How to use open threads

This page is for discussion of climate change generally.


Open threads

To access the open threads, click on the menu item “OPEN THREADS” in the navigation bar above, hover over “HOW TO USE OPEN THREADS” then over “CLIMATE SCIENCE”. The resulting menu, if it’s too long to fit on the screen, will scroll up with the mouse wheel or the down cursor key.


173
Leave a Reply

avatar
17 Comment threads
156 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
Mike JowseyRichard C (NZ)Richard TreadgoldAndyval majkus Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

CLIMATE BLOGS

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Environment and Ecology Archive

Speaks volumes.

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Climate Conversation v Hot Topic

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Alexa

Free traffic metrics, search analytics, demographics, and more for websites…

http://www.alexa.com/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Note: Alexa rankings are for IE / Windows browser toolbars only (No Firefox etc)

See – “Web statistics for internet market research: pick a number, any number

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Climate Conversation v Hot Topic

Alexa Traffic Stats

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Tip

Insert hot-topic.co.nz into Compare wordshine.co.nz to:

Hit Compare.

Et Voila!

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Wow, the Alexa Traffic Stats are making News headlines

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

WUWT’s story on 10:10 – 3rd most popular on WordPress globally – even in New Zealand

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Open Threads – Climate Conversation Group

Climate Science

INDEX

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Oops, wrong place – see down page.

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Highly recommended from “Research Articles”

Simple Climate Model Release, Version 1.0

“In my new book, The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientists, I show the results of experiments with a simple climate model that runs in an Excel spreadsheet. The model is meant to illustrate how natural monthly-to-yearly variability in global (a) cloud cover and (b) surface evaporation can affect our satellite observations of (1) temperature and (2) total radiative flux.”

The 4 basic inputs to the model are in large blue font, all of which are adjustable. These include (in no particular order):

1) Bulk heat capacity of the system, specified as an equivalent ocean water depth (nominally 50 meters deep).
2) Net feedback parameter (controlling the model’s temperature sensitivity to energy imbalances)
3) Radiative forcing (e.g. from natural variations in cloud cover)
4) Non-radiative forcing (from fluctuations in convective heat transfer between the surface and atmosphere)

The model is down-loadable at the above link

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

At the bottom of that page, you may notice these 2 intriguing links:-

Some Comments on Earth’s “Missing Energy”

A Response to Kevin Trenberth

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Back in Judy’s jungle

by Bryan Walker on October 25, 2010

Hot Topic in damage control mode

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

The Science of Doom excellent site – subtle warm bias

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Why ‘Science of Doom’ Doesn’t Understand the 1st Law of Thermodynamics

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

The alarmist Science of Doom blog post Do Trenberth and Kiehl understand the First Law of Thermodynamics? shows an absurd ‘thought experiment’ riddled with errors that is supposed to support and explain the IPCC Earth energy budget of Kevin Trenberth. In brief, the post shows a 30,000 Watt energy source [“earth”] enclosed inside a 3 meter thick PVC sphere [“the atmosphere”] and erroneously calculates that the 30,000 Watts miraculously turns into 1,824,900 Watts emitted from the inner surface of the PVC sphere. To anyone with a rudimentary understanding of physics, this is an obvious violation of the conservation of energy demanded by the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. Let’s examine the math errors of ‘Science of Doom’ (a climate scientist named Dr. Phillips) that produce this absurd result, beginning with the thought experiment diagram and assumptions:

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Don J. Easterbrook, Professor Emeritus

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Modeling the Basics, A mathematical summary of condensation in climate models.

Momentary Lapse of Reason

Where do winds come from? A new theory on how water vapor condensation influences atmospheric pressure and dynamics – Makarieva

Circular Reasoning Explained

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

A NASA site.

Extreme caution required on entry.

A highly politicized organisation – prime mission (according to Obama): “Reaching out to the Muslim nations”

So engage BS detector and pull down propaganda filter.

A worthwhile resource nonetheless

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

RealClimate – enter at your own risk

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

See “RealClimate: Funding and Activism”, Richard S. Courtney

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

RealClimate: Funding and Activism, Richard S. Courtney

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Errors in IPCC climate science – Warwick Hughes

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Charts/Images

Condition:

Your use of C3 charts/graphs: We encourage the free use of C3 charts/images by web sites, blogs, emails, and other digital delivery platforms. For free use of C3 charts/graphs, we require that your web page/email provide a link (url address) to the C3 web page where you found the C3 chart/graph. For free dead-tree (paper) publishing of C3 charts/graphs, you must provide dead-tree readers with the actual C3 url address (link) that the original C3 chart/graph can be found at.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

CO2-Greenhouse Gas Charts/Graphics

Climate Model – Charts/Graphs

Modern Temperatures Charts/Graphs

Natural Oscillations-Cycles Ocean, Solar & Other Oscillations

Sea & Ice – Charts/Graphs

Miscellaneous Charts/Graphs

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Steven Goddard responds to Gareth Renowden’s (Hot Topic) ad hom ridden puff piece “Buffoons in arms: Goddard joins Monckton at SPPI” with a science smackdown.

“It is difficult to argue against ad homs, but easy to discuss the science.”

