Remember the spectacular two and a half meter wide ClimateGate Timeline from 4 weeks ago? We got hundreds of emails from all around the world in response. Some people made giant printed versions and sent us photos, while others requested printed copies. Mohib Ebrahim originally created this project for his own edification, but then decided to release it. When a first draft was published last December, many readers had excellent suggestions for improving it. So behind the scenes, Mohib and four more volunteers went to work. Thanks especially to Curt for revising and editing the entire timeline (as he’d done with the introduction), and to Tom, Stuart and Gene for help proofreading. It’s really been a monumental task and now, finally, for all those waiting for the chance to print and learn, here is the official edition. All pictures and links have been updated.
Click to see a larger version (but download the full version below to read it all).
…
Click here to download the poster as PDF (892k)
Click here if you prefer a GIF version of the poster (1.8Mb)
…
Below, see Brenton’s dedicated effort to put together the poster at home.
Brenton put together 27 pages of full color print to make his own ClimateGate Timeline.
This is One Spectacular Poster of ClimateGate Covering 3 Decades
You have to see this up close to believe it. Look up close and admire the detail while you despair at how long science has been going off the rails. To better appreciate the past and what was exposed by the CRU emails, the Timeline chart consolidates and chronologically organizes the information uncovered and published about the CRU emails by many researchers along with some related contextual events. That the chart exists at all is yet another example of how skilled experts are flocking in to the skeptics’ position and dedicating hours of time pro bono because they are passionately motivated to fight against those who try to deceive us.
I’ve established a permanent home page for Mohib’s beautiful poster that will host the latest updates in PDF and GIF format. There are also printable versions in A4, A3, A2, A1, A0, US Letter and US Tabloid for those of you (like me) who need printed versions on which scribble, and scrawl exclamation marks.
ClimateGate Timeline 1.1 home page
…
It’s hard to do the full Timeline justice on a small screen, but here are a few select screen shots so you have some idea of what this document shows. Click on the images just to pop-up readable close-ups of a few choice spots. One day, in historical exhibitions, I hope this chart will be exhibited to help people dissect just how the global warming scam grew, and to help teach children what to look for, to minimize the damage from the next exaggerated claim of catastrophe before it grows so large.
Climatologists had no idea what the temperature would be in the year 2000
…
NEW IN THIS VERSION: Carbon economics and data fiddling kick in soon after the IPCC is established in 1988.
…
Looking back in 1981, the world had just barely started warming, despite years of rising CO2 levels.
…
Three decades later they still admit privately that they don’t understand the climate.
…
…
Mohib/Jo,
We truly owe you guys a great debt for this fine collation of information. Once again, Thank you….
30
Hi all! This one has a very tenuous connection to the thread in that the computer “evidence” seems to have been so blindly accepted by the global warming advocates.
If the ABC Was Relevant Part 8
(Definitely not the 7:30 Report.)
Kerry: Tonight Brian and John show us how to build a climate model.
[John and Brian dressed as hip dudes; jeans, politically correct tee-shirts, baseball caps etc.]
Brian: [Excitedly]. Hey dude – what’s going down today!?
John: [Also excitedly] Hi Brian! Well today, we’ve going to show our viewers how to make a global climate model and save the planet !
Brian: Wow, that’s great John!
John: Sure is Brian!
Brian: So, what do we need to build a global climate model John?
John: Well, first we’re going to need a supercomputer Brian. Here’s one we borrowed from the climate Labratory… [Wheels in a large cardboard box, painted black, with “Whirlpool” showing through the paint.]
Brian: Wow, he’s a beauty John! What’s his name?
John: He’s called “Hot Black” and he’s the smartest computer in the world Brian!
Brian: Wow John! So we’re going to use Hot Black to show us how to save the planet?
John: That’s right Brian! But first we’re going to need some data. Here’s some we just got straight from the scientists at the IPCC…. [Picks up garbage bin full of old papers, apple cores, cabbage leaves, coke cans, soiled disposable nappies.]
Brian: That’s a load of data John!
John: Sure is Brian! Over 20 years of peer-reviewed research! Now all we need to do is to input the data! [Opens lid of box, tips in papers, apple cores, cabbage leaves etc.]
Brian: Wow John! I never knew saving the planet was so easy!
John: Not so fast Brian! We haven’t finished our programming yet – we need to fine tune our model!
Brian: So how do we do this John?
John: Well, Brian, modeling something as complex as our planet’s climate isn’t that simple! There’s a whole load of inputs we need to… input.
Brian: Which will we need years of training and extensive model review and validation, eh John?
John: No way Brian! Hot Black is specially designed to accept our climate inputs right now! [Goes over to “computer”.] Here’s the model input settings. [Points to array of large dials marked “CO2 level” etc.]
Brian: I get it! So how should we set the CO2 dial John?
John: Let’s see… There’s “Warm”, “Hot” or “Bloody Hot” Brian. What do you reckon?
Brian: Let’s say “Bloody Hot”, John. The Precautionary Principle.
John: OK. CO2 is set to… [Turns dial.] Bloody Hot. How about your water vapour feedback Brian?
Brian: We’d have to call that one Bloody Hot as well Brian, what do you reckon?
John: Right on Brian! Bloody Hot it is. [Turns dial.] How about Ocean Outgassing?
Brian: That’s heavy stuff John – why not say Bloody Hot?
John: Consider it done Brian. [Turns dial]. How about “Solar Activity”?
Brian: Same as usual John.
John: Sorry, no can do dude! The only settings are “Zero” and “Bugger All”. Funny that.
Brian: OK – [tosses coin]. Heads. It’s “Bugger All” for the solar activity. On a probabilistic basis.
John: Right out there Brian! So we’ve built our model – now let’s see what Hot Black can tell us!
Brian: What about the other inputs?
John: You mean “Drip Dry” and “Colours”? We never use them.
Brian: No John – the Cloud Cover Albedo setting!
John: Sorry Brian, that one seems stuck on “Sod All”. Pity. Here we go… [Presses big red button.]
[“Computer” shakes and rattles, lights go on and off on display panel, puffs of smoke drift from vents around the sides.]
Computer: [Metallic American voice] WARNING!!! WARNING!!! DANGER!!! DANGER!!! [Pops out a pair of “Lost in Space” style arms and starts waving them around.] DANGER!!! DANGER!!! [“Computer” shuts down again.]
Brian: Wow John! That’s a pretty serious message for our policy makers! [High fives with John].
John: Right on Brian! We need to take urgent and immediate action! We’ll need a generous government grant, some peer reviewed papers and a very thick report with writing all over it.
Brian: Wow! That’s great John!
John: And I think I can feel a Nobel Prize coming on…
10
Would some please let Tony Abbott know. The opposition are pussy footing around again, when they have the trump cards in their hands regarding this ETS bill. They are now saying ‘Humans do contribute to climate change but to what degree we are not sure!” Or words of that effect… Again I would advise interested parties to get the UTube edition of the “The Great Global Warming Swindle” Takes a hour to run through, but take particular note of the Canadian report on why there was different hauls of herring and anchovy’s in a part of Canada. They suggest that the hidden factors were attributable to cosmic rays that helped form clouds, and also solar activity that sometimes deflects them…(Bit more complex than that though) now I am no scientist but I have always believed that humans can not change climate… climate is what we expect – weather is what we get! However humans can change the landscape and there is no denying cutting down large areas of rain forest
will generally divert precipitation patterns and even monsoon
patterns… but usually only effects immediate regions of the planet. I also advise you tune into Lord Monckton’s radio interview with Alan Jones on 2GB on the 25th January… it’s great …
Carbon trading is a realty. Ecuador have established shares that means they get paid to not cut down their rain forests. Yet maintain them. At the Copenhagen summit, Brazil stated – “You pay us not to drill for oil and maintain the rain forests”.
In many ways I think this is a good idea.
