Climate Science

Below is a link to a very recent article in The Australian, below that is a paragraph from the article by Professor Richard Tol. Is the 97% Consensus on Man-Made Global Warming Correct?, what are the real figures? http://m.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/global-warming-consensus-claim-doesnt-stand-up/story-e6frg6zo-1227276959248 The Cook paper is remarkable for its quality, though. Cook and colleagues studied 12,000 papers, but did not check whether their sample is representative for the scientific literature. It isnt. Their conclusions are about the papers they happened to look at, rather than about the literature. Attempts to replicate their sample failed: a …

I have been apprehensive about showing how solar can possibly affect more recent times because it appears to me that the moderators are quick to suspend or ban anyone who threatens the consensus. For me, it’s a question about how long it takes for the shortwave that penetrates the ocean and heat equilibrium to manifest itself. I don’t have an answer for this with any certainty, and have contemplated starting a thread in Speculations forum. Still, I will now, simply ask that people here consider the fact that larger masses take longer to do equalize. I have a suspicion that heat changes from the sun can take a very long time to equalize to the surface and atmospher…

Polar bears have been taxonomically distinct for about 200,000 years. I'm sure they've witnessed lots of global climate CHANGE (I will not say 'warming') over that time span. The most recent being from about 1000AD, when the Norse settled Greenland, til about 1400 AD, when they couldn't hack the cold. Polar bears just hang tough. And they didn't even have polar bear Climatology PHD's to help them out. Maybe they ate them. Couldn't hurt to get some pointers on the subject of adapting to the climate you have, as opposed to the climate you hope for. Might not be doable. Seriously, if you accept global climate change, which I do, which includes both warming AND cooling, why …

This really isn't looking good, and a sense of urgency seems completely absent among those who can do actually anything about it. It's 2014, yet the debate among the populace is still the same as it was roughly 3 decades ago (despite overwhelming agreement among experts across research domains and fields of study). What are your thoughts? http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/31/planet-will-warm-4c-2100-climate Planet likely to warm by 4C by 2100, scientists warn.

There will, of course, be people who blatantly lie or who simply don't understand the facts on this issue. There are also people who have had their critical thinking skills extinguished with campaigns of ignorance and ideology, but illustrations like the one in the video below help paint the picture in stark and indisputable terms that ought to be accessible to even most ignorant or blind among us. It's both beautiful an sad. What do you think? Also, do you know of any other similar illustrations that help to demonstrate the issue plainly and with clarity?

I don't agree with many things the climate sciences claim, but I did think many of you would appriciate this editorial: http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v4/n12/full/nclimate2464.html First paragraph: Peruvian President Ollanta Humala recently called for the “greatest alliance the world has ever seen” to tackle climate change and its impacts. This month his nation hosts, in Lima, the 20th Conference of the Parties (COP20) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Many see the meeting as a critical stepping stone on the path towards achieving a universal and legally binding international climate agreement, to be adopted, if all goes to …

I have carried out a multi-year study on ocean pH and have included all the relevant equations from Zeebe and Wolf-Gladrow's book 'CO2 in Seawater, Equilibrium, Kinetics' which contains the solubility product equations for CO2(2-),HCO2(-) and H2CO2 as well as for magnesium carbonate (magnesite) and calcium carbonate(both aragonite and calcite) buffers. I have included as much relevant chemistry in the analysis as I can including phosphorus and boron , chlorine and fluorine salts. The pH equations I used are the SWS scale equations from Brookhaven National Lab which were made public by Ernie Lewis and Doug Wallace who are scientists there. I projected the CO2 parts per mi…

Despite large temperature increases in Alaska in recent decades, a new analysis of NASA airborne data finds that methane is not being released from Alaskan soils into the atmosphere at unusually high rates, as recent modeling and experimental studies have suggested. The new result shows that the changes in this part of the Arctic have not yet had enough impact to affect the global methane budget. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141113134856.htm

Been in the weather field for over 40 years. A few observations: 1. Weather/climate is a cycle of cycles of cycles of cycles..... To infer AGW after only a few years of warming on our 4.5 Billion year old planet is like infering a bull market based on a one second up-tick in the DOW. The glacial ice/deep ocean record has been/can be sliced and diced by whoever wants to prove their point. Cherry picking data is not science. Data minipulation by E. Anglia in the U.K. a good example. 2. Prof Mann's (Penn State) Hockey stick is a perfect example of model "blow-up". Current 10-Day forecast models (U.S. GFS, the European and Canadian) will sometimes blow-up by da…

( PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I WERE WRONG ) The atmosphere of the earth = 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases . The atmosphere of the earth = total atmosphere of all countries so each country basically have to create 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases base on the area of that country . We can call the plant create O2 value and decrease CO2 value base on the area of 1 country is A1 , original O2 /CO2 value of country A without the appearance of citizens of A . When citizens of country A appear , they use O2 and create CO2 so country A have to create…

I'll start; As a skeptic of this global warming catastrophe hypothesis I would need to see the climate's temperature rise at least to the mid point of the IPCC's predations by 2025. I would then need to see why that, and the further predictions, would be trouble. So far I have been told that a 2 degree rise in temperature will cause England to have more climate/weather related deaths and such. I consider this utter drivel because the evidence is that warmer places with similar levels of wealth have longer life expectancies than here. I have been told that Bangladesh will disappear beneath the waves. Again drivel. Every monsoon deposits at least 2cm of soil on top of t…

