<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>JoNova: Science, carbon, climate and tax &#187; Water Vapor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://joannenova.com.au/tag/water-vapor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://joannenova.com.au</link>
	<description>Tackling tribal groupthink</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 16:08:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Found: the hot spot? Not</title>
		<link>http://joannenova.com.au/2008/10/not-found-the-hot-spot/</link>
		<comments>http://joannenova.com.au/2008/10/not-found-the-hot-spot/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:37:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Joanne Nova</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feedback]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hot Spot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JoNova's Favourites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missing Hot Spot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Vapor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joannenova.com.au/?p=741</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The gap between real world data and thermometers is a make-or-break issue for the AGW theory. The models predict a hot-spot in the atmosphere above the tropics, but the weather balloons (called radiosondes) can&#8217;t find any sign of it. Most claims that the hot-spot has been found are not providing any new data, they are just massaging the same old numbers with a different statistical tool. Here are three variations (though the third is not a statistical-spin, it&#8217;s just nonsense).</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px;">1-Some AGW supporters claim that Santer et al has found the hot-spot. But his paper boils downs to a statistical reanalysis that suggests that due to noise and error, the hot-spot might be there. Santer hasn&#8217;t actually found the missing hot spot. He has a case, but it&#8217;s not a strong one. The statistical counterargument is at Climate Audit.</p> <p></p> <p>Even if Santer is right and the hot spot IS hidden in the noise, the most generous interpretation is that greenhouse gases must have a pretty weak warming effect&#8230;</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px;">2-Sherwood (another co-author of the Santer paper) published research suggesting that the hot spot is there &#8211; but he threw away the temperatures from weather balloons and [...]<br /><div><img src="http://joannenova.com.au/wp/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/gfx.php?value=7.0" /></div><div>Rating: 7.0/<strong>10</strong> (3 votes cast)</div><br />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://joannenova.com.au/2008/10/not-found-the-hot-spot/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 3/13 queries in 0.004 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 295/295 objects using disk: basic

Served from: joannenova.com.au @ 2012-05-25 01:30:32 -->
