Dagens klima link

[Spiren]

Finally, the IPCC has toned down its climate change alarm. Can rational discussion now begin?

The failure of its predictions undermines the certainties which have been placed upon the science of climate change. Previous IPCC reports — and much of the debate over how to react to them — have appeared to treat the Earth's climate as if it were a domestic central heating system, with carbon emissions analogous to the dial on the thermostat: a small tweak here will result in a temperature rise of precisely 0.2°C and so on. What is clear from the new IPCC report is that the science is not nearly advanced enough to make useful predictions on the future rise of global temperatures. Perhaps it never will be.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-week/leading-article/9027511/a-climate-glasnost/

[Spiren]

EU admits double-counting climate finance and development aid

SPECIAL REPORT / EU officials have admitted for the first time that member state donations to the developing world can simultaneously count towards meeting climate change obligations and development commitments, such as providing 0.7% of gross income for overseas aid.

http://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-un-development-goa/eu-admits-double-counting-climat-news-530583

[Spiren]

Sea level rise: Climate change and an ocean of natural variability

CHICAGO, September 19, 2013 — Sea level rise is the greatest disaster predicted by Climatism, the belief in catastrophic climate change. Today, leading scientific organizations support the idea that the ocean level is rising due to man-made emissions. Further, they claim to be able to measure ocean level to a high degree of accuracy. But a look at natural ocean variation shows that official sea level measurements are nonsense.

The theory of man-made climate change warns that human emissions of greenhouse gases will raise global temperatures and melt Earth's icecaps, causing rising oceans and flooding coastal cities. Former Vice President Al Gore's best-selling book, An Inconvenient Truth, showed simulated pictures of flooding in South Florida, the Netherlands, Bangladesh, and other world locations. Dr. James Hansen predicted an ocean rise of 75 feet during the next 100 years.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated in 2007, "Global average sea level rose at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year over 1961 to 2003. The rate was faster over 1993 to 2003: about 3.1 mm per year." This translates to a 100-year rise of only 7 inches and 12 inches, far below the dire predictions of the climate alarmists.

But three millimeters is about the thickness of two dimes. Can scientists really measure a change in sea level over the course of a year, averaged across the world, which is two dimes thick?

Today, sea level is measured with satellite radar altimeters. Satellites bounce radar waves off the surface of the ocean to measure the distance. Scientific organizations, such as the Sea Level Research Group at the University of Colorado (CU), use the satellite data to estimate ocean rise. The CU team estimates current ocean rise at 3.2 millimeters per year.

The organizations AVISO (Archiving, Validation, and Interpretation of Satellite Oceanographic Data) of France, CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) of Australia, and NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) of the United States agree with the University of Colorado that seas are rising three millimeters per year. Given the huge natural variation in global sea level, the three millimeter number is incredible. The fact that four different organizations have arrived at the same number is suspect.

As Dr. Willie Soon of Harvard shows, ocean level variation is large and affected by many factors. If temperatures rise, water expands, adding to sea level rise. If icecaps melt, levels rise, but if icecaps grow due to increased snowfall, levels fall. If ocean saltiness changes, the water volume will also change.

The land itself moves continuously. Some shorelines are rising and some are subsiding. The land around Hudson Bay in Canada is rising, freed of ice from the last ice age. In contrast, the area around New Orleans is sinking. Long-term movement of Earth's tectonic plates also changes sea level.

Tides are a major source of ocean variation, primarily caused by the gravitational pull of the moon, the sun, and the rotation of the Earth. Ocean water "sloshes" from shore to shore, with tides changing as much as 38 feet per day at the Bay of Fundy in Nova Scotia. The global average tide range is about one meter, but this daily change is still 300 times the three-millimeter change that scientists claim to be able to measure over an entire year.

Storms and weather are major factors affecting satellite measurements. Wave heights change by meters each day, dwarfing the annual rise in ocean level. Winds also change the height of the sea. The easterly wind of a strong La Niña pushes seas at Singapore to a meter higher than in the eastern Pacific Ocean.

Satellites themselves have error bias. Satellite specifications claim a measurement accuracy of about one or two centimeters. How can scientists then measure an annual change of three millimeters, which is almost ten times smaller than the error in daily measurements? Measuring tools typically must have accuracy ten times better than the quantity to be measured, not ten times worse. Dr. Carl Wunsch of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology commented on the satellite data in 2007, "It remains possible that the database is insufficient to compute mean sea level trends with the accuracy necessary to discuss the impact of global warming—as disappointing as this conclusion may be."

