“Climate has not changed.
We have changed.
Our habits have changed.
Our habits have got spoiled.”
Narendra Modi, India Today, 5th September 2014
Archive for the ‘Climate’ Category
Narendra Modi gets it (so does Abe but Obama doesn’t)
September 6, 2014How much of global warming is due to data corruption?
August 27, 2014The Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) is scrabbling trying to defend why the intentional corruption of data is justified. Dr. Jennifer Marohasy has a new post demonstrating that the excuses being offered do not hold up.
Whereas the Australian establishment uses “homogenisation” as their euphemism for “intentional data corruption”, the US uses “adjustment” : How NOAA Data Tampering Destroys Science
Of course raw data often needs to be adjusted but when the magnitude of the data adjustment is greater than the magnitude of the conclusion, then the adjustments or homogenisation become “data corruption” or ” data tampering”. As my Professor, Doug Elliott, once told me – some 40 years ago – when I wanted to make calculated corrections for presumed errors due to radiation in flame temperature measurements, “You can argue for whatever corrections you want to make, but you cannot replace the measurement. The measurement is the measurement is the measurement”.
A “science” built on the falsification of data?
As was recently pointed out, fudging both data and model results seems endemic in “climate science”:
a recent paper from ETH Zurich.
If the model data is corrected downwards, as suggested by the ETH researchers, and
the measurement data is corrected upwards, as suggested by the British and Canadian researchers,
then the model and actual observations are very similar.
Heat is on over weather bureau ‘homogenising temperature records’
August 23, 2014Reblogged from jennifermarohasy.com.
It really needs little comment, except perhaps that the magnitude of “homogenisation” or “adjustments”, or “corrections” as applied to the temperature record makes up most of the “global warming” that is claimed.
Homogenisation in Australia, Adjustments in the US. Fancy algorithms to “correct” data, with not a little confirmation bias, could be better described as “fudging”.
Heat is on over weather bureau ‘homogenising temperature records’
EARLIER this year Tim Flannery said “the pause” in global warming was a myth, leading medical scientists called for stronger action on climate change, and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology declared 2013 the hottest year on record. All of this was reported without any discussion of the actual temperature data. It has been assumed that there is basically one temperature series and that it’s genuine.But I’m hoping that after today, with both a feature (page 20) and a news piece (page 9) in The Weekend Australia things have changed forever. I’m hoping that next time Professor Flannery is interviewed he will be asked by journalists which data series he is relying on: the actual recorded temperatures or the homogenized remodeled series. Because as many skeptics have known for a long time, and as Graham Lloyd reports today for News Ltd, for any one site across this wide-brown land Australia, while the raw data may show a pause, or even cooling, the truncated and homogenized data often shows dramatic warming.
When I first sent Graham Lloyd some examples of the remodeling of the temperature series I think he may have been somewhat skeptical. I know he on-forwarded this information to the Bureau for comment, including three charts showing the homogenization of the minimum temperature series for Amberley.
Mr Lloyd is the Environment Editor for The Australian newspaper and he may have been concerned I got the numbers wrong. He sought comment and clarification from the Bureau, not just for Amberley but also for my numbers pertaining to Rutherglen and Bourke.
I understand that by way of response to Mr Lloyd, the Bureau has not disputed these calculations.
This is significant. The Bureau now admits that it changes the temperature series and quite dramatically through the process of homogenisation.
I repeat the Bureau has not disputed the figures. The Bureau admits that the data is remodelled.
What the Bureau has done, however, is try and justify the changes. In particular, for Amberley the Bureau is claiming to Mr Lloyd that there is very little available documentation for Amberley before 1990 and that information before this time may be “classified”: as in top secret. That’s right, there is apparently a reason for jumping-up the minimum temperatures for Amberley but it just can’t provide Mr Lloyd with the supporting meta-data at this point in time.
*****
The two articles in The Australian are behind a pay wall here and here. If you don’t already have a subscription to The Australian take one out today, because the articles are important and Graham Lloyd’s work is worth paying for.
If the globe is warming how come relative humidity is decreasing?