I do believe that developed countries do have a responsibility
here but not be forced into it. Look at Haiti, such a tragedy, I was shocked to see a small boy have a food parcel snatched
from him and he cried. And the lack of infrastructure they had before that is hampering food and aid distribution. Orphans being sold for $50. Women being raped. It broke my heart that this should happen. Look at the satellite of the devastation of Haitian landscape to next door Dominican republic. They are growing biofuels instead of food.
Climate change is a piddling excuse and that we should concentrate on is sustainability but also the dangers and manipulation of ideologies to support that support this climate change scam.
Charity does start at home however, these politicians and scam
artists have nothing to offer in solving third world countries
plight. Take the King tides enveloping the Torres Straight
Islands. One elder said, “We have been asking for better sea
walls from Australian government – king tides are a problem
we have experienced for many years … $150 million dollars was
promised and we haven’t seen it yet!”
10
Speedy hilarious. I am a published writer and freelance journalist and one of the methods I use is humor to get a message across. Well done. Seen the hilarious Glazier Gate with Hitler… another great. Just google glazier gate you’ll find it.
10
What a fantastic effort! It’s all getting rather frantic at the end, with all those ‘-gates’ popping out of the woodwork. I just hope the chart is easy enough to update!
10
[…] The climategate timeline – the poster child of global warming alarmism! […]
10
Suspicion confirmed! It was a fraud from the start.
I’ll email this to President Obama.
10
Roy Hogue: Email it to Tony Abbott too, please.
10
Bush Bunny,
I’ll have to leave that job up to someone in Australia. I don’t have a position as a U.S. citizen that will make me credible.
10
And this is my response to email to the president.
I zeroed out my IP address to protect the guilty.
Printing it and sending it by snail-mail is prohibitive for me. So that ends that. Nuts!
10
Good stuff Mohib, Jo and Co….. That’s one big assed poster, outlining a big assed fraud! 🙂
10
Joanna, could you send it to Tony Abbott please?
10
[…] Finally! The Newly Revised and Edited ClimateGate Timeline (1.1 … […]
10
[…] http://joannenova.com.au/2010/01/finally-the-new-revised-and-edited-climategate-timeline/ […]
10
Brett, no way. There is no sheet of paper big enough to fit the history of all the fraud, crime and scientific malfeasance…
20
joanne:
Great work!! Thank you one and all for this compendium.
10
This fraud is falling apart fast. I believe a seminal moment has been reached. The moment is reminiscent of the battle scene before the gates of Mordor in the book “The Return of the King” from Tolkien’s “The Lord of The Rings” trilogy. The scene from the movie where Sauron’s tower of Barad-Dur falls and explodes also comes to mind. The longer the politicians take to cut their losses and run the more expensive it will be for them both in political and financial currency. Since it is all about the money and it is going to start costing them big time, the politicians will either turn against the AGW zealots or try and ignore the AGW scandal and hope that it goes away. Either way, the climate scientists who form the core of the cabal are toast.
If you look at the time line chart there is all kinds of evidence of fraud waiting to be reported. Think about what has already been reported about the various “gates”, the information was always there and was known to the skeptics for quite some time. What is different now is that the winds of fortune have shifted and the “story” is finally being reported. This scandal should go supernova before the year is out.
Writing of supernovas, how do you do it Jo? You are a lean, mean blogging machine. I wake up in the morning here in the US and there is often two or more new blogs waiting. You aught to write a book on time management. Thank you for your hard work.
10
[…] Finally! The Newly Revised and Edited ClimateGate Timeline (1.1) « JoNova. […]
10
Off topic a little but this from the US today.
The United Nations’ expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world’s mountain tops on a student’s dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.
In its most recent report, it stated that observed reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and Africa was being caused by global warming, citing two papers as the source of the information.
However, it can be revealed that one of the sources quoted was a feature article published in a popular magazine for climbers which was based on anecdotal evidence from mountaineers about the changes they were witnessing on the mountainsides around them.
The other was a dissertation written by a geography student, studying for the equivalent of a master’s degree, at the University of Berne in Switzerland that quoted interviews with mountain guides in the Alps.
20
[…] 30 years in the making The ClimateGate timeline from Mohib Ebrahim, found at Joanne Nova’s place. You have to see this up close to believe it. Look up close and admire the detail while you despair […]
10
Speedy you are exact in your modelling except theres is called GLO2ABS,
Welcome! This is the GLO2ABS program.
I will create a set of absolute grids from
a set of anomaly grids (in .glo format), also
a gridded version of the climatology.
Enter the path and name of the normals file: clim.6190.lan.tmx
Enter a name for the gridded climatology file: clim.6190.lan.tmx.grid
Enter the path and stem of the .glo files: tmxglo/tmx.
Enter the starting year: 1901
Enter the ending year: 2006
Enter the path (if any) for the output files: tmxabs
Now, CONCENTRATE. Addition or Percentage (A/P)? A
Right, erm.. off I jolly well go!
tmx.01.1901.glo
(etc)
tmx.12.2006.glo
#####
Welcome! This is the MERGEGRIDS program.
I will create decadal and full gridded files
from the output files of (eg) glo2abs.for.
Enter a gridfile with YYYY for year and MM for month: tmxabs/tmx.MM.YYYY.glo.abs
Enter Start Year: 1901
Enter Start Month: 01
Enter End Year: 2006
Enter End Month: 12
Please enter a sample OUTPUT filename, replacing
start year with SSSS and end year with EEEE: cru_ts_3_00.SSSS.EEEE.tmx.dat
Writing cru_ts_3_00.1901.1910.tmx.dat
(etc)
This took longer than hoped.. running out of disk space again. This is why Tim didn’t save more of
the intermediate products – which would have made my detective work easier. The ridiculous process
he adopted – and which we have dutifully followed – creates hundreds of intermediate files at every
stage, none of which are automatically zipped/unzipped. Crazy. I’ve filled a 100gb disk!
10
Maybe you should look at this Google Book entry of The Bulletin of The Atomic Scientist February 1978, Is Mankind Warming the Earth
Rather long link here…
W. W. Kellogg — The Atmosphere.
Earliest Article I can find that has the rhetoric and the CO2 references.
10
@ Roy Hogue: #7
Since Obama was instrumental in setting up the Chicago Climate Exchange , I’m guessing he probably won’t exactly fall off his chair with surprise when he reads your email.
10
Now sensible people and the ‘non Gaia Worshipers’ are a danger to National Security. More hysterical drivel from the Climate Fraudsters. This guy really is a . . . tool?
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/climate-changes-sceptics-a-threat-to-national-security/
10
Pez dePupkern,
The White House mail server rejected my message. They have a size limit and the pdf file exceeded it. And I was doubtful that it would get as far as the president’s desk. But if you don’t try you just guarantee that he’ll never see it.
10
Pez dePupkern,
On another aspect of this — it’s beginning to be clear to me that he doesn’t care if it’s fraudulent or not. I once thought he was a true believer but now I’m not so sure. His agenda is driven by the IOUs that he’s stuck with as the price of support for his election by environmental interests. That’s on top of the fact that he believes his country needs to be, shall we say, humbled before the entire world for its great sin of being prosperous and a world leader. We have too many freedoms and aren’t socialist, which, in spite of protests to the contrary, is where he’s leading us.
20
Controversial climate change boss
uses car AND driver to travel
one mile to office…
(but he says YOU should use public transport)
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1247376/Controversial-climate-change-boss-uses-car-AND-driver-travel-mile-office—says-YOU-use-public-transport.html#ixzz0eHyL8EaH
10
► CIA Spying on CO2 now ◄
https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/center-on-climate-change-and-national-security.html
10
▼
► Freeman Dyson on Global Warming:
A prominent scientist who’s
followed the science of global warming
from the beginning, Dyson explains why
climate models have no scientific merit:
part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTSxubKfTBU
part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk
10
PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd
says his climate change policy
could be to blame for the
hit he’s taken in the polls.
Tell him NO ETS ASAP:
► http://pm.gov.au/PM_Connect/Email_your_PM
10
Just what we need — more jousting at windmills.