Scientists add many "fudge factors" to the raw data. The same measurement taken by each of the three satellites, TOPEX, JASON-1, and JASON-2, differs by 75 millimeters and must be corrected. As a natural adjustment, researchers add 0.3 millimeters to the measured data, because ocean basins appear to be getting larger, able to hold more water, and reducing apparent ocean levels.

Tide gauges are also used to "calibrate" the satellite data. But gauge measurements are subject to errors of one or two centimeters, again many times more than the sea level rise to be measured.

Clearly, the official three millimeter sea level rise number is a product of scientific "group think." Not only is this number far below what can be accurately measured, but all leading organizations support this nonsense number. Could it be that our leading scientists must endorse sea-level rise to support the ideology of man-made global warming?

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/climatism-watching-climate-science/2013/sep/19/sea-level-rise-climate-change-and-ocean-natural-va/#ixzz2fYcmsGUm

[Jostemikk]

Joe Postma ser ut til å la det gå mer og mer inn på seg hvordan klimafrelserne og deres legionærer har oppført seg de siste årene. Personlig så håper jeg han slipper gå på en stjernesmell grunnet fullstendig oppgitthet.

Han har skrevet et fullstendig bombardement i sitt nye blogginnlegg, og det kan leses her. Jeg siterer i stedet fra noe han bidrar med i debatten under innlegget.

It is because it is all a lot easier to lie to people and to get people to believe in and then support lies either passively or fanatically than rational people realize. There's that, and there's also that people are very stupid today. You come from a generation that I have a lot of respect for (judging by your handsome picture!). People used to be much more rational and critical.

You must know full well that people haven't been being raised on anything mentally healthy for a a few generations now, starting with the 68′ers. While the rational and greatest generation was going to the moon, the 68′ers were smoking pot, doing LSD and all manner of drugs, ignoring the greatest feat of human ingenuity of all time, etc. Those people then went into education. Science was where many of them congregated. We are now watching what they have produced. People today are incapable of identifying value – that is what has been removed from their psyche, the concept of value. People are PROGRAMMED instead. They are PROGRAMMED to value Arctic ice over their own availability of energy and the quality of lives of poor people who could really use cheap energy. They don't form original ideas or thoughts and they do not think critically or rationally. They are automatons. We are in one of the greatest dark ages of rationality of all time. The people who are the alarmists today were the Inquisitors murdering people yesterday – you see all that in their language, their policies, and their goals. The scientific establishment has unfortunately become their priesthood and congregation because almost all scientists today are specialists and simply have naive trust in the "brand" of science. They don't realize that it is possible to hijack science and related to that they don't realize that politics is capable of going wrong; they have naive absolute faith in the system they are part of, and they find identity in this system, so they can't question it. Climate alarm has manufactured the APPEARANCE of doing science, and few people are capable of understanding the philosophical argumentative tricks and subterfuges employed against them. The simple answer is that people have been degenerated. That's not some "easy-out" answer. It is the truth. I know good engineers and scientists. Even they are too incredulous to critically think of the issue of -40C sunlight...they just can't believe the lie. They're too naive and innocent. They have too much trust that "someone must know what they are doing" and be able to make it work. Look all this is well-known and has historical precedent: something about telling a lie that's big enough, and people will believe it, and will deny the opposite of the lie, which is the truth. We're in the same old territory, just a different group of people, but a group which has all the potential and naive trust to be conned.

[Amatør1]

Ikke mye å være uenig i det Postma-sitatet. Jeg må lese det hele. Han er definitivt inne på noe vesentlig.

[Jostemikk]

Ikke mye å være uenig i det Postma-sitatet. Jeg må lese det hele. Han er definitivt inne på noe vesentlig.

Jeg er så absolutt enig i at han er inne på noe vesentlig. Han skriver blant annet:

The people who are the alarmists today were the Inquisitors murdering people yesterday – you see all that in their language, their policies, and their goals. The scientific establishment has unfortunately become their priesthood and congregation because almost all scientists today are specialists and simply have naive trust in the "brand" of science. They don't realize that it is possible to hijack science and related to that they don't realize that politics is capable of going wrong; they have naive absolute faith in the system they are part of, and they find identity in this system, so they can't question it.

Så lenge folk ikke er i stand til å lære av historien, og naiviteten ser ut til å øke for hver generasjon, er det vanskelig å se noen vei ut av uføret. I en annen tråd i kveld siterte du fra debatten på BH:

When asked, 97% said they followed each other. 3% are still looking for the truth and one day, 1 will find it.

