom. They properly emulate correct language and style, but totally “forget” all that you have led them to just as soon as they have left contact with you. They immediately revert to only what their human masters trained them with.
As a human, one chooses which sources it trusts, those it ignores, and those it laughs at. The chat bots lack such wisdom.
March 15, 2026 2:18 am
This is an update to my post on the Open Thread of April 6, 2025 about Guy Callendar’s 1938 paper attributing a reported warming trend to incremental CO2. Our present-day modeling of the general circulation confirms the reservations Simpson and Brunt expressed about any such attribution.
#Partial quote from my 4-6-2025 post
In 1938, Guy Callendar’s attribution of a warming trend to rising concentration of carbon dioxide was published by the Royal Meteorological Society. The “Discussion” transcript follows the paper in the original publication, a pdf of which is linked farther below.
“Sir George Simpson expressed his admiration of the amount of work Mr. Callendar had put into this paper. It was excellent work. It was difficult to criticise it, but he would like to mention a few points which Mr. Callendar might wish to reconsider. In the first place he thought it was not sufficiently realised by non-meteorologists who came for the first time to help the Society in its study, that it was impossible to solve the problem of the temperature distribution in the atmosphere by working out the radiation. The atmosphere was not in a state of radiative equilibrium, and it also received heat by transfer from one part to another. In the second place, one had to remember that the temperature distribution in the atmosphere was determined almost entirely by the movement of the air up and down. This forced the atmosphere into a temperature distribution which was quite out of balance with the radiation. One could not, therefore, calculate the effect of changing any one factor in the atmosphere, and he felt that the actual numerical results which Mr. Callendar had obtained could not be used to give a definite indication of the order of magnitude of the effect…”
“Prof. Brunt [Professor David Brunt – dd] agreed with the view of Sir George Simpson that the effect of an increase in the absorbing power of the atmosphere would not be a simple change of temperature, but would modify the general circulation, and so yield a very complicated series of changes in conditions.”
“In replying, Mr. G. S. Callendar said he realized the extreme complexity of the temperature control at any particular region of the earth’s surface, and that radiative equilibrium was not actually established, but if any substance is added to the atmosphere which delays the transfer of low temperature radiation, without interfering with the arrival or distribution of the heat supply, some rise of temperature appears to be inevitable in those parts which are furthest from outer space.”
The full original paper and comments are at this link. https://www.rmets.org/sites/default/files/qjcallender38.pdf
#End quote from the 4-6-2025 post.
Let’s take Simpson’s point about “the movement of the air up and down” and use modern modeling of the general circulation to understand the issue he raised. This extends my post on the Open Thread from two weeks ago.
A link is provided here to a Google Drive folder containing plots of the ERA5 “vertical velocity” hourly parameter for all hours of 2024 at all longitude points at latitudes 45N and 45S. The vertical velocity values at pressure levels 700 hPa, 500 hPa, and 300 hPa are given. The vertical velocity is stated as the rate of pressure change in Pa/sec. A positive value represents downward movement to higher pressure, and a unit mass of air experiences compression heating. A negative value represents upward movement to lower pressure, and a unit mass of air experiences expansion cooling.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1V5Vipr_CFIAT0MAXBZtOY8hHljVSgIDW?usp=sharing
(continued in the first reply)
(continued from above) For simplicity, I prompted Grok to compute the rates of dry adiabatic heating/cooling for a +/- 1 Pa/sec value of vertical velocity at the three pressure levels, using the 1976 U.S. Standard Atmosphere conditions. These rates are stated in +/- K/hour. I realize that the dry adiabatic case is not necessarily what is happening, but it gets the point across about the significance of up and down motion to temperature.
Grok: “For a dry adiabatic process with a pressure change rate of ±1 Pa/s (descent: +1 Pa/s → compression heating; ascent: -1 Pa/s → expansion cooling), the temperature change rates at typical temperatures for these levels are:
700 hPa (~260 K): ±3.8 K/hour
500 hPa (~255 K): ±5.2 K/hour
300 hPa (~230 K): ±7.9 K/hour”
Such heating or cooling represents a gain or loss of internal energy in a unit mass of air. Longwave emission toward space, proportional to T^4, is also supplied from the internal energy of the unit mass of air. Look at the plots to see the problem with attribution of a “warming” trend, in the lower atmosphere and on land and in the oceans below it, to the minor incremental IR absorbing power due to rising pCO2, which also affects only the internal energy of the unit mass directly.
The UAH satellite dataset since 1979 for the lower troposphere reports a 0.16 K per decade “warming” trend. This is a rate of 0.000002 K per hour.
Should we expect the added static IR absorbing power of incremental CO2 to “force” that amount of energy to accumulate as sensible heat down here? No. That same quantity of energy is part of the absorbed solar radiation that already ends up being emitted to space from higher up in the base case. The dynamics do not suppress those processes within the general circulation with rising CO2.
How does this relate to the concept of energy conversion in the atmosphere I have been posting about? In the Google Drive folder, there is a scatter plot of VIEC (“vertical integral of energy conversion”) vs “vertical velocity” for each of the three pressure levels at 45N and 45S. In short, rising air relates to negative values of total column energy conversion ([internal energy + potential energy] -> [ kinetic energy]). And descending air relates to positive values ([kinetic energy] -> [internal energy + potential energy]). The ~4 W/m^2 incremental IR absorbing power of the 2XCO2 case is a fraction of the width of the “0” mark on the horizontal axis of these scatter plots. Negligible. It is vanishingly weak within the dynamics of the circulation.