H/T Andy

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

geologist-1011

Not so Apologetic

.Deforestation
.Climate “Climate Change Catastrophes in Critical Thinking”
.Greenhouse Effect The Shattered Greenhouse: How Simple Physics Demolishes the “Greenhouse Effect”.
.Volcanic CO2
.Volcanic CFCs
.Expanding Earth
.Palaeomagnetism
.Science

.Most Misquoted

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

SkepticalScience – a warmist enclave

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

David Archibald

Papers and Presentations.

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

kenskingdom

Ken Stewart

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

the inconvenient SKEPTIC

Radiative Heat Transfer: Simple Overview – first in series

Discussion in comments

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

seafriends

Seafriends Marine Conservation and Education Centre. 7 Goat Island Rd. Leigh R.D.5. New Zealand

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

CLIMATE MODELS

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

CLIMATE MODEL PAPERS

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

WHAT SURFACE TEMPERATURE IS YOUR MODEL REALLY PREDICTING? Roy Clark SUMMARY The whole anthropogenic global warming (AGW) argument falls apart when we ask the rather simple question: What surface temperature is your model really predicting? Most large scale climate models still use radiative forcing to predict changes in surface temperature. The original radiative forcing derivation, by Manabe and Wetherald in 1967 clearly defined an ‘equilibrium surface’ that interacted with an ‘equilibrium surface flux’ to produce an ‘equilibrium surface temperature’.[1] However, the Earth’s surface is never in thermal equilibrium so radiative forcing is, by definition, based on invalid assumptions. The surface temperature is set by the dynamic energy flux balance at the surface. When real surface temperatures are calculated using the thermal properties of the surface material and measured values of the surface energy flux terms, the small change in downward LWIR flux from a 100 ppm increase in atmospheric CO2 has no measurable effect on the surface temperature. The whole AGW argument disappears. Now, the meteorological surface temperature (MSAT) has indeed shown an increase over last 50 years or so, but this has nothing to do with the ground surface temperature or CO2.… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

A HotLinked, HotList of HotPapers. Generally model-centric Wyant, M.C., Khairoutdinov, M. & Bretherton, C.S., 2006. Climate sensitivity and cloud response of a GCM with a superparameterization. Bretherton, C.S., 2006. Low-Latitude Cloud Feedbacks on Climate Sensitivity. [Steve McIntyre at CA noted that Bretherton (2006) that shows negative cloud feedbacks contrary to the positive feedback orthodoxy, was NOT cited in AR4 even though the paper must have been known to the authors.] David H. Douglass, John R. Christy, Benjamin D. Pearson and S. Fred Singer, A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions P. W. Thorne, D. E. Parker, B. D. Santer, M. P. McCarthy, D. M. H. Sexton, M. J. Webb, J. M. Murphy, M. Collins, H. A. Titchner, G. S. Jones, 2007, Tropical vertical temperature trends: A real discrepancy? – Abstract only, behind paywall. Pincus, R., C. P. Batstone, R. J. P. Hofmann, K. E. Taylor, and P. J. Glecker (2008), Evaluating the present-day simulation of clouds, precipitation, and radiation in climate models Limits on CO2 Climate Forcing from Recent Temperature Data of Earth, David H. Douglass and John R. Christy, 2008 – [PDF] from arxiv.org On the Effective Number of Climate… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Scafetta on 60 year climate oscillations

George Taylor, former Oregon State climatologist writes:

Nicola Scafetta has published the most decisive indictment of GCM’s I’ve ever read in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics. His analysis is purely phenomenological, but he claims that over half of the warming observed since 1975 can be tied to 20 and 60-year climate oscillations driven by the 12 and 30-year orbital periods of Jupiter and Saturn, through their gravitational influence on the Sun, which in turn modulates cosmic radiation.

If he’s correct, then all GCM’s are massively in error because they fail to show any of the observed oscillations.

See “Controversy and scandal”

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Tuesday, October 5, 2010 Paper: Models lead to overly confident climate predictions A paper published today in the Journal of Climate finds that ensembles of climate models used by the IPCC to predict future climate change “may lead to overly confident climate predictions.” The authors find that many models share the same computer code, have the same limitations, and “tend to be fairly similar,” resulting in confirmation bias. Indeed, empirical observations have shown far less warming than the “90% confident” IPCC models in AR4, as shown in this poster by John Christy: [Graphic] Journal of Climate doi: 10.1175/2010JCLI3814.1 On the Effective Number of Climate Models Christopher Pennell and Thomas Reichler Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT Abstract: Projections of future climate change are increasingly based on the output of many different models. Typically, the mean over all model simulations is considered as the optimal prediction, with the underlying assumption that different models provide statistically independent information evenly distributed around the true state. However, there is reason to believe that this is not the best assumption. Coupled models are of comparable complexity and are constructed in similar ways. Some… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Bob D says:
October 27, 2010 at 5:56 pm

On the performance of models:

