Seen elsewhere
Buy

Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
Sunday
Dec052010

Climate cuttings 44

With quite a lot of climate and weather stories around, here is another roundup for you.

David Rose in the Mail on Sunday sticks the boot into the Met Office, noting the failure of reality to keep up with their incessant predictions of warming.

Strangely enough, comedian David Mitchell - a man who would normally expected to be "right-on" on these issues - is also letting off a few pot-shots at Britain's weather forecasters, wondering if they would "get it right more often if it stuck to the facts rather than suppositions."

Click to read more ...

Friday
Dec032010

Climate cuttings 43

Welcome to another edition of Climate Cuttings, in which I round up some global warming links you may have missed.

First up is Judith Curry, who has had a letter from Congress following up on her earlier testimony. The theme seems to be - do you think we should listen to scientists who don't release their data?

Things don't seem to be going so well for the Campaign against Climate Change, who are suffering, along with many other charities, from a lack of donations.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Dec032010

Good news

Prince Charles has backed CRU scientists. In view of some of his other causes (homeopathy and the like) this is probably good news.

Friday
Dec032010

La papa snowbound

Friday
Dec032010

Graun on best green books

Damian Carrington looks at best selling books on the environment. Apparently the top seller for 2010 was The Vanishing Face of Gaia, which shifted 5200 copies.

I did a double take since The Hockey Stick Illusion has sold slightly more than this, although I'm not sure we are comparing like with like - the 5200 figure may be UK-only and many of my sales have been to the US.

It will certainly be interesting to see whether I get a name-check in any of the "books of the year" articles that are coming our way.

Friday
Dec032010

The Orwellian solution

As readers know, I have been keeping a close eye on the BBC's review of science coverage, to which TonyN and I have made a submission.

Science coverage on the television was also the subject of a recent lecture at the Royal Television Society (H/T Martyn in the comments) and it's hard to believe that the timing is coincidental.

The speaker was Professor Brian Cox, who, for viewers outside the UK is something of a rising star in the world of TV science. His day job is in physics - he plies his trade at CERN - and if he has something of a retired pop star about him, this is because earlier in life he was the keyboard player in a chart-topping band.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Dec032010

Matt Ridley on weather and climate

Matt Ridley has an op-ed in the Times, the gist of which can be seen here.

Like everyone else he's laughing at Dr David Viner.

Thursday
Dec022010

Steig in the dump

A team of Climate Audit regulars have finally had their paper refuting Steig et al's headline grabbing Antarctic temperature record accepted by Journal of Climate. The big story is not that Steig has been dumped but that the team are still moving heaven and earth to keep critical papers out of the literature.

Read about it at CA.

Thursday
Dec022010

THES on FOI in universities

The Times Higher Ed Supp has a leader on Freedom of Information in universities, calling on the academy to open up.

Researchers need to start with the basic assumption that it is right for others, including those outside the academy, to be able to test and challenge their methods and results. But they also need to take responsibility for providing the context that makes their raw material intelligible.

In short, they need to learn not only to live with FoI, but also to embrace it.

Thursday
Dec022010

Josh 57

More cartoons by Josh here.

Thursday
Dec022010

Josh 56

Thursday
Dec022010

Wind capacity again

Another interesting assertion by Prof Anderson on the earlier thread was what he had to say about capacity factors for wind turbines:

...the capacity factor for turbines - which ranges from low 20 to 50 depending on size and location (well sited on land probably 25-35%, with well sited offshore and bigger (3-5MW) 35 to 50%) - I recall a few years back some 3MW turbines near the Shetlands reached 52% over the year - though the Shetland is a particularly good site.

When we discussed this the other day, we were looking at figures that were much lower than this - more like 10%. Can anyone explain the discrepancy?

Thursday
Dec022010

Why four degrees?

There was some interesting engagement between commenters on the Kevin Anderson thread and the good professor himself. Hat tips to all concerned.

My own contribution to the comments was limited - having been snowbound since the weekend, there was a certain amount of merrymaking in the village last night by way of cheering ourselves up. The one comment I did make was to note that a temperature rise of four degrees by 2060 is extremely high in the light of the temperatures observed since the millennium. Prof Anderson's response was to refer commenters to the Phil Trans A special edition that started the thread off.

If we look at the introductory article, by New et al., there is indeed some explanation of why four degrees is considered a number that should be discussed.

The 2009 Copenhagen Accord recognized the scientific view ‘that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius’ despite growing views that this might be too high. At the same time, the continued rise in greenhouse gas emissions in the past decade and the delays in a comprehensive global emissions reduction agreement have made achieving this target extremely difficult, arguably impossible, raising the likelihood of global temperature rises of 3◦C or 4◦C within this century. Yet, there are few studies that assess the potential impacts and consequences of a warming of 4◦C or greater in a systematic manner. Papers in this themed issue provide an initial picture of the challenges facing a world that warms by 4◦C or more...

In other words, we think that CO2 emissions are going to be higher than expected therefore we need to look at higher temperature rises.

But hold on, my point was that 4 degrees by 2060 (perhaps 5 or 6 degrees per century) is high in the light of recent temperature trends. As readers of Lucia's blog know, even a trend of 2 degrees per century is on the cusp of falsification, so 5 or 6 is surely falsified at a very level of confidence.

If the trend is already falsified what is the point of looking at it, other than as part of a PR campaign?

Wednesday
Dec012010

Josh 55

Wednesday
Dec012010

HSI sightings

A couple of recent sightings of the Hockey Stick Illusion.

First there's Reformatorisch Dagblad, a Dutch newspaper, which has an article on the MWP, based largely on HSI. Original here, machine translation here. This appears to be the first of a two-part feature.

Then from South Africa, there's this article in Business Day looking at the year since Climategate and mentioning the Hal Lewis resignation, and with it HSI. The book is apparently "essential reading for understanding the climate scam".