August 22, 2014Increasing temperature leads to a greater capacity for air to hold moisture (the specific humidity). The actual amount of moisture held in a sample of air as a proportion of the capacity of that air to hold moisture is termed the relative humidity and is usually given as a percentage.
Specific humidity (g/kg) versus temperature for air earthobservatory.nasa.gov
All climate computer models usually assume a constant relative humidity.
Nasa: In climate modeling, scientists have assumed that the relative humidity of the atmosphere will stay the same regardless of how the climate changes. In other words, they assume that even though air will be able to hold more moisture as the temperature goes up, proportionally more water vapor will be evaporated from the ocean surface and carried through the atmosphere so that the percentage of water in the air remains constant. Climate models that assume that future relative humidity will remain constant predict greater increases in the Earth’s temperature in response to increased carbon dioxide than models that allow relative humidity to change. The constant-relative-humidity assumption places extra water in the equation, which increases the heating.
Relative humidity has decreased steadily for over 60 years. All computer models which assume constant relative humidity will overestimate the feedback and the degree of warming.
Forbes carries an article about the mismatch between computer models and actual observations.
Forbes: Water vapor is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, so substantial increases in atmospheric water vapor can certainly cause significant warming. United Nations computer models are programmed to assume that absolute humidity (the total amount of water vapor in the atmosphere) will rise so much that even relative humidity (the percent of water vapor in the atmosphere) will at least keep pace and perhaps even increase. Warmer air is able to hold more water than cooler air, so absolute water vapor would have to increase quite substantially for relative humidity to remain constant or increase in a warming world.
Scientists, however, have been measuring relative humidity for many decades. Rather than keeping pace with modestly warming temperatures, relative humidity is declining. This decline has been ongoing, without interruption, for more than 60 years. After more than six decades of consistent data, we can say with strong confidence that absolute humidity is not rising rapidly enough for relative humidity to keep pace with warming temperatures.
Global Relative Humidity 300 – 700mb (300mb corresponds to about 9,000 m altitude)
The failure of relative humidity to hold constant or rise during recent decades is a lethal dagger in the heart of alarmist global warming claims. According to the UN computer models, rapidly rising absolute humidity will cause substantially more global warming than the modest warming directly caused by rising carbon dioxide levels. Given the potency of water vapor, even a small overstatement of atmospheric humidity levels in UN computer models will cause a very significant overstatement of future warming. And the data show UN computer models assume too much atmospheric humidity.
The effects of this overstatement are apparent in real-world temperature data this century. Precise atmospheric temperature measurements compiled by NASA and NOAA satellite instruments show there has been no global warming since late in the 20th century
Climate modelling: Study shows that without access to water fish will die!
August 21, 2014I am sure all the forecasts based on climate models applied to hydrological models and extrapolated to 2050 are all quite clever. But it is no evidence of anything.
I am not sure why their conclusions are confined to Arizona. I suspect it may be a profound and universal truth that: Without water fish will die!!
My reading of this study (which I put under Trivia):
If the climate develops as we have modelled,
and if the surface water flows are reduced,
and if the connectivity of the water streams is reduced as we have modelled,
then some fish will lose access to water,
and some of those fish will die.
K. L. Jaeger, J. D. Olden, N. A. Pelland. Climate change poised to threaten hydrologic connectivity and endemic fishes in dryland streams. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2014; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1320890111
Significance (In other words an abstract of the abstract)
We provide the first demonstration to our knowledge that projected changes in regional climate regimes will have significant consequences for patterns of intermittence and hydrologic connectivity in dryland streams of the American Southwest. By simulating fine-resolution streamflow responses to forecasted climate change, we simultaneously evaluate alterations in local flow continuity over time and network flow connectivity over space and relate how these changes may challenge the persistence of a globally endemic fish fauna. Given that human population growth in arid regions will only further increase surface and groundwater extraction during droughts, we expect even greater likelihood of flow intermittence and loss of habitat connectivity in the future.
(my bold)
The University of Ohio goes to town with its Press Release : Climate Change will threaten fish…
Fish species native to a major Arizona watershed may lose access to important segments of their habitat by 2050 as surface water flow is reduced by the effects of climate warming, new research suggests. …..