G. G. Anagnostopoulos et al. (2010) “A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data”

http://pdfserve.informaworld.com/943561__928051726.pdf

Abstract:
We compare the output of various climate models to temperature and precipitation observations at 55 points around the globe.We also spatially aggregate model output and observations over the contiguous USA using data from 70 stations, and we perform comparison at several temporal scales, including a climatic (30-year) scale.
Besides confirming the findings of a previous assessment study that model projections at point scale are poor, results show that the spatially integrated projections are also poor.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Download error – alternative link:-

http://pdfserve.informaworld.com/218198__928051726.pdf

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

On the performance of models: “A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data” G. G. Anagnostopoulos et al. (2010) CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION It is claimed that GCMs provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate change, particularly at continental scales and above. Examining the local performance of the models at 55 points, we found that local projections do not correlate well with observed measurements. Furthermore, we found that the correlation at a large spatial scale, i.e. the contiguous USA, is worse than at the local scale. However, we think that the most important question is not whether GCMs can produce credible estimates of future climate, but whether climate is at all predictable in deterministic terms. Several publications, a typical example being Rial et al. (2004), point out the difficulties that the climate system complexity introduces when we attempt to make predictions. “Complexity” in this context usually refers to the fact that there are many parts comprising the system and many interactions among these parts. This observation is correct, but we take it a step further. We think that it is not merely a matter of high dimensionality, and that it… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Modeling the Dynamics of Long-Term Variability of Hydroclimatic Processes OLI G. B. SVEINSSON AND JOSE D. SALAS Department of Civil Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado DUANE C. BOES Department of Statistics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado ROGER A. PIELKE SR. Department of Atmospheric Science, and Colorado Climate Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado (Manuscript received 26 December 2001, in final form 9 September 2002) ABSTRACT The stochastic analysis, modeling, and simulation of climatic and hydrologic processes such as precipitation, streamflow, and sea surface temperature have usually been based on assumed stationarity or randomness of the process under consideration. However, empirical evidence of many hydroclimatic data shows temporal variability involving trends, oscillatory behavior, and sudden shifts. While many studies have been made for detecting and testing the statistical significance of these special characteristics, the probabilistic framework for modeling the temporal dynamics of such processes appears to be lacking. In this paper a family of stochastic models that can be used to capture the dynamics of abrupt shifts in hydroclimatic time series is proposed. The applicability of such ‘‘shifting mean models’’ are illustrated by using time series data of annual Pacific… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Stochastic Hydrology

Advanced application of statistics and probability to hydrology as applied in the modeling of hydro-climatic sequences

Computer rendering of stochastic models

Fournier 1982

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Radiative forcing by well-mixed greenhouse gases: Estimates from climate models in the IPCC AR4 Collins Et Al 2010 Abstract. The radiative e ffects from increased concentrations of wellmixed greenhouse gases (WMGHGs) represent the most signi ficant and best understood anthropogenic forcing of the climate system. The most comprehensive tools for simulating past and future climates in uenced by WMGHGs are fully coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation models (AOGCMs). Because of the importance of WMGHGs as forcing agents, it is essential that AOGCMs compute the radiative forcing by these gases as accurately as possible. We present the results of a Radiative-Transfer Model Intercomparison (RTMIP) between the forcings computed by the radiative parameterizations of AOGCMs and by benchmark line-by-line (LBL) codes. The comparison is focused on forcing by CO2, CH4, N2O, CFC-11, CFC-12, and the increased H2O expected in warmer climates. The models included in the intercomparison include several LBL codes and most of the global models submitted to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4th Assessment Report (AR4). In general, the LBL models are in excellent agreement with each other. However, in many cases, there are substantial discrepancies among the AOGCMs and between the AOGCMs and… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

From – Discussion and conclusions This paper discusses the findings from the Radiative Transfer Model Intercomparison Project (RTMIP). The basic goal of RTMIP is to compare the radiative forcings computed with AOGCMs in the IPCC AR4 against calculations with LBL models. [But no comparison with real-world measurements of radiation – Note] These results suggest several directions for development of the radiative parameterizations in AOGCMs. First, tests of the accuracy of shortwave and longwave forcings at the surface should be given special attention. Second, the shortwave parameterizations in all the AOGCMs should be enhanced to include the e ffects of CH4 and optionally N2O on near-infrared radiation. Third, AOGCMs should evaluate the convergence of shortwave radiation in the atmosphere using benchmark calculations. This is a particularly clean test of the radiation physics, and the current models exhibit an improbably large spread of the convergence. E fforts to address these issues would have several benefi ts for the climate-modeling community and for groups using their models in scientifi c and societal applications. Better agreement of AOGCMs with LBL calculations would lead to greater con fidence in simulations of past and future climate. It would also facilitate the analysis of forcing-response… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Effects of bias in solar radiative transfer codes on global climate model simulations Arking 2005 Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA Discussion and Conclusion [19] The radiative properties of the clear atmosphere are such that about half the solar radiation incident at TOA is absorbed by the surface, and only 25% is absorbed by the atmosphere. Hence, it is the surface that is the primary source of heat for the troposphere, most of which is in theform of emitted (infrared) radiation, but some of it is in the form of a thermodynamic heat exchange at the surface (comprising sensible and latent heat) that is carried upward by convection. Enhancing atmospheric absorption of solar radiation would transfer to the atmosphere some of the solar energy that would otherwise heat the surface. [20] As one might expect from a change in the radiation code which increases the absorption of solar radiation in the atmosphere, energy that is otherwise primarily absorbed by the surface is captured by the atmosphere. Hence, as we see in Figure 3, the convective flux necessarily decreases. The magnitude of the change seen, 15–17 W m2… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Note – Arking 2005 predates recent findings of negative feedbacks from clouds

