Archives par mot-clé : Fun?/Discussion

Swiss Daily, German Scientist Slam Reporting U of Exeter Antarctic Findings… “An Abuse Of Science”!

by P  Gosselin, July 21, 2107 in NoTricksZone


A commentary appearing here at the Swiss Baseler Zeitung (BAZ) slams a recently published British paper on moss growth in Antarctica that gave the impression the south polar continent was greening up due to climate change.

The BAZ writes that the paper is an example of “how today science is manipulated and used for political purposes“.

Des corrections aux données satellitaires augmentent de 140% le réchauffement : le commentaire de Roy Spencer

by Uzbek, 7 juillet 2017 in ClimatoRéalistes


Le site carbonbrief  a publié le 30 juin 2017 un article sous le titre : « Des corrections majeures aux données satellitaires augmentent de 140% le réchauffement depuis 1998[1] »

Précisons d’abord que Les satellites ne mesurent pas directement la température. Ils sont équipés de capteurs sensibles à la luminance de l’atmosphère et de la mer dans le spectre des infrarouges.  Pour en dériver  la température, des traitements informatiques sur les données brutes sont nécessaires.

Scientists Find At Least 75% Of The Earth Has Not Warmed In Recent Decades

by Kenneth Richard, July 20, 2017 in ClimateChangeDispatch


As a new scientific paper (Turney et al., 2017) indicates, the Southern Ocean encompasses 14% of the Earth’s surface. And according to regional temperature measurements that have apparently not been subjected to warming “corrections” by data adjusters, the Southern Ocean has been cooling in recent decades.

THE COP21 AGREEMENT – JUST THE FACTS, PLEASE

by Robert Lyman, June9, 2017 in FriendsOfScienceCalgary


French version here

Each country is committed “to prepare and maintain successive individual nationally determined contributions (INDCs) that it intends to achieve”, to update these plans every five years and to pursue and report on the related domestic emission reduction measures. After three years, a Party may withdraw from the Agreement with one year’s notice.

There is an unresolved debate as to whether to call COP21 an agreement or a treaty.

 

Focusing on worst case climate futures doesn’t work. It shouldn’t work

by Larry Kummer, July 15, 2017 in WUWT


After 30 years of failure to gain support of the US public for massive public policy measures to fight climate change, climate activists now double down on the tactics that have failed them for so long. This post explains why it will not work. Nor should it. Instead they should trust the IPCC and science, showing both the good and bad news.

The ‘hiatus’ in global warming is the hottest topic in climate science right now, whether alarmists like it or not

by David Whitehouse, June 22, 2017 in Financial Post


Few things illustrate the poor state of the communication of climate science better than the reaction to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt’s comments about global temperatures in the past 20 years. It was made in written comments to the Senate following his confirmation hearing. He wrote, “over the past two decades satellite data indicates there has been a leveling off of warming.” Has the temperature increase of the Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere “stalled” in the past 20 years or so? Does this change our view of climate change?

MOST EUROPEANS AND 2/3 OF BRITONS REJECT IPCC ‘CLIMATE CONSENSUS’

from Global Warming Policy Forum, July 12, 2017


A new opinion poll of 10,000 European citizens reveals majority of Europeans reject the claim that climate change is mainly or entirely caused by humans.

For the last few decades, questions about the causes and impacts of climate change have dominated the climate debate. The IPCC and many climate scientists have been claiming relentlessly that the global warming trend since the second half of the 20th century is mainly if not entirely man-made, i.e. as a result of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. This dogma is habitually claimed to be the global climate consensus.

Just When You Thought Scientists Couldn’t Possibly Get Any Stupider …

by Tony Heller, July 4, 2017


Venus is hot because it has an atmospheric pressure almost 100X that of Earth. The same reason why the top of the Grand canyon is cold, and the bottom of the Grand Canyon is hot. Temperatures in Venus troposphere at the elevation where pressure is 1 bar, are similar to earth.  Only a complete moron would believe that adding 0.0001 mole fraction CO2 to the atmosphere would cause that.

“No evidence” is a useful scientific finding

by Michel de Rougemont, June 28, 2017 in WUWT


We hear that global warming is highly dependent on the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, this gas that is required to sustain life on Earth and that is also emitted when burning flammable stuff, such as wood, coal, mineral and organic oils, or methane.

If you are told “this depends on that”, you are invited to examine available data observed over time to draw a representation of this on the y-axis vs. that on the x-axis.

So, in all logic, you should be interested in a representation of the temperature evolution in dependence of the atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Yes, you should, but, looking hard into the latest IPCC Report (the fifth of Working Group I, to be precise), no diagram of that sort can be found among its 1535 pages.