Archives par mot-clé : Temperature

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.

 

On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data

by Dr. J. Wallace III et al., June 2017


Abridged research Report, 30 pages, .pdf

The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.

See also here

Satellite battle: Five reasons UAH is different (better) to the RSS global temperature estimates

by JoNova, July 10, 2017


There are two main groups that use essentially the same NASA and NOAA satellites to estimate global temperatures. In the last year, they’ve both made adjustments, one down, and one up, getting further apart in their estimates. In ClimateWorld this is a big deal. Believers are excited that now a satellite set agrees a bit better with the maligned “hot” surface thermometers. But UAH still agrees more with millions of weather balloons. The debate continues. Here’s my short synopsis of the  Roy Spencer (and John Christy) from the “Comments on the new RSS lower tropospheric temperature set.” (If something is wrong here, blame me).

Alarm about alarmism

by Judith Curry, July 15, 2017 in ClimateEtc.


In understanding climate change risk, and deciding on the ‘if’ and ‘what’ of ‘action’,  we need to acknowledge that we don’t know how the climate of the 21st century will play out (Deep Uncertainty, folks).  Four possibilities:

  1. It is possible that human-caused climate change will be swamped by much larger natural climate variability.

  2. It is possible/plausible  that the sensitivity of the climate is on the low end of the IPCC envelope (1.0-1.5C), with a slow creep of warming superimposed on much larger natural variability.

  3. It is possible/plausible that the IPCC projections are actually correct (right for the wrong reasons; too much wrong with the climate models for much credibility, IMO).

  4. It is possible that AGW and natural variability could conspire to cause catastrophic outcomes

Temperature and Forcing

by Willis Eschenbach, July 13, 2017 in WUWT


Over at Dr. Curry’s excellent website, she’s discussing the Red and Blue Team approach. If I ran the zoo and could re-examine the climate question, I’d want to look at what I see as the central misunderstanding in the current theory of climate.

This is the mistaken idea that changes in global temperature are a linear function of changes in the top-of-atmosphere (TOA) radiation balance (usually called “forcing”).

Media gets high on Antarctic Crack

by Anthony Watts, July 13, 2017 in WUWT


I thought I’d take a moment from my R&R to write about all the hullabaloo surrounding the calving of the large iceberg off the Larsen C ice shelf in Antarctica. First, a few of the headlines:

LA Times: After Antarctica sheds a trillion-ton block of ice, the world asks: Now what?

The Grauniad: Iceberg twice size of Luxembourg breaks off Antarctic ice shelf

NYT: Warnings from Antarctica

The Holocene context for Anthropogenic Global warming

by Ed Hoskins, June1, 2015


When considering the scale of temperature changes that alarmists anticipate because of Man-made Global Warming and their view of the disastrous effects of additional Man-made Carbon Dioxide emissions in this century, it is useful to look at climate change from a longer term, century by century and even on a millennial perspective.

(i) See also here

(ii) See also here