De følger et fiktivt flertall, og noe av årsaken til at svindelen kan opprettholdes kan du lese om her, noe jeg har tenkt å lage et eget innlegg om etter hvert. Tidligere var dette jobben til historieskriverne. De som skrev historien, ikke om den. Nå er de degradert til lønnede debattmanipulatorer.

[seoto]

...they just can't believe the lie. They're too naive and innocent. They have too much trust that "someone must know what they are doing" and be able to make it work. Look all this is well-known and has historical precedent: something about telling a lie that's big enough, and people will believe it, and will deny the opposite of the lie, which is the truth. We're in the same old territory, just a different group of people, but a group which has all the potential and naive trust to be conned.

Dette er en veldig bra beskrivelse - og dessverre så sann. Hvor mange ganger har jeg ikke hørt folk si: "Du må da forstå at de vet hva de driver med!" Gjør løgnen så stor at den ikke kan forstås, og gjenta den til alle tror det er deres egne tanker.

[Jostemikk]

Karboen er i farta, og dette er så interessant at det egentlig burde implementeres i en av de to Hansen-trådene. Skal tygge litt på dette.

Det handler om hvordan temperaturjuksteringene før eller senere MÅTTE komme tilbake og slå trikserne i bakhodet.

http://vgd.no/samfunn/miljoe-og-klima/tema/1775687/tittel/dagens-jukstering-vs-gaarsdagens-jukstering/innlegg/39806635/#39806635

Artig kommentar fra "Chris y" på Bishop Hill:

"In 1981, Hansen relied on 15 years of temperature change as his 'dramatic evidence' of global warming- "They have found that the Earth's average temperature rose 0.2 degrees Centigrade from the mid-1960s to 1980."- Eleanor Randolph, in The Pittsburgh Press, August 15, 1981

There are several problems with this. For example, from 1965 to 1980, HadCRUT now gives 0.06C rise, GISS now gives 0.12C rise and HadSST now gives 0.02C DROP for this time period. So, Hansen hung his hat on a temperature increase that has disappeared in a cloud of data tampering." (Min uth.)

Så seriejusteringene er altså i ferd med å trekke teppet vekk under... eh, seriejustererne. Sånn kan det gå...

Seriejusterer er seriejusterer verst?

Både Bebben og jeg skrev om dette allerede i 2011 her på forumet.

[Telehiv]

Karboen er i farta, og dette er så interessant at det egentlig burde implementeres i en av de to Hansen-trådene. Skal tygge litt på dette.

Det handler om hvordan temperaturjuksteringene før eller senere MÅTTE komme tilbake og slå trikserne i bakhodet.

http://vgd.no/samfunn/miljoe-og-klima/tema/1775687/tittel/dagens-jukstering-vs-gaarsdagens-jukstering/innlegg/39806635/#39806635

Artig kommentar fra "Chris y" på Bishop Hill:

"In 1981, Hansen relied on 15 years of temperature change as his 'dramatic evidence' of global warming- "They have found that the Earth's average temperature rose 0.2 degrees Centigrade from the mid-1960s to 1980."- Eleanor Randolph, in The Pittsburgh Press, August 15, 1981

There are several problems with this. For example, from 1965 to 1980, HadCRUT now gives 0.06C rise, GISS now gives 0.12C rise and HadSST now gives 0.02C DROP for this time period. So, Hansen hung his hat on a temperature increase that has disappeared in a cloud of data tampering." (Min uth.)

Så seriejusteringene er altså i ferd med å trekke teppet vekk under... eh, seriejustererne. Sånn kan det gå...

Seriejusterer er seriejusterer verst?

Både Bebben og jeg skrev om dette allerede i 2011 her på forumet.

Rett og slett lynskarpt - men dessverre også hjerteskjærende - morsomt observert.

Hadde det bare ikke vært så fullstendig ødeleggende for naturvitenskapenes troverdighet rent generelt, skulle jeg knegget hele veien til AR5-slippet...

[Telehiv]

Rigget for fullstendig bevisstløst klimaseminar på Litteraturhuset i Bergen på onsdag 25. sept.?

For hva er det ikke vi fristes med:

"Hør vurderingene til en insider som har arbeidet med å skrive rapporten".

Og så kan man jo tippe på hvilket insider-klimaflogvit dette er, er det lov å anta at dette er en person som trolig holder til i Bergen, og kanskje har fått rettledning av Fjeldskaar om gravitasjonslovene etter sine famøse fysiske tabber om havstigning der disse lover glimret ved sitt fravær? Og som gjorde sitt beste for å få strøket "ubehagelige" fakta i forrige IPCC-rapport? Vi får se....