10
[…] was climategate—pow!—then came revelations of the tarting up of the melting Himalayan […]
10
Roy, why not just send a link to the PDF rather than send the file?
Also if you really changed your IP to zero’s that would usually trigger a spam filter. Get a Gmail account and use that for anonymous sending. Of course it isn’t foolproof…….Just use the name Rudd as the sender 🙂
10
Mark,
Sending email with an embedded link can trigger spam filters, but frankly I didn’t think of that. I was too busy with something else when the email came back. I’ll give it a try.
By the way, it was in the part of the rejection message that I posted here that I zeroed my IP address. It’s now quite illegal to email under a false IP address.
10
Let me know if Barry, replies.
My new measure of legal is if it meets the Farnish test…….
10
Roy,
further to Mark’s Gmail suggestion, if you use Google Docs to store the pdf and share it, you can send invitations to view to whoever.
10
[…] http://joannenova.com.au/2010/01/finally-the-new-revised-and-edited-climategate-timeline/ […]
10
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by A. Servant, linda digiacomo, Justin Lee, Justin Lee, BJ McCormick and others. BJ McCormick said: Checking out this site: http://joannenova.com.au/2010/01/finally-the-new-revised-and-edited-climategate-timeline/ […]
10
Be careful of Gmail: But I can assure you the FBI or CIA will be
monitoring anything sent … and even if you delete your email addy they’ll trace it. I would send the link as suggested.
And emphasise why you are sending it? Up to you trooper!
10
Mark D! Want another Utegate in America? Falsifing the sender of an email is a Federal offence in Oz. Good idea, but not one
to be adopted please.
10
[…] amazing, HUGE, poster showing a 30-year timeline of Climategate. You can download it free on JoNova here as a PDF or GIF, and there are printable versions in A4, A3, A2, US letter and US […]
10
Hilarious Speedy!
I’m still chuckling.
Do you mind If I cut, paste and post elsewhere? Linking back to here naturally.
FWIW, I think the tipping point will be well and truly crossed when stand-up comedians get to work on this stuff.
I miss George Carlin.
10
Aww rats, Mohib didn’t include my suggestion about using the Science News cover story about the “Coming Ice Age?” from 1974.
Oh wow, he added an amazing amount!
I printed out the first edition on a cheap color laser printer and the 21 pages registered pretty well. I taped them onto two pieces of foamboard (I printed and extra middle column to provide overlap), I might try it again with the revision, but probably not.
I’m going to give a Climategate talk soon, and will get the new version printed on a single sheet in B&W (only about USD$8). A local Kinkos estimated about $12 for B&W and $130 for color, all those quotes are for the 30″x80″ first release. The 94″ will be some 20% higher I think.
10
Hi Ric, and everyone else.
First of all let me thank everyone once again for all the words of appreciation. Let me also especially thank Curt for the weeks he spent editing each box. There are actually some 60-65 pages of text and we were at it all day every day for almost 4 weeks. You’ll see his hand everywhere from start right through to the reference list.
Ric, regarding the size, it’s the same as the original (2 landscape A0 size sheets), but the printer can of course scale it as needed and of course text will go smaller. If you’re printing at reduced the size, you could ask them to print a small section as a proof to see if it’s satisfactorily readable. Kinkos have excellent prices. Tom Moriarty of Climate Sanity paid $18 for a full size print in B&W (see his photo on the timeline home page). Other B&W quotes I got were in the $60+ range.
Yes lots more info was added, especially about the early history and carbon economics. These were excellent suggestions as they give a better picture of the early years. There are also additions scattered throughout. All the breaking news last week came a bit late, so only GlacierGate made it in, but then there’s no room left at that end of the chart, so the glaring headline the Times chose seemed to be a fitting end!
About your Science News suggestion, actually I did use your idea! If I remember correctly, you suggested to include a “science” related citation rather than just the popular press and offered Science News. What I chose was a quote from Nigel Calder that appeared in International Wildlife, because at the time he made the statement he was editor of New Scientist and also “the man responsible” for the BBC series the Weather Machine and so tied into the red box also for 1974.
I think I managed to incorporate all the suggestions; the only one I couldn’t sort out was grapes at Hadrian’s wall. I tried hard to get to the bottom of it, but could not resolve it satisfactorily in time. I have some additional sources to check but have not been able to do so yet. Let me prepare a post of what I found and where I reached, with help from Ian Plimer (via Joanne), and perhaps as a group we can go further.
BTW I’ve discovered the amazing Loupe Tool in Acrobat. It’s a perfect way to read the timeline as you can keep it displayed as a full page and simply click here and there to have a section enlarged in a re-sizable window!! Brilliant.
10
Ok here’s a little detective project for those interested in helping resolve the grapes at Hadrian’s wall question.
I tried to find some source references for this and the trail went as follows:
1) First I came across this article with the enticing title:
Were grapes really grown as far north as Hadrian’s Wall in Roman Times?
http://www.ecologicmedia.org/green-room/the-grapes-of-sceptics-wrath/
It suggested that all roads led to Ian Plimer. I looked some more and indeed most references were from Ian. For example:
http://www.examiner.com/x-7564-SF-Libertarian-Examiner~y2009m7d23-Kerry-threatens-war-over-climate-change:
“I’ll leave you with Australian geologist Ian Plimer on issues that the scare-mongers leave out of their speeches: ‘… that CO2 is not a pollutant but a plant food; that the earth’s warmer periods — such as when the Romans grew grapes and citrus trees as far north as Hadrian’s Wall — were times of wealth and plenty.'”
And also again in Ian’s own words:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1231673/Global-warming-Dont-wait-The-Earth-tricks-carbon-count-control.html
“It was so hot during the 600-year-long ‘Roman warming’ that grapes were grown as far north as Hadrian’s Wall.”
2) Next stop Ian Plimer, with Joanne’s help, to find out his source. He replied to check his book which Joanne did for me as I didn’t have a copy. She found a couple of references on pages 59-63 and said the source comes down to the 1000 year old Domesday book. As well as the following article at RealClimate, of all places.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/07/medieval-warmth-and-english-wine/
3) I checked and plotted the UK locations mentioned in the realclimate article and the locations mentioned in the ecologicmedia article above on the excellent map at ecologicmedia. All the sites were below the “M” line. Realclimate states there are other single reports of vineyards in Lincoln, Leeds and Derbyshire. I plotted these also and although they are above the “M” line, Leeds being the farthest north, they are all well below Hadrian’s Wall (Joanne, perhaps you could upload and link the map I sent you). Realclimate alsom mentions a lone report of a vineyard in Scotland
So I suggested, that unless these reports about what is contained in the Domesday book are wrong, Ian may be mistaken in referencing the Domesday book as a source for vinyards at Hadrian’s Wall and asked her to find out if he has other sources for this matter.
4) She talked to Ian again and he said that Brian Fagan had written on the topic. I did a search and found his site, but no versions of his books are available on-line and so I’ll have to fish them out my local library but have not yet been able to do. I imagine the relevant books of his will be these:
The great warming : climate change and the rise and fall of civilizations
The long summer : how climate changed civilization
The Little Ice Age : how climate made history, 1300-1850
Time detectives : how archeologists use technology to recapture the past
So the trail has reached upto here for anyone who wishes to pick it up.
There are also a couple of other dimensions to this topic:
a) It’s been written in many places that “Chaucer wrote about vineyards in Northeren England.” (I’ve even used this on the timeline.) But I’ve never seen any reference as to where Chaucer wrote this — if someone knows which of his works it’s in then we can confirm this and see also how far north he was referring to.
b) The Vikings had named a place “Vinland”, which is thought to be Newfundland, and had vineyards there. Some sources I read suggested this is a corruption of a word that meant pastures so it would good to find out exactly where “Vinland” is (if this is even known with certainty), if the Vikings had vineyards there and if there are any there now.
10
Thank you so much for the wonderful efforts of all those involved in putting together this chart! What a massive job, it’s people like this that will help save our country! THANK YOU once again for your efforts.
10
REALLY EYE OPENER to believers of warming world.