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Effects of bias in solar radiative transfer codes on global climate model simulations – Google Scholar Search

Note: this is a better search than:

radiative transfer codes global climate model simulations

and contains for example;

“An accurate parameterization of the infrared radiative properties of cirrus clouds for climate models” Yang 1998

Also see – “Clouds in Climate Models”

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

On Climate Models, the Case For Living with Uncertainty

by fred pearce

(or not as the case may be)

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/on_climate_models_the_case_for_living_with_uncertainties/2325/

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

My Communications With Dr David Wratt, Chief Scientist, NIWA

Re A challenge to him in regard to natural forcings simulation

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/hal-lewis-resigns-from-the-aps-in-protest/#comment-25336

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Modelling the climate – UKMO

Introduction to Climate Models

The Unified Model (UM)

The atmospheric part of the model used by climateprediction.net is the UK Met Office’s state-of-the-art Unified Model;

NIWA employs the “atmospheric part of the UM model”

i.e. The “A” part of the Atmosphere-Ocean coupled General Circulation Model (AOGCM)

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Met Office climate prediction model: HadGEM2 family

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Met Office Hadley Centre technical notes

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

“circular reasoning” at work in NIWA’s UKMO UM model

Please Note:

IPCC simulations categories:-

1. Models using only natural forcings.

2. Models using both natural and anthropogenic forcings

Don’t be fooled by this internal IPCC distinction.

1. and 2. simulations are run on the SAME models: SAME formulations; SAME spin-up datasets (just addition or deletion of the ACO2 driver); and, SAME IPCC Radiative Forcing (RF) methodology (i.e. in their own terms).

NIWA uses the “A” module of UKMO’s UM model that is in the IPCC’s 1. and 2. categories.

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

From Overconfidence in IPCC’s detection and attribution: Part III October 24, 2010 by Judith Curry Circularity in the argument Apart from the issue of the actual logic used for reasoning, there is circularity in the argument that is endemic to whatever reasoning logic is used. Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy whereby the proposition to be proved is assumed in one of the premises. The most serious circularity enters into the determination of the forcing data. Given the large uncertainties in forcings and model inadequacies (including a factor of 2 difference in CO2 sensitivity), how is it that each model does a credible job of tracking the 20th century global surface temperature anomalies (AR4 Figure 9.5)? This agreement is accomplished through each modeling group selecting the forcing data set that produces the best agreement with observations, along with model kludges that include adjusting the aerosol forcing to produce good agreement with the surface temperature observations. If a model’s sensitivity is high, it is likely to require greater aerosol forcing to counter the greenhouse warming, and vice versa for a low model sensitivity. The proposition to be proved (#7) is assumed in premise #3… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

From Overconfidence in IPCC’s detection and attribution: Part III October 24, 2010 by Judith Curry Circularity in the argument Richard S Courtney | October 25, 2010 at 4:48 am | Reply Dr Curry: I think the problem with the models is more profound than you state when you write: “The most serious circularity enters into the determination of the forcing data. Given the large uncertainties in forcings and model inadequacies (including a factor of 2 difference in CO2 sensitivity), how is it that each model does a credible job of tracking the 20th century global surface temperature anomalies (AR4 Figure 9.5)? This agreement is accomplished through each modeling group selecting the forcing data set that produces the best agreement with observations, along with model kludges that include adjusting the aerosol forcing to produce good agreement with the surface temperature observations. ” I stated my assessment on a previous thread of your blog and I take the liberty of copying it here because I think it goes to the heart of the issue of “Overconfidence”. My comment was in the thread titled “What can we learn from climate models” that is at http://judithcurry.com/2010/10/03/what-can-we-learn-from-climate-models/ It… Read more »

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Climate Modeling Under Fire From Other Fields – nuclear, chemical,aeronautics etc

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/filmed-for-free-but-for-nothing/#comment-25129

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

A SIMULATION that is NOT SIMILAR to the observed condition is NOT a SIMULATION.

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/09/seventy-years-is-plenty/#comment-24665

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Shock! Climate models can’t even predict a linear rise – JoNova

http://joannenova.com.au/2010/10/shock-climate-models-cant-even-predict-linear-rise/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Comments are a must read – builds up to some good stuff circa # 100

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Feed Backs

Peer Reviewed Study: CO2 warming effect cut by 65%, climate sensitivity impossible to accurately determine

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/12/peer-reviewed-study-co2-warming-effect-cut-by-65-climate-sensitivity-impossible-to-accurately-determine/#comment-505817

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

How to Lie with Bad Data Richard D. De Veaux and David J. Hand “To create accurate models, however, it can be important to know the source and therefore the accuracy of the measurements. Consider a study of the effect of ocean bottom topography on sea ice formation in the southern oceans (De Veaux, Gordon, Comiso and Bacherer, 1993). After learning that wind can have a strong effect on sea ice formation the statistician, wanting to incorporate this predictor into a model, asked one of the physicists whether any wind data existed. It was difficult to imagine very many Antarctic stations with anemometers and so he was very surprised when the physicist replied, “Sure, there’s plenty of it.” Excitedly he asked what spatial resolution he could provide. When the physicist countered with “what resolution do you want?” the statistician became suspicious. He probed further and asked if they really had anemometers set up on a 5 km grid on the sea ice? He said, “Of course not. The wind data come from a global weather model—I can generate them at any resolution you want!” It turned out that all the other satellite data… Read more »

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Climate Model Deception – See It for Yourself

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

McKitrick, McIntyre, and Herman 2010 [MMH10]

“It’s a big step forward in the search for the hot-spot. (If the hot spot were a missing person, McKitrick et al have sighted a corpse.)