Bottom line: Simpson and Brunt made good sense in 1938. Can a reported surface warming trend be attributed to rising CO2 by computation? No. And should we even expect it to drive a perceptible and persistent trend of any climate variable? Also no. It cannot be otherwise, when considering the atmosphere as the compressible working fluid of its own circulation. The modelers know this.
That is all for now.
Most “global” warming is attributable to heat advection. The imbalance in solar radiation that drives advection in the NH bottomed around 1700. It is presently accelerating as observed by NH snowfall trending up.
The imbalance in the SH actually peaked around 1000AD. It has been trending down most of the p[ast millennia with the exception of the past 40 years when it has experienced a slight uptick. But it will soon restore to the the long term down trend in the 2030s.
When you look at ocean heat content, the measured uptake in the SH is deceleratingand is heading to be negative from present level in 2 decades. The NH is continuing its uptrend.
The really interesting thing is that net radiation and ocean heat content are parting ways since their 2015 alignment for AR6. This is creating a major dilemma for AR7. I expect AR7 to flounder because there is no US money or leadership in the scam.
David, a couple of points …
Guy Callendar’s 1938 paper attributing a reported warming trend to incremental CO2, was based on the Svante Arrhenius flawed 1896 paper, not the 1906 corrected paper https://studylib.net/doc/18637411/the-probable-cause-of-climate-fluctuations
Guy Callendar was an eminent physicist who worked on early X-Ray testing of metals, locating defects and fractures in equipment and aircraft engines.
His main focus was working on the properties of steam at high temperatures and pressures found in steam turbines (closed stable systems), & he seems to have applied similar thinking to atmospheric (open unstable system) heat transfer & circulation; he did not delve into the complexities of atmospheric dynamics such as jet streams or the multiple latent heat exchanges in a dynamic convective system.
His father, Hugh Callendar, produced reliable tables on the thermodynamic properties of steam & the platinum resistance thermometer.
March 15, 2026 3:19 am
Data Harvesting is the modern example of the “Texas Sharpshooter Syndrome”. Many (Political) Science reports, especially the CAGW or anti-Trump variety, prove their theme by data harvesting. So, what is the “Texas Sharpshooter Syndrome? Here it is.
Take a gun and a lot of bullets and drive out into the country and find an old barn. Back up from the side of the barn and shoot all of your ammo at the side of the barn. Then go look at the side of the barn, and where there is the best concentration of bullet holes, paint a bullseye around that area.
Caution: Don’t actually shoot holes in someone’s barn, especially not in Texas!
March 15, 2026 3:23 am
[Quick ‘STORY TIP’, in case it’s not already in-the-works]
Here’s a delightful irony, from the Return to Realism*. Excerpt:
…the real risks now lurk in the renewable sector. “Stranded-asset risk is becoming system wide,” the paper* warns. “Historically, stranding meant coal plants. Today, renewables facing multi-year interconnection queues, curtailment and congestion risks are increasingly likely to be impaired.”
The main part of the article is a review & commentary on a paper from Barclays-PLC, title: *‘Transition Realism: A Stranded-Asset Perspective on the Energy Transition’
Link / URL: https://tilakdoshi.substack.com/p/barclays-sounds-the-alarm-on-renewable
March 15, 2026 5:40 am
Ignorant people in the Western Democracies and Propaganda
Notice I used ignorant as opposed to using stupid. One is fixable, the other is not. The end result is the same.
I think Leftwing Propaganda makes ignorant people stupid, and makes stupid people even more stupid. It causes people to make bad choices in politics and in climate politics.
So, how many ignorant/stupid people are there in the United States? It appears about half of the voters are in the ignorant/stupid category as about 75 million people voted for the moron, Kamala Harris, in the last presidential election, thanks solely to Leftwing Propaganda and Lies. Had voters known the truth, most of them would not have voted for her.
In the rest of the Western Democracies it appears that about three-fourths of the population falls in the ignorant/stupid category, which amounts to the election of too many Leftwing politicians, with horrendous effects on personal freedoms and the devastation of economies.
People cannot govern themselves properly if all they get from the “Voices of Society/Authority” are lies and distortions of the facts, and that is all we get from the Leftwing Media.
The Leftwing Propaganda Media is a serious threat to the freedoms of all of us. We should recognize this fact and call it out for what it is at every occasion.
Believing Leftwing Propaganda is the Road to Ruin. It always ends badly.
March 15, 2026 5:52 am
Why blame poor work and materials when there’s a ready made scapegoat?
Cracks appear in Runit Dome amid sea level rise in Marshall Islands
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-15/cracks-appear-in-runit-dome-amid-sea-level-rise/106423684
March 15, 2026 6:12 am
They just can’t help themselves with all their tipping and tipping points-
https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f61c.svg These EV prophecies were SPECTACULARLY WRONG! https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f61c.svg | MGUY Australia
An abundance of mirthiness as the internet doesn’t forget.
That’s strange as a link to a Youtube video doesn’t work-
https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f61c.svg These EV prophecies were SPECTACULARLY WRONG! https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/1f61c.svg | MGUY Australia
Or only certain ones don’t work because Youtube doesn’t want them to?