Sickening that MWDIVAL WARMTH Flattened for ulterior motives
to get HOCKEY STICK for playing Warming-match that culminates
with climate-gate.
10
The debate regarding Global Warming has reached the stage where only advancement in the understanding of physics can logically arbitrate. Failing such advancement, then by assessments of the events occurring during the passage of an unknown period of that phenomenon we call “time”.
With regards to physics, I would now request your patience as I attempt to elaborate on an earlier comment (number 165 in another Joanne blog) made regarding evaporation, condensation, freezing and thawing being the major thermostats assisting to regulate the temperature of our atmosphere. Although the following comments may appear not to have relevance to Global Warming, there is a correlation.
Presently my work regarding “Matter and Associated Mysteries” indicates that if heat energy is referred to as the “rapidity of the random motion of the molecules of a body”, that belief or statement is not correct because the statement only referred to the “dynamic state” = temperature. If two molecule oscillators approach too close, then they lose mass (according to my work) in the form of radiated energy. The magnitude of mass transformed and therefore the intensity of radiation being dependent on the closeness of approach. The frequency of the radiated energy is dependent on the “time” between each encounter. As near as I can ascertain, it is presently commonly believed that molecular impact occurs and results in heat energy
Presently the physics textbooks state that the “masked assimilation of heat energy during a phase change of state results from the need to expend energy to bring about the change of state, and that is correct with regards to evaporation of water. However there is an anomaly regarding water at 100 degrees C changing to steam at 100 degrees C and then returning to water at !00 degrees C. Steam at 100 degrees C liberates quite a lot of what we refer to as heat energy when condensing to water with a temperature of 100 degrees C, and presently is referred to as resulting from changes occurring to unknown motions within molecules. A small portion of the work referred to above attempts to provide logical and detailed answers to the anomaly referred to regarding how heat energy is created and stored.
I stated in the earlier 165 comment that considerable effort has been expended regarding the understanding of changes of state, and that the process is not presently fully understood. In that regard, I would be happy to provide a copy of my work to any physicist willing to read and comment on my work. My thanks for your patience and for the reading of my comment and to Joanne for the opportunity.
The email address is [email protected]
10
Jo,
One Republican candidate for state assembly for my district here in California has come out calling for repeal of AB 32, our own homegrown version of cap and trade. I’ve no idea how much of a skeptic he is or is not but I sent him the link to this timeline.
One possible problem with this is the unwieldy size of the chart. So Jo, can we get this in text form as a pdf file with the references included with each event? I know that’s a lot more work, but it would make this a better tool for educating politicians and others.
Thanks Jo
Roy
10
Mohib! GIVE THAT POSTER A MEDAL! Did anyone tune in to President
Obama’s Address to the Union, in the US Congress!
Not a mention of the IPCC COP15? However, he got a chuckle when
he mentioned “I know some people do not believe the Climate Change science, but … then went on to suggest America must be a forefront in Clean Energy.. mentioned China and Europe … and
how America must keep up in this field… Then said (to cheers) we must think of nuclear, off shore oil and gas and employ more people in the manufacturer of solar panels… Of course nuclear, gas and oil, have lower greenhouse emissions than coal fired electricity plants.
President Obama is coming to speak to Mr Rudd in the next few
weeks, now I wonder what he will be speaking about?
Incidentaly Prof Oppenheimer (I think I have that name correct)
was interviewed on the ABC report two days ago… he said
that greenhouse gases do make the Earth warmer… Well we all
knew this! As clouds trap the greenhouse gases closer to earth rather than let them escape into space… What is the composition of greenhouse gases? 95% water vapour and the rest … ?
10
[…] Climategate Timeline Banner […]
10
I’m giving a talk on Climategate at this year’s New Hampshire (USA) Mensa’s regional gathering. I did last year’s too, in 2008 I suggested asking Joe D’Aleo to talk (he lives one town away from the RG) and he did.
We use a copy shop for our monthly newsletter and RG program because they have really good prices. I went to pick up the RG program Friday, but they ran out of cover stock so I have to go back Monday.
While there, I had them print out the poster full size. Their printer left some narrow white streaks that don’t interfere with reading. All the images are fine, and the grayscale shading is great. All for USD $8.25. It sounds like that price will be tough to beat.
On Monday I’ll see if they have interest in selling it mail order. They barely have a web presence, so that would be an issue. I might be able to help with that, but I don’t have time for it. (OTOH, it may prod me to get moving on some stuff I’ve been neglecting.) Maybe Anthony Watts could add it to his company’s site. I doubt they’d be interested in international orders.
10
[…] abusing peer-review and peer-reviewed publications for personal benefit? Hummm, now where have I heard that before? These kinds of allegations are not new and not confined to stem cell research. But professors […]
10
A big mistake OMISSION spotted?!?!!?
TIM MITCHELL WORKED AT CRU, 1997 to at least 2000, studied and GOT his PHD there.
google: dr “tim mitchell” phd climate research unit
Gets you this: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/people.htm
CRU Staff, past and present
Tim Mitchell, Sep. ’97 – Oct. ’00. Anders Moberg, Aug. …. ’93 – Apr. ’94, PhD Student, Royal Holloway & Bedford New College, Egham, Surrey, UK. John Turnpenny ? email, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, UEA …
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/people.htm – Cached
I found his bio before Cru’s server went down, they seem to have lost him now, and his phd, and papers he authored that were easy to find 2 months ago:;;
This was cached then by google:
Tim Mitchell bio:
In 1997 I moved to Norwich to carry out the research for a PhD at the
Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia. My subject
was the development of climate scenarios for subsequent use by researchers
investigating the impacts of climate change. I was supervised by Mike Hulme
and by John Mitchell (Hadley Centre of the UK Meteorological Office). The
PhD was awarded in April 2001.
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timm/personal/index.html – Cached
HE DEFINETLY workd at CRU:
Did he write a lot of the code on the dataset as a phd student?
From his bio: My subject was the development of climate scenarios for subsequent use by researchers investigating the impacts of climate change.
NOTE who his supervisor was:
Dr John Mitchell – Hadley centre
Who is now:
Professor John Mitchell OBE, Director of Climate Science – Met Office
Tim Mitchell also wrote this… human corruptiion, pollution, climate change….
“… Although I have yet to see any evidence that climate change is a sign of Christ’s imminent return, human pollution is clearly another of the birth pangs of creation, as it eagerly awaits being delivered from the bondage of corruption (Romans. 19-22).
Tim Mitchell works at the Climactic Research Unit, UEA, Norwich, and is a member of South Park Evangelical Church.
For an enhanced version of this article, with extra diagrams and links to further information, visit the website: http://www. uea.ac.uk/~f709762/climate/en-article.htm””
link to the above: http://www.e-n.org.uk/p-1129-Climate-change-and-the-Christian.htm
10
just clicked on a link above:
(tyndall centre same location as CRU?)
confirms phd at CRU. bio at the bottom
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timm/personal/index.html
Tyndall centre:
No longer in post
I left my position in the Tyndall Centre at the end of February 2004. I am no longer able to answer requests for data or information on the climate data-sets I have produced. all data enquiries should now be directed to the Climatic Research Unit at the same institution (UEA). The contact details you should use are as follows:
[email protected]
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/hrg.htm (opens in a new window)
Climatic Research Unit, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK.
If you are contacting us to request information about, or access to, one of the data-sets, then please go to the data-set request page.
Training
I was brought up and schooled in London.
At Oxford University I read geography (1994-1997, School of Geography). My college was Christ Church. At Oxford I developed a special interest in the study of climate change.
In 1997 I moved to Norwich to carry out the research for a PhD at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia. My subject was the development of climate scenarios for subsequent use by researchers investigating the impacts of climate change. I was supervised by Mike Hulme and by John Mitchell (Hadley Centre of the UK Meteorological Office). The PhD was awarded in April 2001.
Current Affiliation
Since 2000 I have worked at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. The Tyndall Centre is a consortium of research centres in the UK, set up to complement CRU and the Hadley Centre by investigating potential responses to climate change. I am based at Tyndall Headquarters, at the University of East Anglia.