In 2006 the CCSP quietly admitted with graphs (in distant parts of various reports) that the models were predicting a hot spot that the radiosondes didn’t find (Karl et al 2006).”

Joanne Nova

A MUST READ

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Model projections for 2100 in perspective

Andy
Guest
Andy

There’s a video presentation of Prof Mike Hulme talking about climate models

Challenging Models in the Face of Uncertainty – Conference Keynote: Professor Mike Hulme (UEA): How do Climate Models Gain and Exercise Authority?

http://www.crassh.cam.ac.uk/page/195/media-gallery.htm

h/t Bishop Hill, who has a thread on this here:

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/10/22/mike-hulme-on-climate-models.html

The comments at Bishop Hill are usually enlightening, sometimes entertaining.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Which is why we should be watching NIWA’s use of their UKMO UM like hawks – I know I am, and hopefully that realization has set in with Dr David Wratt now that he knows I can’t be fobbed off like some ignoramus.

I’ll be putting UM info and links in “Climate” – “Climate Models” periodically along with NASA GISS ModelE and a few others, but I suggest we get expert in UM.

That means: parameterizations, spin-up datasets (garbage in), formulations and the general functionality and limitations IMO. The info is VERY hard to obtain as compared to ModelE so this is no easy task.

Remember, UM was the model that predicted the “barbecue summer” in Britain and NIWA predicted a “mild” spring without the assistance of UM.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Just to give an indication of what other people are doing elsewhere.

Steve Mosher has trawled through EVERY LINE of GISS ModelE.

100,000+ lines!

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Gavin Schmidt (GISS) in defensive mode here.

Scroll down to “Some comments at RealClimate on models”

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

See – IPCC AR4 Climate Model Simulations

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

See – Climate Models

NON IPCC and Natural Forcings ONLY

Atmospheric & Environmental Research, Inc.’s (AER)
Radiative Transfer Working Group

The foundation of our research and model development is the validation of line-by-line radiative transfer calculations with accurate high-resolution measurements.

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

CLOUDS in CLIMATE MODELS

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

The Effect of Clouds on Climate: A Key Mystery for Researchers

(Warm biased article – but readable nevertheless)

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_effect_of_clouds_on_climate_a_key_mystery_for_researchers/2313/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Some relevant links here:

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/royal-society-humiliated/#comment-26206

Also:

Does CO2 Drive the Earth’s Climate System? Comments on the Latest NASA GISS Paper” – Dr Roy Spencer.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/10/does-co2-drive-the-earths-climate-system-comments-on-the-latest-nasa-giss-paper/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Top link above leads to:

“Comments on Miskolczi’s (2010) Controversial Greenhouse Theory”

The classic Spencer – Miskolczi show-down at the Spencer corral – amazing

“Our JGR Paper on Feedbacks is Published”

Spencer, one of THE BIG papers – a must read.

“The Persistence of Paradigms” – Cloud Feedbacks

Spencer

“Five Reasons Why Water Vapor Feedback Might Not Be Positive”

Spencer – brilliant!

“The saturated greenhouse effect theory of Ferenc Miskolczi”

A very significant and controversial paper – an unfinished story

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Comment On The Science Paper “Atmospheric CO2: Principal Control Knob Governing Earth’s Temperature” By Lacis Et Al 2010″ (NASA GISS)

Pielke

http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/comment-on-the-science-paper-atmospheric-co2-principal-control-knob-governing-earth%E2%80%99s-temperature-by-lacis-et-al-2010/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

“Does CO2 Drive the Earth’s Climate System? Comments on the Latest NASA GISS Paper” – Dr Roy Spencer. I asked Richard S. Courtney to comment on my analysis that is posted here: https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/royal-society-humiliated/#comment-26206 Richard Courtney replied at JoNova, comment # 141 here: http://joannenova.com.au/2010/10/shock-climate-models-cant-even-predict-linear-rise/#comments [He is on fire versus oh dear et al] My question: BTW, I would really value your observations on this: https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/royal-society-humiliated/#comment-26206 Not the RS post, but O/T discussion brought about by Dr Roy Spencers post: “Does CO2 Drive the Earth’s Climate System? Comments on the Latest NASA GISS Paper” http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/10/does-co2-drive-the-earths-climate-system-comments-on-the-latest-nasa-giss-paper/ i.e. Is my analysis way off? His answer: It is spot on and not “way off”. He goes on to make an extensive analysis of the GISS paper (way more than I requested – thank you, Richard Courtney): [The following is better viewed at JoNova] Please see my post at #60 above. I there quoted (and referenced) Kiehl reporting: The cited range in climate sensitivity from a wide collection of models is usually 1.5 to 4.5 deg C for a doubling of CO2, where most global climate models used for climate change studies vary by at least a factor of… Read more »

Mike Jowsey
Guest
Mike Jowsey

Richards S. Courtenay rocks

Love this one:
“So, the difference between a model’s results and observed reality informs about the model, and this difference is not “evidence” for the existence or otherwise of any postulated effect – for example, anthropogenic global warming – in the real climate system.
If you cannot grasp this simple point then you should consider the following. Computer models based on fundamental physical laws can very accurately emulate the behaviours of battling spaceships, but this cannot provide any “evidence” for the existence of alien monsters in real space.”