I've read that, at the level where official temperature readings are taken, the hottest possible air temperature due to weather is between 131 - 133 degrees Fahrenheit. This seems awfully low, considering how hot surface temperatures can get in the Lut Desert, Iran -- close to 70 degrees centigrade. I'm sure if they set up an appropriate weather station in the middle of the Lut, they'd measure temperatures much above 133 degrees F. The current, official hottest temperature on earth is 129 degrees F, recorded at Furnace Creek, Death Valley, Ca. in 2007 and on a few earlier occasions. The previous record was held to be 134 degrees F, at the same location, but the th…

A peer reviewed paper that provides support to skeptics! And it's in Science. I don't have a subscription to science so I am unable to read the whole paper, I may have to visit my local library. -15 Wm-2 seems a lot. I am presuming that this figure would be fairly localized. If anyone can post more of the paper without infringing copy right that would be good. The world must move to nationalize scientific journals. The content has already been paid for by us all in our taxes to fund the research!

The debate about human induced climate change, it's effects, it's causes and what to do about it seems to be the sort of thing which gets very bitchy and personal. Even more so than the debates between creationists and the rest of us. I may have found out why;- I take it you don't think it good to have dissenters allowed in a discussion. Not a fan of democracy are you.

Why do raindrops take their typical pear shape? Please provide some insight.

Why do clouds look the way they do ? I mean, even Wordsworth said, and i quote : "I wondered lonely as a cloud..." and the imagery is very vivid and striking. Why do they resemble cotton wool clumps of more or less predictable size ? How does fluid mechanics play a role in all of this ? Please advise.

I was using Google Earth the other day and I came across a startling discovery. I was looking at the enormity of Antarctica but then I went to look at the north pole and it simply isn't there. On Google Earth I could not find any ice north of Greenland. Is that even possible or is there something wrong with Google Earth. I know the poles are melting but have we actually lost the entirety of the north pole? No wonder Santa didn't show up last year!! lol

I will admit that I am skeptical about man-made global warming, but not because I am in denial, nor because I am an idiot, nor because I am in bed with the oil industry. I simply haven't been given a satisfying explanation of why scientists believe that man is the biggest contributor to present global warming. Most of the websites and videos on the subject are full of reference to the scientific consensus, emotional pictures (think: polar bears swimming and cooling towers), and maybe a simple explanation of how the greenhouse effect works or a graph showing CO2 going up along with temperature towards the end of the last century. None of this proves that man is the big…

Hey there In my country and region (Nicaragua, Central America) winter hasnt come this year. It is off by three months. This hasn't happened in almost forty years. Where can I find information about this topic? I am interested in a discussion or publication by serious academics who try to explain what has happened so far this year, and a pronostic for the remaining of the year. Maybe a US forum/institution talking about this topic? Unfortunately, politics in my region are corrupt, and official professionals are usually just average joes leading quizzical institutions. Thanks for your help

Methane Apocalypse, Everything Else Is A Distraction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FnfygE5Lhw Here is the latest June, 2014 interview with Dr.Natalia Shakhova, on the current state of the methane from the Arctic, with links to the other two parts and other related video presentations. The temperature graph does not show the even higher near vertical line on the right. No matter what other mechanisms are in play, human greenhouse gas emissions are the by far largest forcing to climate and heat to CH4 Turnover and an ELE worse than the Permian. Unless at least Yellowstone is forced to erupt. Then we will really see geologic climate forcing. A "Toba type" bot…

bycatch in one of the reasons the population of dolphins is shrinking, but is was wondering if it could be possible to create a device that emits radio waves of a dolphins warning for a dangerous animal. and then place this device on fishing boats (e.g. tuna fishing boats) so that other dolphins in the area will go away with the result that there will be less bycatch of dolphins and this is better for the dolphin polpulation. of course bycatch consist not only of dolphins. longline fishing is also a big problem for sea turtles, sea birds (some endangered) and sharkes. but to that there are already some solutions. you have the turtle excluder device (TED) that helps…

Wanting to know what these graphs actually mean... The article: http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/03/04/updated-global-temperature-no-global-warming-for-17-years-6-months-no-warming-for-210-months/ Here is the main graph from rmess. http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html So what's the deal? It's talking about temperature anomalies, but Idk what that really means in terms of global warming. Thanx!

Sounds really odd, doesn't it? I came across the link for this elsewhere and had a read, the guy makes sense. Not just for Australia, but for many other developed nations. http://papundits.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/co2-emissions-reduction-a-radical-plan/ Down here we are looking at a rather nasty tax, plus programs with the idea of 5-10% reductions. The whole deal will cost a not small fortune. Now a heck of a lot of the CO2 and other pollutants are from burning coal. Big power stations (old ones) burn 6.5 - 8 million tons per year, but new versions are far more efficient and burn around 5 million tons per year. While I'm sceptical about how much warming m…

I'm much confussed when I look at the temprature of different regions and other climate factors because some time it seems that we are moving global warming and some time it seems like global cooling. what you think?

I'm a 32 year old Computer Scientist with some questions about Climate Change(Global Warming). Over the years I've read many stances and positions on Climate Change, and have lost touch with the controversy over the years. I got tired of hearing every view point, and wanted to wait until a formal scientific consensus was made until a single **** was given! Seeing that this might not happen anytime soon, and as the controversy moves on; it seems to be more of a cluster **** then originally planned. Not knowing anything about Environmental Science; makes it difficult to jump into the controversy, and understand the informal current 2014 scientific consensus! Questions:…