10
Barry, thank you for your comment. As per your suggestion when the original timeline was released, Mitchell has been included in the latest Who’s Who along with a reference to a version of his bio similar to the one at your link, where readers can go to learn more about him.
Here’s his Who’s Who entry under TYNDALL CENTRE:
(TCCCR) TYNDALL CENTRE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH — ENG
MIKE HULME: director; fellow, professor of climate science: UEA.
TIM MITCHELL: present 1997-2004; PhD: 2001: UEA (supervised by Mike Hulme)
[115]; possibly software author “Harry” (of HARRY_READ_ME.TXT) was analyzing.
And here’s the reference cited (the CRU site was down so I got this from the web archive):
[115] Tim Mitchell (bio-sketch), Tyndall Centre for Climate Change, East Anglia, nd
http://web.archive.org/web/20040217140147/http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timm/personal/index.html
10
He got his PHD at CRU….. see further down….
Plus this may be of interest….
(bing not google is your friend;- Dr tim mitchell climate – found lots of stuff…
link: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timm/data/index.html
(Tim) I provide…
…a limited number of high-quality data-sets.
An important part of my work is to develop climate data-sets. My intention is that these data-sets will then be used by researchers investigating the impacts of climate change. Here I provide access to these data-sets.
There are two groups of climate data-sets, intended for two different groups of researchers:
country averages, intended for researchers from the social sciences who are working on international scales, comparing one country with another;
high-resolution grids of monthly climate (observed and future), intended for researchers from the environmental sciences who wish to combine climate data with environmental models.
Alternatively, view all available data-sets in a single table.
Of course, there are other legitimate uses for these data-sets, and researchers are welcome to employ them in any legitimate way.
A more minor data-set is the length of the thermal growing season in Central England. Latest chart (up to 2002).
———————————————————————————
This is what Harry was dealing with to make hadcru 3.0
Tim and a few others see references,
produced the datasets for OTHER researcher to use, after they had done all the things we see in the Harry file to produce it………………!!!
—————————————————–
link: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timm/data/index-table.html
Table of climate grids and derived data-sets
IMPORTANT: This table is out of date. Please use the CRU HRG page instead
This table presents the complete set of high-resolution climate grids available through the Climatic Research Unit and the Tyndall Centre, and some data-sets based on those grids. Some data-sets are available from this website; others are available from the Climatic Research Unit. Following the proliferation of gridded data-sets and their by-products, we have developed a consistent form of identification for these data-sets to provide greater clarity to users. We recommend that any users of these data-sets should use these labels to refer to these data-sets.
You must cite the referenced paper in any publications.
data-set space time variety variables reference availability
CRU CL 1.0 0.5° globe 1961-1990 climatology pre, wet, tmp, dtr, tmx, tmn, vap, spc, cld, frs, wnd New et al, 1999 this site
CRU CL 2.0 10′ globe 1961-1990 climatology pre, wet, tmp, dtr, rhm, ssh, frs, wnd New et al, 2002 this site
CRU TS 1.0 0.5° globe 1901-1995 time-series pre, tmp, dtr, wet, vap, cld, frs New et al, 2000 this site, but superseded by CRU TS 2.0 except for wet and frs
CRU TS 1.1 0.5° globe 1996-1998 time-series pre, tmp New et al, 2000; extended this site, but superseded by CRU TS 2.0
CRU TS 1.2 10′ Europe 1901-2000 time-series pre, tmp, dtr, vap, cld Mitchell et al, 2003 this site
CRU TS 2.0 0.5° globe 1901-2000 time-series pre, tmp, dtr, vap, cld Mitchell et al, 2003 this site
TYN SC 1.0 10′ Europe 2001-2100 scenarios pre, tmp, dtr, vap, cld Mitchell et al, 2003 this site
TYN SC 2.0 0.5° globe 2001-2100 scenarios pre, tmp, dtr, vap, cld Mitchell et al, 2003 this site
TYN CY 1.0 country 1901-1998 countries pre, tmp, dtr, wet, vap, cld, frs Mitchell et al, 2002 superseded by TYN CY 1.1
TYN CY 1.1 country 1901-2000 countries pre, tmp, dtr, wet, vap, cld, frs, tmn, tmx Mitchell et al, 2003 this site
TYN CY 2.0 country 2070-2099 countries pre, tmp Mitchell et al, 2002; extended this site
TYN CY 3.0 country 2000-2100 countries pre, tmp, dtr, vap, cld Mitchell et al, 2003 this site
Please note that all data-sets are limited to the land surface only; the ocean grid boxes are left blank. The ‘global’ domain also excludes Antarctica.
Labelling convention
The identifying label is made up of:
Institution of origin
CRU = Climatic Research Unit
TYN = Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
both at the University of East Anglia (UK)
Label denoting the type of data-set
CL = average climatology
TS = time-series
SC = set of scenarios
CY = set of country averages
Version number
Types of dataset
climate data-set nature purpose
CL (climatology) The average climate in the recent past. These are high-resolution grids. Allows spatial comparisons of environmental features; the dependency of certain features on climate may be assessed.
TS (time-series) Month-by-month variations in climate over the last century or so. These are high-resolution grids. Allows the comparison of variations in climate with variations in other phenomena.
SC (scenarios) A set of scenarios of possible climates in the future, using data from climate models. These are high-resolution grids. Allows environmental impact models to consider month-by-month changes in climate from the past, through the present, and into the future. Future uncertainties are represented through scenarios.
CY (countries) Country averages, based on aggregating grid cells together from the grids in CL, TS, or SC. Allows international comparisons to be made, in conjunction with socio-economic data such as GDP, population, land area, etc.
Variable abbreviations
label variable units
cld cloud cover percentage
dtr diurnal temperature range degrees Celsius
frs frost day frequency days
pre precipitation millimetres
rhm relative humidity percentage
ssh sunshine duration hours
tmp daily mean temperature degrees Celsius
vap vapour pressure hecta-Pascals
wet wet day frequency days
wnd wind speed metres per second
References
Mitchell, T.D., Hulme, M. and New, M., 2002: Climate data for political areas. Area 34, 109-112
WHOLE PAPER AS PDF
Mitchell, T.D., Carter, T.R., Jones, P.D., Hulme,M., New, M., 2003: A comprehensive set of high-resolution grids of monthly climate for Europe and the globe: the observed record (1901-2000) and 16 scenarios (2001-2100). Journal of Climate: submitted (August 2003)
New, M., Hulme, M. and Jones, P.D., 1999: Representing twentieth century space-time climate variability. Part 1: development of a 1961-90 mean monthly terrestrial climatology. Journal of Climate 12, 829-856
ABSTRACT (AND WHOLE PAPER FOR SUBSCRIBERS)
New, M., Hulme, M. and Jones, P.D., 2000: Representing twentieth century space-time climate variability. Part 2: development of 1901-96 monthly grids of terrestrial surface climate. Journal of Climate 13, 2217-2238
ABSTRACT (AND WHOLE PAPER FOR SUBSCRIBERS)
New, M., Lister, D., Hulme, M. and Makin, I., 2002: A high-resolution data set of surface climate over global land areas. Climate Research 21
ABSTRACT
Conditions of use
These datasets are provided for all to use, provided the sources are acknowledged. Acknowledgement must include the citation of the paper referenced. The website can also be acknowledged if deemed necessary. I will endeavour to update the majority of the data pages at timely intervals although this cannot be guaranteed by specific dates.
—————————————————-
How independent are the datasets (Hansen, Cru, GISS)…. These are the three lots of date sets… other climate researcher use and depend on…
—————————————————–
There are three centres which calculate global-average temperature each month.
———————————————
link: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/explained/explained5.html
•Met Office, in collaboration with the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UK)
•Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is part of NASA (USA)
•National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), which is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (USA)
These work independently and use different methods in the way they collect and process data to calculate the global-average temperature. Despite this, the results of each are similar from month to month and year to year, and there is definite agreement on temperature trends from decade to decade (Figure 1). Most importantly, they all agree global-average temperature has increased over the past century and this warming has been particularly rapid since the 1970s..”