Mike Jowsey
Guest
Mike Jowsey

Oops – apologies for mis-spelling name : hate it when that happens! S/b Richard S. Courtney

Andy
Guest
Andy

I’d be getting a bit worried about this particular computer model:

Climate change game launched

An educational computer game in which users have to save the world from climate change offers an interesting solution – decide the problem is overpopulation and design a virus to kill millions.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8101281/Climate-change-game-launched.html

Fancy a bit of genocide in your stocking this Christmas, Johnny?

Mike Jowsey
Guest
Mike Jowsey

OMG – this is for real! Reminds me of Hitler Youth camps – indoctrinate, indoctrinate, indoctrinate. THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS!

Andy
Guest
Andy

Mike,
Sounds like you and Richard North are reading the same messages into this:

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/11/hitler-youth.html

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Is this another own goal like 10:10?

I’m putting this in “Controversy and scandal” anyway.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

From JoNova Author: allen mcmahon Comment: John@96; An argument is not automatically good because it supports your position, you actually need to sift the useful from the rubbish. A good point but on that seems to be lost on many who support the AGW hypothesis. One could look at many issues over the past decade or so such as ice cores, the combined arctic/antarctic ice extent,the ‘hot spot’, paleo evidence or lack thereof, the failure of model forecasts where reason suggests that the hypothesis has failed. But this has not happened, the general fallback position is not evidence based but relies heavily on the manipulation and distortion of existing data coupled with the latest, and generally more alarming, model senarios. Coupled with this is the extension of the doomsday time frame, for example, Keelyside 2008 suggests AGW will be back with a vengeance in 2015 while Tsonis 2009 opts for 2020. The discourse from the AGW camp has changed as well and a good example of this is Michael Tobis who has gone from act now or your children suffer to act within the next coupled of decades or your grandchildren will suffer.… Read more »

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

An Update on Radiative Transfer Model Development at Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc.

J. S. Delamere, S. A. Clough, E. J. Mlawer, Sid-Ahmed Boukabara, K. Cady-Pereira, and M. Shepard Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc. Lexington, Maine

Introduction
Over the last decade, a suite of radiative transfer models has been developed at Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc. (AER) with support from the Atmospheric and Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program. These models span the full spectral regime from the microwave to the ultraviolet, and range from monochromatic to band calculations. Each model combines the latest spectroscopic advancements with radiative transfer algorithms to efficiently compute radiances, fluxes, and cooling rates. These models have been extensively validated against high-resolution spectral measurements and broadband irradiance measurements. Several of these models are part of the broadband heating rate profile value-added product (BBHRP VAP), currently being established at the ARM Southern Great Plains (SGP) site.

A Web site has been established to host the AER radiative transfer models (http://rtweb.aer.com). The Web site facilitates access to the models and is a convenient platform on which to provide model updates

Also see – “Atmospheric Thermodynamics and Heat”

Radiative Transfer Climate Models – Google Search

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Radiative Transfer Climate Models – Google Search

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Effects of bias in solar radiative transfer codes on global climate model simulations – Google Scholar Search

Note: this is a better search than:

radiative transfer codes global climate model simulations

and contains for example;

“An accurate parameterization of the infrared radiative properties of cirrus clouds for climate models” Yang 1998

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

See – “Climate Models”

NON IPCC and Natural Forcings ONLY

Cloud Resolving Model (CRM)

Superparameterization

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

CLIMATE SCIENCE PAPERS

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

See CLIMATE SCIENCE thread

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Refer CLIMATE SCIENCE thread

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

CLIMATE SCIENCE INFORMATION RESOURCES

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Heading at CLIMATE SCIENCE thread

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Climate Change: Natural Cycles, Phenomena, NH v SH and Weather

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Dr Roy Clark’s Magnificent Reply to “What can we learn from climate models”

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/filmed-for-free-but-for-nothing/#comment-25103

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

The Significance Of McKitrick-McIntyre-Herman 2010 (MMH10)

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/whats-left-of-the-niwa-case/#comment-2539

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Climate Model Uncertainty and Judith Curry’s (possible) Ulterior Motives

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/10/filmed-for-free-but-for-nothing/#comment-25247

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

The “Missing Heat”, Model Simulations, and Knox-Douglass 2010

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/09/seventy-years-is-plenty/#comment-24668

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Overconfidence in IPCC’s detection and attribution: Part I

http://judithcurry.com/

Andy
Guest
Andy

As soon as I started reading this post by Dr Curry, I see the phrase “circular reasoning”

This seems to be a common theme, as also exposed in Spencer’s critique of the Lacis paper

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

“circular reasoning”

As defined in the IPCC’s Radiative Forcing (RF) methodology using ACO2 as the major climate driver and hard-wired into the GSM’s (Gareth Renowden’s opinion notwithstanding).