NB: Men kanskje det er Bjørn Samset som stiller som back-up, det kan jo komme ubehgelige spørsmål fra salen....?!? Samset er jo helt hyper i disse tider og sprer sine visvas-spekulasjoner alle steder, uten helt å forstå den munterhet han skaper i opplyste miljø.. Men kunnskapsspredning på tvers er som kjent ikke alarmistenes sterke side, for selv om Jansen og Drange har fått mild gravitasjons-veiledning av Fjeldskaar flere ganger, hindrer ikke dette kollega og ultra-alarmist Samset i å rykke ut i Sunnmørsposten sist lørdag via et fullstendig frelst mikrofonstativ-nek med en højdare av en akterutseilt skremselsinfo (isbjørnene truet igjen, osv., samt at 60% isvekst i Arktis i år ikke er noe å ta hensyn til, det går snart over - men isfrie somre er nå flyttet til 2030-2050, som kjent har tidligere isfrie merkeår som 2012 og 2013 gått ut på dato.....; har fyren lest mine innlegg om naturlige variasjoner?!). Han kan dermed, et par år etter at de forrige slikket sine sår på dette tøvet, nå igjen skråsikkert fastslå at vannstanden i Bergen vil stige med 73 cm innen utgangen av dette århundret.....hvor tar de denne vettløse frekkheten fra?

Dette altså etter at hans kolleger stotrende og mumlende for mindre enn to år siden - da de varslet tilsvarende oversvømming av Bryggen - måtte innrømme at der er
a) en aktiv landheving på Vestlandet etter siste istid som mer enn nuller ut havstigning, samt
b) at dersom Bjerknes-skremslene om nedsmelting av Grønland faktisk hadde hatt noe for seg, ville GRAVITASJONSLOVENE ytterligere senket vannstanden utenfor Bergen.

Men læringsfaktoren i disse skamløse hodene er åpenbart under null. Det er jo selvsagt mer fristende for en useriøs klimafantast å skremme en vestlending med at middelalderunikumet Bryggen drukner enn at bangladesherne får vann i sandalene.   

http://www.litthusbergen.no/program/ukedager/onsdag/forskningsdagene/

Bebben, du bør nok ta turen, jeg blir bortreist. Det begynner kl 1900.

- Og ta deg en vin for nervene hvis du går, for som dere ser av vedlagte link kan dette bli et av tidenes mest akterutseilte seminar, kan ikke se et spor av at man har tenkt å slippe til noen form for kritisk tenkning rundt dette?

[stjakobs]

BBC om AR5 og stoppen i temperaturutviklingen:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24173504

[seoto]

BBC om AR5 og stoppen i temperaturutviklingen:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24173504

Fra BBC:

And this week, when the scientists will go through their summary line by line with officials from 195 governments, the pause is likely to be the focus of heated debate.

Det store spørsmålet må være: Er disse representantene fra 195 forskjellige regjeringer overhodet i stand til å få inn i sine forurensede hoder at temperaturer ikke har steget på rundt 15 år? Tror noen at f.eks. Solhjell/Lysbakken ville være i stand til å forstå noe slikt? Kanskje det heller burde være sendt mer skeptiske folk fra Norge? De kunne jo ha stilt noen realistiske spørsmål, i stedet for å la seg dupere.

[Amatør1]

Pachauri ute igjen - ved hjelp av BBCs Harrabin

Human role in warming 'more certain' - UN climate chief

He also dismissed suggestions of a slowdown in global warming.

"There's definitely an increase in our belief that climate change is taking place and that human beings are responsible," he told me.

Tviler ikke. Men selv om sjelen blir stadig sterkere i troen, Pachauri, så finnes det en virkelighet der ute, og det var faktisk den du skulle forholde deg til.

[Spiren]

Warming Plateau? Climatologists Face Inconvenient Truth

Data shows global temperatures aren't rising the way climate scientists have predicted. Now the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change faces a problem: publicize these findings and encourage skeptics -- or hush up the figures.

Germany's Federal Ministry of Research would prefer to leave any discussion of the global warming hiatus entirely out of the new IPCC report summary. "In climate research, changes don't count until they've been observed on a timescale of 30 years," claims one delegate participating in the negotiations on behalf of German Research Minister Johanna Wanka of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). The Ministry for the Environment's identical stance: "Climate fluctuations that don't last very long are not scientifically relevant."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/climate-scientists-face-crisis-over-global-warming-pause-a-923937.html

[stjakobs]

Jeg vet ikke om denne har vært postet tidligere, men morsom er den.

Global Warming Tour Cut Off By--Wait for It-- Too Much Ice! :

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/michaelschaus/2013/09/09/why-we-need-more-global-warming-n1694740/page/full