“…Each of the three global temperature centres uses different observation sets, although there are large overlaps in the information used. Each centre also has its own methods for checking and processing data, as well as for making the final calculation.
The HadCRUT3 record, which is produced by the Met Office in collaboration with the Climatic Research Unit, takes in observations from about 2,000 land stations each month. The figures for each one are checked both by computer and manually to find and remove any problems. Sea-surface temperature observations come from about 1,200 drifting buoys deployed across the world’s oceans and around 4,000 ships in the Voluntary Observing Ship programme. There are also numerous moored buoys in the tropics and in coastal regions, principally around the US. Together they take around 1.5 million observations each month. These are checked by computer and any obviously inaccurate readings are excluded.
For all three global average temperature records, the 2009 value is based on data from January to October only…”
10
My concern is that the (CRU) department, had apparently minimal(that appears to be kind), documentation, version control, data handling policies, QA. audit… see (Harry_read_me.txt file)
Mitchell, New et all worked/provided (see below) previous hadcru datasets for researchers (1.2, 2.0)
Harry I believe was trying to get 3.0 together, after Tim was gone…
All that ‘Harry’ ‘seems’ to have for documenation were a few.txt read me type files…
to quote: “what did Tim do? As I keep asking.”
Not the PILE of documenation, qa, audit, version, design documents you might expect to be prince 2 managed, or other methodology, you might expect from a government funded software developed to produce one of the three global datasets…?!
Used by researcher, as part of a multi trillion dollar economy based on the IPCC/HAdley/CRU/NASA/GISS data sets..
10
All the above comments are most interesting, BUT:
(1) An infinite number of ground-based temperature reading stations showing undeniable warming would be needed to get denialists to even concede that something was happening temperature-wise;
(2) Even then, the denialists would refuse to believe even in the possibility that the warming was CO2 induced;
(3) Even if they conceded on points (1) and (2) they would argue that the CO2 to blame came from volcanoes, undersea vents, outer space etc etc; anywhere but from burning fossil fuels. Like religionists everywhere, they start with the propositions they want to prove, and then go looking for supporting evidence.
Because if they conceded that 97% of the world’s climatologists are right on the science (which appears to me increasingly certain with every passing day), there would be certain political consequences, namely that things might have to change. At base, that is what this argument is about: energy politics. Do we need to switch away from carbon to non-carbon energy sources? The religion of ‘there’s nothing wrong with business as usual’ says no.
If AGW alarmists like myself get to set the policy, and later (in the century) get shown to be wrong, the main consequence will be spending money on a switch away from fossil carbon perhaps 100 years too soon, as it’s all running out anyway.
But if denialists like Tony Abbott get control of policy in a sufficient number of countries and they turn out to be wrong (as would most likely be the case) the results will too likely be (ie with a probability greater than zero) catastrophic ‘runaway’ climate change, and we could then probably do nothing to turn it all around.
Burning fossil carbon has been heading us into uncharted waters since about the time of Captain Cook.
So if those climatologists fudged figures on ground-based temperature readings they were most foolish and naive. They did not realise the extent to which climatology has been politicised or the methods political operators will go to to advance their cause. It was all unnecessary, because the warming they might have been looking to support is in the undoubtedly rising ocean level (about 3 mm/year according to satellite measurements accurate to +/- 0.4 mm).
Every molecule of water in the ocean is a thermometer showing temperature gain. One would hope such an large number of measuring stations would convince even the most stubborn denialist that the planet is heating up.
10
Captain Marvel,
Wow! Strong statement!
Now show me the empirical evidence that CO2 is warming the planet. That’s all we have ever been asking for. Can you do it?
Please, the opinion of scientists, even large numbers of them, is not evidence and proves nothing.
Here’s some reading for you if you’re interested.
http://www.co2web.info/ESEF3VO2.pdf
I don’t know your background but I have more than enough chemistry and physics to understand this and it puts AGW right through a document shredder.
10
Roy Hogue: “Now show me the empirical evidence that CO2 is warming the planet. That’s all we have ever been asking for. Can you do it?
“Please, the opinion of scientists, even large numbers of them, is not evidence and proves nothing.”
You apparently agree that the planet is warming. Well, that’s something at least. Up till recently a major plank of denialism has been that it is cooling.
1. The sea levels are rising. Therefore the planet is warming. End of story there. No way round it for the denialist. 2. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It warms a planet when in its atmosphere. Without what we have, the Earth would be a hell of a lot colder. (According even to the denialist Prof Plimer, it would be at an average of minus 3 degrees C.) Venus has an atmosphere with about 93 times the mass of Earth’s atmosphere, 96% of it is CO2 and the rest is mainly nitrogen. The surface of Venus is hotter than the surface of Mercury, which is half the distance of Venus from the Sun. So no, I don’t buy simplistic saturation arguments. 3. At the same time as the Earth is heating, the CO2 levels in the air are rising. Denialists say ‘coincidence’. I say to them, you’d better be right if you want to bet the planet on that. But no thanks, I’ll go with the other option.
To the denialists, the common opinion of 97% of climatologists just proves that there is a climatological conspiracy. You choose to dismiss them totally. I suppose if 97 out of 100 doctors told you that your appendix should come out, you would dismiss them the same way. Ah well, takes all sorts…
Florida: the water in the Gulf of Mexico will rise with the rest of the world’s one ocean, at about 3 mm per year. Stick around there for 100 years and it will be up by 300 mm, about 1 foot. Nobody said it was going to be fast. But it will be relentless.
10
Captain Marvel,
The planet has warmed in the past. Presently it’s not warming. In no recent case has CO2 had enough to do with any warming to make the slightest difference. The sensitivity of warming to added CO2 is logarithmic and we are well past the point where it will do anything noticeable. But you’ve heard all these things before and didn’t believe them then. So why should I hope you will believe them now. And you put words in my mouth as well.
The opinion of even large numbers of scientists, peer reviewed or not, means nothing. The truth is not a matter of majority opinion.
You have not provided any empirical link between anything happening on this planet and CO2.
Take a clue from your buddy Al Gore who seems to have bought a $4 million waterfront condo in San Francisco, an area he claims will be under water before long.
You would not sink so low as to read what I offered you either or you would have mentioned it. So much for an open mind!
How many like you do you think have hit this site before you did? If you were the first I’d show you more tolerance, but you’re not.
10
Wrong, Captain Marvel. The water here has not risen even a fraction of an inch in my lifetime. The only thing relentless about the water’s rise in Florida is its non-existence.
When the overwhelming majority of “climate scientists” are simply quoting each other and fudged climate data without even bothering to look for themselves, their numbers mean nothing. And when they ignore or suppress the historical record, their theories mean nothing.
Take away the billions in funding and the projected trillions in carbon trading profits, and see how many geniuses continue to beat this old tired drum. It’s revealing that the same investment banks and other firms that created the worldwide housing bubble–and subsequent economic collapse (all the while claiming there was no bubble and that real estate prices only rose, never declined) are the same ones funding the global warming hysteria and setting up carbon exchanges. How much money does the NYT have riding on this? If the BBC has invested its retirement accounts in carbon trading, it may not be reckless to assume that many other mainstream news outlets have done likewise with theirs (after all, they are, for the most part, one big club). Climate Change terror has every appearance of being just another bubble created to enrich some people at the expense of others, and to elevate otherwise boring, unattractive geeks to celebrity and hero status. Note how many of the climate change luminaries are hideous ’60s leftovers, still fantasizing about Woodstock, and how many of the young ones have yet to discover the modern miracles of soap and toothpaste. I can’t even imagine what it must have smelled like in Copenhagen, though the snow may have dampened the miasma.
10
Florida: Tide markers show relative movement between local sea floor and sea level. The most reliable data on sea level comes from satellite altimetry. Google ‘sea level, university of colorado’ for more detail.