A lot of people around the world are cottoning on to this scam for what it is and the significance it has in the context of global economic modification.

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Richard C: Is that GCMs you mean to refer to? And ACO2 is anthropogenic CO2, is that right?

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Yes, that’s correct. Got confused with Global System for Mobile Communications – not sure how, I think it’s a Morrinsville – Matamata thing.

ACO2 – Yup

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Also

AO – Acronym Overload
AO – Atmosphere Ocean GCM’s (AOGCM’s) and on and on.

THREAD
Guest
THREAD
THREAD
Guest
THREAD
val majkus
Guest
val majkus

Might I suggest all sympathetic contributers visit WUWT Announcements and wish him and his wife well; his wife has to under go an operation and I’m sure he will read all comments at some stage and will be glad of each
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/18/announcement/#comment-510941
Anthony says ‘As a result, I’ll be pretty much offline this week. But there is good news in all of this.
WUWT has a life of its own now. It will continue without my help, thanks to the tireless work of guest authors, our moderation team, and of course the tips and notes brought in by our volume of readers.’

What dedication! and it deserves our appreciation

val majkus
Guest
val majkus

Here’s the inimitable Dr Tim Ball on data manipulation http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/28360 Data collection is expensive and requires continuity – it’s a major role for government. They fail with weather data because money goes to political climate research. A positive outcome of corrupted climate science exposed by Climategate, is re-examination beginning with raw data by the UK Met Office (UKMO). This is impossible because much is lost, thrown out after modification or conveniently lost, as in the case of records held by Phil Jones, director of Climategate. (Here and Here) Evidence of manipulation and misrepresentation of data is everywhere. Countries maintain weather stations and adjust the data before it’s submitted through the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to the central agencies including the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN), the Hadley Center associated with CRU now called CRUTEM3, and NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). They make further adjustments before selecting stations to produce their global annual average temperature. This is why they produce different measures each year from supposedly similar data. There are serious concerns about data quality. The US spends more than others on weather stations, yet their condition and reliability is simply atrocious.… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)
val majkus
Guest
val majkus

For Australians: Here’s a copy of an e mail I received today A group set up with Allen Jones as patron and some very eminent advisors including Warwick Hughes And another media personality Andrew Bolt I heartily endorse the site; it’s time to get the message that people like Warwick have been researching for so long before the public and into the media so I hope you can donate and encourage this effort and here’s the e mail It’s time: an opportunity to support true scientists presenting real-world climate science to inform the public. http://www.galileomovement.com.au 7:10am Tuesday morning, May 17th, and Wednesday, May 18th tune into radio 2GB, Sydney: http://www.2gb.com 16 May, 2011 Hi, We’re delighted to be able to introduce you to the web site of the newly-formed Galileo Movement (www.galileomovement.com.au). The principal aim of this Movement is to first win the battle against the currently threatened tax on carbon dioxide and then to win the war against any drive for ever putting a price on it. From recent public polls it is obvious that the majority of Australians are opposed to this tax and we believe you are probably part of… Read more »

THREAD
Guest
THREAD

Climate Extremes and Extreme Weather

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Climate Extremes and Global Warming

By ANDREW C. REVKIN – Dot Earth

[…]

Passions are heightened by extraordinary recent climate-related disasters and concerns in poor countries that they’re already being affected by a greenhouse-gas buildup mainly caused (so far) by rich countries.

But despite decades of work on greenhouse-driven warming, research aimed at clarifying how greenhouse-driven global warming will affect the rarest categories of raging floods, searing droughts and potent storms is both limited and laden with uncertainty.

[…]

See Q and A with Chris Field, a leader of the panel’s [IPCC] Working Group 2 “Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX)”

>>>>>>>>

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/closeup-climate-extremes-and-global-warming/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Details and reaction to the IPCC Special Report:

“Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX)”

can be found in this (off-topic) thread under the “‘Monster’ increase in emissions” post starting here:-

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2011/11/monster-increase-in-emissions/#comment-70844

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Review fails to support climate change link * by: Graham Lloyd, Environment editor * From: The Australian * November 18, 2011 12:00AM WIDELY-HELD assumptions that climate change is responsible for an upsurge in extreme drought, flood and storm events are not supported by a landmark review of the science. And a clear climate change signal would not be evident for decades because of natural weather variability. Despite the uncertainties, politicians – including US President Barack Obama in his address to federal parliament yesterday – continue to link major weather events directly to climate change. Greens leader Bob Brown yesterday highlighted Mr Obama’s climate change comments and said the extreme weather impacts were “not just coming, they are happening”. But rather than bolster claims of a climate change link, the scientific review prepared by the world’s leading climate scientists for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change highlights the level of uncertainty. After a week of debate, the IPCC will tonight release a summary of the report in Kampala, Uganda, as a prelude to the year’s biggest climate change conference, being held in Durban, South Africa. The full report will not be released for… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

IPCC scientists test the Exit doors

RE: Mixed messages on climate ‘vulnerability’. Richard Black, BBC.

AND UPDATED: The Australian reports the leaked IPCC review, AND a radio station just announced it as “IPCC says we don’t know if there is a reason for the carbon tax”. See more below.
———————————-
This is another big tipping point on the slide out of the Great Global Scam. IPCC scientists — facing the travesty of predictions-gone-wrong — are trying to salvage some face, and plant some escape-clause seeds for later. But people are not stupid.

