Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

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

Powered by Squarespace

Unthreaded

Jul 15, 2012 at 4:54 PM Grumpy

"No doubt an expert can enlighten me."

The Lord of the Rings resides here:-

http://climateaudit.org/

Jul 15, 2012 at 6:34 PM | Registered CommenterGreen Sand

Grumpy - I believe that the basic principle of dendrochronology is that there will be several environmental growth factors affecting tree growth and the rate of growth will be constrained by the environment factor that is most limiting. For example, in semi-arid areas precipitation might be that factor, while in elevated areas temperature would be the limiting factor.

So dendrochronologists try to pick their locations carefully.

By measuring ring widths they can also determine which trees may have been affected e.g. by excess fertilisation from passing animals and also which trees should be rejected for reasons yet to be explained.

It's all frightfully complicated and only serious climate scientists can be counted on to get it right most of the time.

(The amount of skill involved in deciding which measurements to retain and which to reject also provides the justification for their not subsequently sharing their data.)

Jul 15, 2012 at 6:18 PM | Registered Commentermatthu

I was in a wood today where there are a lot of larch trees. There are warning signs up about a larch virus and loggers have been in thinning them out, the logs stacked up along the tracks waiting collection. Looking at some of the logs/trunks, the rings are not equal all the way round; in some the centres are not bang in the middle, so growth has been lopsided, in others the rings meander around, wider one one side of the tree than on the other. These trees are about 50 years old, if I counted the rings correctly, but are all different. The point is, how can climate be deduced from these rings when the trees are all grown in the same place but have all grown at different rates, some individual trees have grown differently?

No doubt an expert can enlighten me.

Jul 15, 2012 at 4:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterGrumpy

Jul 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM | lapogus

irrespective of the fact that there are good written historical records of both stretching over many hundreds of years.

Nearly 2 years ago there was a thread: "The Climate Code Foundation" (Sep 3, 2010 )

On Sep 4, 2010 at 3:50 PM | Green Sand observed:

How about a universal agreement on station network, location, inclusion, exclusion and standard equipment, also standard procedures for the collection, storage and real time publication of the RAW data?

At Sep 4, 2010 at 4:59 PM | Brownedoff said:

Exactly.

But who would do the individual tasks?

Task (a) universal agreement on station network, location, inclusion, exclusion and standard equipment - Royal Air Force meteorologists?

Task (b) standard procedures for the collection, storage and real time publication of the RAW data - Royal Navy meteorologists?

Task (c) set up a secure base where tasks (a) and (b) can be housed - SAS HQ Hereford?

In view of the fact that "They are getting very desperate . . . . " one has to wonder whether some of these desperate people might think that a good fire would be in order to get rid of these awkward historical records.

After all, some of them have no qualms about claiming "my original data was lost when I moved office".

When Climategate 1 broke ABC of America went to the Climatic Research Unit in November or December 2009, and on a tour of the offices, viewers could clearly see shelf after shelf of leather bound volumes. Are they in safe hands, are they still there?

Maybe the time has come for simultaneous dawn raids on all establishments, warmist or not, which hold historical "weather" records, carefully gather them all up and get them to a safe place.

I invite suggestions for the membership of the dawn raider groups and the location of a safe place. Who can be trusted?

Jul 15, 2012 at 11:54 AM | Unregistered CommenterBrownedoff

matthu
You scooped me!!
But I'll say it anyway (in case anybody out there doesn't get the connection!)
Booker in the ST in a report on the subject of white asbestos says that Beddington was asked to investigate claims that the stuff is not the deadly substance that brown or blue asbestos are.

...the Beddington committee consisted largely of members already firmly wedded to the official view, and Mr Edgley was astonished to discover that they did not even consider the scientific evidence that he and his team had supplied to the inquiry.
My immediate reaction was to wonder whether the refusal to invite Cuadrilla to the Downing Street discussion on shale gas was also Beddington making sure that only the "right" views were heard.
I confess to being more than a little concerned that the government's scientific adviser is apparently this susceptible to lobbyists and pressure groups especially since I know a little about the white asbestos scam — and scam it certainly is!

Jul 15, 2012 at 11:23 AM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

More child-scaring by Rob Edwards at the Sunday Herald:

"There is now no such thing as 'natural' weather," says Peter Singleton, the environmental futures manager at the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa). "The growing impact of mankind and its resulting pollution has changed both the weather and climate of the planet...starting with deforestation and followed by excessive use of fossil fuels and pollution."

Source: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/top-scottish-scientist-there-is-now-no-such-thing-as-natural-weather-its-all-man-made.18153470.

The Met Office also feature in this CO2 attribution fantasy. You would think that Edwards is a long standing reporter would at least ask what the evidence is. Arctic temperatures have been average or below average since the end of March - http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php - and before that Arctic Sea Ice was at a record high. None of the IPCC models predicted or projected cold wet UK summers, and no climate scientists mentioned the Arctic ice jet stream theory until now. They are getting very desperate, clutching at any freak weather event which comes along and any spell of prolonged rainfall, irrespective of the fact that there are good written historical records of both stretching over many hundreds of years.

Jul 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM | Registered Commenterlapogus

Another breaking story in The Telegraph that some may find interesting:

Damian McBride, who worked as a special adviser to Gordon Brown at Number 10 between 2007 and 2009, claimed he had been shown a “stand-alone computer through which No 10 staff could use personal email accounts”.

This computer, understood to have been in a ground-floor room at No10, was run separately from the main Downing Street server, which blocked such accounts, Mr McBride said. He added that he had been told by officials: “We don’t discuss this publicly. We don’t want people going on about 'second Downing Street email systems’.”

His account was in stark contrast to official denials given during the cash-for-honours investigation, which dogged the former prime minister’s last period in office.

and in 2007 Lord O’Donnell is quoted as having said

“There is no second email system inside No10.”

And when Mr Blair was asked by MPs about the Number 10 email system

he referred his questioners to Lord O’Donnell’s testimony.

I wonder how Mr Blair's professed desire to re-enter British politics is going down?

Jul 14, 2012 at 11:23 PM | Registered Commentermatthu

This is pretty interesting too:

In January, India’s Supreme Court issued a ruling against the organisers of a petition asking the Indian government to introduce a total ban on white asbestos. The judges found that the lobby group had produced fraudulently doctored evidence to promote the financial interests of those standing to benefit from a ban, and suggested that they were guilty of perjury. That may be an extreme case, but if our own woolly-headed judges would take a more considered view of the confused matters put before them, we might be saved much misery and a lot of money.

Jul 14, 2012 at 11:13 PM | Registered Commentermatthu

Oh, dear! Christopher Booker highlights yet another intimate involvement by Sir John Beddington in a biased inquiry:

Eventually, the Government’s chief scientific adviser, Sir John Beddington, a population biologist, was asked to hold an inquiry. But the Beddington committee consisted largely of members already firmly wedded to the official view, and Mr Edgley was astonished to discover that they did not even consider the scientific evidence that he and his team had supplied to the inquiry.

Jul 14, 2012 at 10:07 PM | Registered Commentermatthu

@ Pharos, thanks! Also thanks to James P for the link to Carbon Brief; they link, in turn to another discussion (on Radio 5) which I'll have to grab, too, before it disappears.

Jul 14, 2012 at 6:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlex Cull

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>