- Cold, snow tipped after twisters, hailMen de verkar få en tidig skidsäsong där nere.
- Bop kiwifruit orchardists assess hail damage
The Resilient Earth: Attempt To Discredit Cosmic Ray-Climate Link Using Computer Model
I artikelns avslutning bl a denna mening:
As Wolfgang Pauli famously said of a paper submitted by a colleague, “This isn't right. This isn't even wrong.”
Fortune: What if global-warming fears are overblown?
...noted climatologist John Christy contends the green crusade to fight climate change is "all cost and no benefit."
Såg just ett gammalt dokument på NASA från 1997, med Roy Spencer som medförfattare och följande ännu kloka ord:
The atmosphere is extremely complex in its behavior. Because of this, finding the correct explanation for the behavior we observe is complex as well. Virtually all scientists will agree that a doubling of the amount of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere should have some effect on the temperature of the Earth. But it is much less certain how or if we will recognize the effects of this increase. There are several reasons:+ First, the influence of a man-made doubling of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is small compared to the Earth's natural cooling rate, on the order of only a percent.
+ Second, there is a much more important greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, namely water vapor. Water vapor over the Earth is extremely variable, both in space and in time.
+ Third, the ways in which clouds and water vapor feed back and ultimately influence the temperature of the Earth are, at best, poorly understood.
+ Fourth, while the whole Earth is indeed in a state that scientists describe as "radiative equilibrium," where the incoming sunlight equals the outgoing infrared radiation to provide a roughly constant overall temperature, the surface is far from this radiative balance condition. Evaporation and convection processes in the atmosphere transport heat from the surface to the upper troposphere, where it can be much more efficiently radiated into space since it is above most of the greenhouse-trapping water vapor. So in short, it is this convective overturning of the atmosphere - poorly represented in computer models of global warming - that primarily determines the temperature distribution of the surface and upper troposphere, not radiation balance.
Sund skepsis på bloggen Dalton Minimum om huruvida nuvarande låga solaktivitet leder till ett större solminimum: Cycle 24 - don't panic yet!
Watts postade nyss ett inlägg av Leif Svalgaard med detaljer kring solens tillstånd.
(HT: kiwistonewall och andra på solarcycle24-forumet)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Twingly-länkar om klimat: SvD; SMP; KB
Andra bloggar om: miljö, vetenskap, klimat, solen, solaktivitet, klimatförändring, klimatförändringar, Svensmark, kosmisk strålning
Climategate -- The Crutape Letters, by Steven Mosher and Thomas W. Fuller
The Deniers
Jag får den känslan av att datormodeller, hur lovvärt det än är att göra dom, inte räcker till. Teorier kan inte slå verkligheten, tvärtom är det verkligheten som övertrumfar teorierna hela tiden. Jag tänker nu främst på den artikel du länkar till om försöket att falsifiera reella data med hjälp av datormodeller. Är modeller verkligen äkta vetenskap?
ReplyDelete