A conveniently leaked IPCC draft is testing the ground. What excuses can they get away with? Hidden underneath some pat lines about how anthropogenic global warming is “likely” to influence… ah cold days and warm days, is the get-out-of-jail clause that’s really a bombshell:

“Uncertainty in the sign of projected changes in climate extremes over the coming two to three decades is relatively large because climate change signals are expected to be relatively small compared to natural climate variability”.

http://joannenova.com.au/2011/11/ipcc-scientists-test-the-exit-doors/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Common link in extreme weather events found – and no, it isn’t AGW Posted on December 5, 2011 by Anthony Watts From the University of Wisconsin-Madison something you’ll never see posted on Climate Progress or mentioned by weepy Bill McKibben because it mellows their harshness Global winds could explain record rains, tornadoes MADISON –Two talks at a scientific conference this week will propose a common root for an enormous deluge in western Tennessee in May 2010, and a historic outbreak of tornadoes centered on Alabama in April 2011. Both events seem to be linked to a relatively rare coupling between the polar and the subtropical jet streams, says Jonathan Martin, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences. But the fascinating part is that the change originates in the western Pacific, about 9,000 miles away from the intense storms in the U.S. midsection, Martin says. The mechanism that causes the storms originates during spring or fall when organized complexes of tropical thunderstorms over Indonesia push the subtropical jet stream north, causing it to merge with the polar jet stream. The subtropical jet stream is a high-altitude band of wind that is… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Looks like alarm will continue to focus on extreme weather in 2012 – a great new greenfield opportunity for climate science funding. Here’s something to watch for mid-year (a headsup, if you will):- Harsh Political Reality Slows Climate Studies Despite Extreme Year By JUSTIN GILLIS Published: December 24, 2011 At the end of one of the most bizarre weather years in American history, climate research stands at a crossroads. But for many reasons, efforts to put out prompt reports on the causes of extreme weather are essentially languishing. Chief among the difficulties that scientists face: the political environment for new climate-science initiatives has turned hostile, and with the federal budget crisis, money is tight […page 2] Some steps are being taken. Peter A. Stott, a leading climate scientist in Britain, has been pressing colleagues on both sides of the Atlantic to develop a robust capability to analyze weather extremes in real time. He is part of a group that expects to publish, next summer, the first complete analysis of a full year of extremes, focusing on 2011. In an interview, Dr. Stott said the goal was to get to a point where “the… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Tom Nelson headlines the article a little differently:-

Another lie from your New York Times: “the weather becomes more erratic by the year”

http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/12/another-lie-from-your-new-york-times.html

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Useful tutorials from Stephan Goddard at Real Science

Learning To Distinguish Between Low CO2 And High CO2 Droughts | Real Science

Droughts on the left side of the blue line were below 350 ppm CO2, and droughts on the right side were above 350 ppm. Before you can distinguish between them, you need to accurately determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Then you have to tell the press that droughts seem like they are getting worse.

Learning To Distinguish Between Low CO2 Tornadoes And High CO2 Tornadoes | Real Science

Tornadoes to the left of the pink line are below 350 PPM tornadoes, and tornadoes to the right are high CO2 (supercharged) tornadoes. Can you spot the difference?

http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/will-droughts-and-floods-eventually.html

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Failed winter climate predictions

(The first 33 concern mostly Germany and Central Europe)

1. “Due to global warming, the coming winters in the local regions will become milder.”
Stefan Rahmstorf, Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research, University of Potsdam, 8 Feb 2006

***

2. “Milder winters, drier summers: Climate study shows a need to adapt in Saxony Anhalt.”
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Press Release, 10 Jan 2010.

****

3. “More heat waves, no snow in the winter“ … “Climate models… over 20 times more precise than the UN IPCC global models. In no other country do we have more precise calculations of climate consequences. They should form the basis for political planning. … Temperatures in the wintertime will rise the most … there will be less cold air coming to Central Europe from the east. …In the Alps winters will be 2°C warmer already between 2021 and 2050.”
Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, 2 Sept 2008.

****
More >>>>>>>> [59 so far]

http://notrickszone.com/2013/04/04/climate-science-humiliated-earlier-model-prognoses-of-warmer-winters-now-todays-laughingstocks/

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Matt Ridley’s diary: My undiscovered island, and the Met Office’s computer problem

[…]

At least somebody’s happy about the cold. Gary Lydiate runs one of Northumberland’s export success stories, Kilfrost, which manufactures 60 per cent of Europe’s and a big chunk of the world’s aircraft de-icing fluid, so he puts his money where his mouth is, deciding how much fluid to send to various airports each winter. Back in January, when I bumped into him in a restaurant, he was beaming: ‘Joe says this cold weather’s going to last three months,’ he said. Joe is Joe Bastardi, a private weather forecaster, who does not let global warming cloud his judgment. Based on jetstreams, el Niños and ocean oscillations, Bastardi said the winter of 2011–12 would be cold only in eastern Europe, which it was, but the winter of 2012–13 would be cold in western Europe too, which it was. He’s now predicting ‘warming by mid month’ of April for the UK.

More >>>>>

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-week/diary/8880591/diary-603/