Roy Hogue: I did visit your linked paper, where I read:
‘Over the last years, mainly after the fall of the communism, environmentalism
seems to have taken the vacant place on the political scene. This new “ism” alleges
that Man is destructive, unnatural, evil, and guilty of destructing the environment on this
planet. The “proofs” used in this respect are based on selected portions of science, in
many cases not based on the objectivity of the scientific method of natural sciences…
Rather the “proofs” concert rejection of reason, and are based on the scientific
method of philosophy, where the fundamental 3 parts of the scientific method of natural
sciences do not apply. In natural sciences knowledge is obtained by validating the
content of one’s mind according to the facts of reality. Truth then corresponds to reality.
In philosophy the world is artificial, and truth is redefined to mean coherence among
ideas, along the views of the philosopher Immanuel Kant. Hence a dogma can be
constructed by ignoring reality, and rather appealing to authority or consensus as
invalid substitutes for reason. In philosophy hypotheses can be proposed, validated,
and accepted without reference to facts (Sanford, 1992). We see that most often the
treatment of what is normal or natural is lacking from the environmental “dooms”, and
that we only are told what is “abnormal” or “unnatural” without an indisputable baseline
reference.’ [My emphasis – CM]
That spoke volumes re the author’s ignorance of the subject he was banging on about. Frankly, I have better things to do with my time.
“The world is not warming” appears to be a mantra you have repeated over to yourself often enough for it to become an article of faith for you. No further comment from me on that, as I do not as a rule try to persuade people away from their religious beliefs. But you might read over again the section in bold in the quote above.
Never let inconvenient facts get in the way of a good religion.
10
Lets see now
Ergo by this logic, when sea levels were upto 300mtrs higher than today, temps must have been???
Venus? Silly comparison for the following reasons..
1-)Solar irradiance at Venus is 2614Wm2, nearly double that of earth at 1368Wm2 Apples and oranges.
2-)Length of day on Venus is 2802 earth hours. Longer cooking time at double solar irradiance equals apples and pineapples.
3-)No water (oceans) on Venus hence no possibility of the most efficient form of cooling…evaporation. Apples and Wolkswagons
Dunno about others, but this HERETIC says the oceans store 70 times more CO2 than the atmosphere. Warm oceans DISCHARGE CO2 whilst cool oceans absorb CO2. This rate of transfer is an order of magnitude higher than anything humans emit via fossil fuel burn. Even a small % change in the amount oceans discharge and absorb swamps human emissions. Thats even before accounting for the exchange between the biosphere and atmosphere.
Just a little tip for you capn. Jo, the host of this blog, doesn’t like the use of the word denier. So I suggest you find another word to use if you wish to keep educating yourself on this blog. Me, I like HERETIC. Others can please themselves.
10
Captain Marvel,
If you read only that far you let your own prejudice get in your way. Had I read only that far I would have written him off also.
This is one of the problems with you alarmists. I will almost always take the time to read all of everything you point me to. But not you!
What subject, pray tell, was the author, “…banging on…” about? What is his thesis? What conclusions does he reach and how does he support them?
Since you complain about “religion”, take a good look at your own. I can support mine just by pointing out the monumental scientific holes in yours. Actually only one hole is necessary to point out. You cannot produce the slightest empirical evidence that CO2 is warming planet Earth. If you could you would do it and chop the legs right out from under everyone here. That’s the one hole that kills your religion. Mine stands undaunted until you can show me that evidence.
10
Captain Marvel, you prove my point. Thank you. You are more taken with a reading from a satellite, calibrated who knows how, than with actual PHYSICAL evidence. If the satellite says the seas are rising over Florida, that’s what you believe, even though we who live here, looking at the water, tell you that there is no rise. And if a rigged computer model or misplaced weather station tells you that the temperature here is 95 degrees and we tell you, living in it, that the temperature is 85 degrees, you dismiss us and go with the 95. This is the entire crux of the Climate Change hysteria. It is based on rubbish, theories, faked numbers, guesswork, assumptions, and faulty logic. If the facts don’t work out for you, you dismiss them in favor of factoids.
10
Florida… hmm I get told by skeptics that we only have reliable temperature data since satellites went up… but now you tell me that sattelites are unrelaible.. sheesh make up your mind.
Can I ask how you can tell it is 85 degrees without using a thermometer? And how accurate is your thermometer? Or shall we build a global temperature map based on what folks reckon the temperature is?
10
MattB, don’t try to engage me in an argument.
Did I say I could tell it was 85 degrees without using a thermometer? No. I have a thermometer, and I trust it more than some weather station at the airport set up near jet exhaust streams. And I trust it more than some satellite, which by the way, does not measure surface temperatures, but provides atmospheric data that computers use to calculate alleged surface temperatures. So you have again set up a straw man to knock down.
I live on the water. I know better than you where that water is and what it’s doing. Now go look up the word “empirical,” because it’s a good one to know. It used to be a bedrock of science.
10
So you are using a thermometer, they are using a thermometer, but you just reckon yours works better? If you want to rant without being engaged in discussion I suggest you set up your own website rather than post on a blog.
And don’t forget I’m not arguing in favour of the satellites, others like Jo do that. I’m comfortable with the surface temerature record myself.
But in essence you don’t trust weather stations, you don’t trust satellites, and you reckon all of ocean science is wrong because you can eyeball the levels where you live and you reckon nothing is changing.
Maybe you are right – I should not try to engage you in an argument.
10
Incedentally it looks like (http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_proj_21st.html) the projected rise from 1990 – 2020 is 5 cm rise. Good luck eyeballing that Florida.
10
Captain Marvel and MattB, there are water-level markers on the bay across from my house. According to those markers, our water level at low and high tides is actually LOWER than it was twenty years ago, but about where it was sixty years ago. Now, do I believe the water markers, or do I believe data produced by a computer in Alabama based on a satellite’s measurements of atmospheric conditions miles above the planet? Wouldn’t it be helpful for ocean scientists to actually go to the ocean and see for themselves? Why do you place virtual reality above reality?
The only way rising sea water could be at the same mark is if the above-water land were rising at the same rate, or if the below-water land were sinking at the same rate–in either case cancelling the water’s rise out. And wouldn’t that be the most amazing coincidence?????
And yes, my thermometer is not placed on hot tarmac or in exhaust streams of jets taking off and landing, so I think it reasonable to assume it more accurately reflects the temperature where I live than one across town in the other situation.
MattB, I am not ranting, you are. Maybe if you took off the black Matrix coat you wouldn’t be so overheated.
10
Baa Humbug: You appear to be saying that no valid comparison can be made on any basis between Earth and any other planet. I meanwhile would have to be the total fool you appear to think I am to suggest equivalence between the Earth and Venus. My main point re that planet is that it gives the lie to notions of simple CO2 saturation here on Earth: the idea that as the CO2 atmospheric fraction keeps rising, the heat trapped flattens out. Venus does not support that. On that basis, it simply should not be the hottest planet in the solar system; but it is, and no other credible reason than the 96% CO2 concentration in its atmosphere has been advanced. By anyone to my knowledge.
“Solar irradiance at Venus is 2614Wm2, nearly double that of earth at 1368Wm2.” Yeah, right. Discount some of that due to the higher albedo of Venus, and remember that the Earth has never been, in all its history, hotter than an average of 27 C (It is about average 15 C now). Global warming in my view can never take the planet higher than its historic maximum. It does not have to in order to cause devastation all round. See http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm
“Length of day on Venus is 2802 earth hours. Longer cooking time at double solar irradiance equals apples and pineapples.” What goes around comes around. Long days for heating mean long nights for cooling. But the surface temperature of Venus is remarkably uniform and averages 740 K (= 467 C).
“No water (oceans) on Venus hence no possibility of the most efficient form of cooling…evaporation.” This intrigues me, as on Earth evaporative cooling of the oceans transfers heat from them to the atmosphere and thence by radiation to outer space. But on Venus the heat is already in the atmosphere, and has to be lost directly to outer space to cool the planet down. (Your analogy with the air-cooled VW is apt here, if nowhere else.) The high albedo of Venus tends to slow this down while the high atmospheric temperature assists it. But your recourse to ‘apples and oranges’ etc I think commits you to the proposition that items out of one logical class can never be compared with items out of another. Apples and ‘Wolkswagons’; apples and oranges, apples and pineapples… Take it far enough and you can’t compare Granny Smiths with red delicious, or for that matter Granny Smiths with Granny Smiths.
Me: “At the same time as the Earth is heating, the CO2 levels in the air are rising. Denialists say ‘coincidence’.”
You: “Dunno about others, but this HERETIC says the oceans store 70 times more CO2 than the atmosphere. Warm oceans DISCHARGE CO2 whilst cool oceans absorb CO2. This rate of transfer is an order of magnitude higher than anything humans emit via fossil fuel burn. Even a small % change in the amount oceans discharge and absorb swamps human emissions. That’s even before accounting for the exchange between the biosphere and atmosphere.”
Given this, atmospheric CO2 levels should not be rising at all, from any source: human, volcanic, oceanic… But they are. Fact is that most of the oceanic CO2 is solidly locked away in the ocean depths, and it might as well be in the crust below the seabed for all the exchanging with the air it can do. Hence http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jan/12/sea-co2-climate-japan-environment
The available oceanic CO2 for exchange with the atmosphere is far less than you suggest, hence the actual atmospheric rise; unless as a true heretic/denialist/whatever, you wish to dispute that too.
PS: Jo’s reported preference for something other than ‘denialist’ is noted. But I prefer to stick with it until something more appropriate (not ‘heretic’ or ‘skeptic’ thanks very much) is suggested.
10
Well Captain Marvel if your sea level rising theory is true, that I know is not – just for starters. CO2 does not globally increase temperatures.
CO2 is a very small percentage of Greenhouse gases, 98% is water vapor – like those fluffy little things that float across the globe, sometimes delivering rain? With me?
Green house gases keep this ‘ice planet’ warmer at night and cooler by day. That’s why frost doesn’t form at night when there is a cloud cover. Why desert regions are boiling hot
during the day and freezing cold at night, savvy?
Cosmic radiation/rays also help generate clouds, but sun or solar activity sometimes deflect them, hence …. I have to admit folks on this blog, I am getting so bored with these believers that as Carl Sagan said, You can’t change what a believer believes in, because their whole world view would change..
Sea level rises, they do come and go, the moon has something to do with it too, like king tides, etc.
However the big crunch is that the Australian government have
a blow out with rebates re solar panels etc., carbon credits
trading… It is believed that there are considerable loses,
so no wonder … the con artists like Al Gore et al, are responsible for giving well meaning people the impression his
predictions are right… yet he buys a 4 million dollar condo
in a area he predicted would be inundated by rising sea levels.
Florida: I lived in Bermuda. Now if sea levels were a threat
to your part of the globe, they would also effect Bermuda, considering it’s low above sea level islands. Now I don’t see
all those tax dodging billionaires selling up and moving back to New York or your part of the woods?
Captain Marvel, on this site, like MattB, we don’t like
the Carbon Credit supporters who are afraid that their shares
are plummeting and they have lost millions of dollars. You should have done your own independent (and scientific) research before you invested. Yet I believe those who have, must in someway feel let down, and I am sorry this happened to you?
I can tell when it is 85% F during the day, some of my plants
wilt because of transpiration rations. Come back during the
evening though.
10
Does anyone think like I do, that the AGW philosophy was driven
by opportunists who saw a big money train. And kept it driven
until the UN IPCC treaty collapsed, and not only individual investors, governments who trusted the reports they were told was
produced by honest and scientific based organizations, bought into
Carbon Credits trading and taxes etc. I believe the BBC have invested their pension fund in these… Gee … CCT shares are plummeting.
The worse scenario is that the real ‘Convenient Truth’ was known
before the UN IPCC report was released, and they ignored it. I wonder why? Because India for starters had invested millions in Carbon Credit trading hoping that ETS taxes would reap in
trillions… Bad Hat eh?
10
Bush Bunny,
It clearly was political from the start. Someone picked up an old theory and tried to make hay out of it. But I think there was quickly more than one cook in the kitchen, each hoping to further their own agenda.
They were undisciplined and accountable to no one. And that leads to all sorts of interests getting in — corruption too. Politicians (include the UN) saw power. Actually the UN saw the realization of their dream of governing the world. Money grubbers, as you said, saw dollar signs. Environmental interests, the extreme ones in particular, saw a way to save the planet. It’s an unfortunate accident that this one old theory could fit all those desires so nicely.
I’m not quite sure where Phil Jones et al, James Hansen, Michael Mann and even Al Gore and some others, fit in all this. But I think they really believed they were doing the right thing. Not so for everyone though.
I may be wrong about Hansen.
This is the way I see it from watching what’s been said and what’s going on over several years now. Others may see it differently and that’s good. A little debate about it can’t hurt.
10
Tim Mitchell with a GEOGRAPHY degree, apparently learns fortran and writes a lot of the code to process, adjust the weather station data in HADCRU datasets.. (Harry_Read_me.txt)
“what did Tim do? – says Harry (trying to produce hadcru 3.0))
How about the general public find out that:
The General public are told that this is the warmest year on Record:
How can you deny this global warming!!!!
What tells them that: 3 global datasets, Hadcru, nasa, giss
Tell the public: HAdcru dataset – Climate research Unit )
Global raw data into a black box: (their code)
Global Adjusted, homogenised, tortured, data out… we have global warming…
The CODE that adjust the raw data has never even been IT PEER reviewed outside of CRU.
How many other researchers have used it!!!1
Eco green christian (with a geography degree) and phil jpones and one or two others wrote the code…
Climategate scandal Harry_Read_me.txt, and the CODE freely available to any it profeesional to see:
MAny issues..
It is crap code.
It does some very dodgy things to the data:
to quote a techy guy, that didn’t just torture the data – they waterboarded IT
The whole methodology, gridding, assumptions,
loss of weather stations.
Send that message to any IT professonals, and they will be appalled
AND they can check for themselves!!!!
It totally destroys the warmest year on record lies….
Didn’t I just see that NASA had been caught out adjusting Australia weather stations rather a LOT.
Everybody has been talking aboutthe emails, Ipcc reports.
Little talk been talking about Harry_Read_me.txt, and all th erest of the code..
The UK has a terrible record of useless publically funded IT systems.
Billions wasted!!!!
Tell the public that half a dozen ‘climate scientists’, with probably no IT qualification between them.
Not complying with any recognised governmentprocedure for, qa, documentation, software design, data integrity, data archiving, etc,etc processes and procedure.
Are responsible for one of three global temperature datasets that says ‘Global Warming’
And tell the public, they won’t let anybody check IT!!!
10
Hi, i would just like to say, what a cool article! i’m in the process of researching for my website but i had issues reading this article as the text sticking out in to the menu…. edit… apologies, the problems my end, it is my outdated version of chrome causing the bug. May be worthwhile asking people to update? Cheers. Derek Martin
10
Get on the more recent JoNova blogs.
10
For some reason only half of the post has been displayed, could it be my browser or the website?
10
Hi, the dates don’t seem to compute.
10
Hello Some good valid content on here. Nice work.
10
[…] Et l’affiche, une version PDF y est disponible. (Bien que celle-ci comporte des problèmes à l’ouverture du PDF, je vous conseille un agrandissement au-delà de 50%, vous pourrez en lire le contenu. L’affiche fait 2 mètres de longueur) : http://joannenova.com.au/2010/01/finally-the-new-revised-and-edited-climategate-timeline/ […]
10
Will somebody get a REAL scientist to oversee the evidence. We live in the modern ERA and yet we have so called scientists who have no idea of Earth’s geological history or the cyclic events of our Sun effecting our climate.
Pollution is a propblem that we need to control.
The question that many are asking is that:
Is pollution causing climate change?
So far,no evidence to support such a claim.
10