“If water is flowing throughout the network, fish are able to access all parts of it and make use of whatever resources are there. But when systems dry down, temporary fragmented systems develop that force fish into smaller, sometimes isolated channel reaches or pools until dry channels wet up again.”…….
How climate science models are validated
August 20, 2014Mathematical and computer models are wonderful tools. Once they can be validated they are powerful methods of interpolation. They are useful methods of improving the understanding embodied in the models by extrapolation. The divergence between extrapolated model results and real data can then be used for improving the models to better account for real data. If model results do not fit real data it is time to change the model.
Extrapolated model results are never evidence. They are just indicators of what may come to pass provided that the model – in spite of all its simplifications – does truly apply.
And when climate model results are fudged to move towards climate data which, in turn, has to be fudged to move towards the model results, one wonders whether there is any scientific method left in “climate science”.
This is reported by WUWT from a recent paper from ETH Zurich.
If the model data is corrected downwards, as suggested by the ETH researchers, and
the measurement data is corrected upwards, as suggested by the British and Canadian researchers,
then the model and actual observations are very similar.
Shameless is one adjective that comes to mind.
Fraudulent is another.
Climate models wrong again in ignoring brown carbon from wildfires
August 11, 2014So much for global warming being settled and the infallibility of incomplete and inadequate climate models.
Climate models generally take the effect of wildfires (brown carbon) on climate to be zero (it is not a parameter that is normally included). Both black and brown carbon particulates are products of incomplete combustion.
A new paper reports on experiments with the combustion of biomass and the brown carbon particulate matter in the smoke:
Saleh et al, Brownness of organics in aerosols from biomass burning linked to their black carbon content. Nature Geoscience (2014) doi:10.1038/ngeo2220
The research provides information which can now be included in climate models but since it is a parameter which is not usually included, the obvious conclusion is that for any given level of warming some other effect (most likely that of man-made emissions of carbon dioxide) has been overestimated in the models.
But it is not the obvious conclusion that makes the headlines. Instead it is the ridiculous and alarmist statement that “Forest fires can heat the climate“ that is the headline that Swedish Radio (which is about as orthodox as they come) chooses to lead with. They would clearly like to project the picture of a greater threat and not that of inadequate climate models.
Abstract: …. Here we present smog chamber experiments to characterize the effective absorptivity of organic aerosol from biomass burning under a range of conditions. We show that brown carbon in emissions from biomass burning is associated mostly with organic compounds of extremely low volatility. In addition, we find that the effective absorptivity of organic aerosol in biomass burning emissions can be parameterized as a function of the ratio of black carbon to organic aerosol, indicating that aerosol absorptivity depends largely on burn conditions, not fuel type. We conclude that brown carbon from biomass burning can be an important factor in aerosol radiative forcing.
The paper claims that brown carbon is a significant factor which must be taken into account and the more significant it is the less significant is man-made carbon dioxide.
Swedish Environmental Party makes a fool of itself (again)
August 9, 2014The Swedish Environmental Party (Miljöpartiet) has not been slow in trying to cash in on the large forest fire in Västmanland. The Swedish General Elections are in September and “anything goes”. Especially if it is alarmist. I don’t expect much intellectual or scientific honesty from them any longer but I though their behaviour yesterday was particularly opportunistic and crass.
- Never mind that forest fires in Sweden reduced from over 250,000 hectares destroyed every year before 1850 to less than 1,000 hectares per year in recent times when forest “cultivation” increased.
- Never mind that because of the reduced incidence of forest fires the owners have reduced their fire watches.
- Never mind that the number of military helicopters suitable for fire fighting have reduced from 33 to 3 in the last 20 years.
- Never mind that Sweden no longer has any planes suitable for water bombing.
- Never mind that in the grip of complacency, fire fighting equipment has reduced under 3 successive governments.
- Never mind that global temperatures have been stagnant for the last 18 years and have actually reduced slightly in the last decade.
- Never mind that carbon dioxide emissions by humans are apparently having no impact on real global temperatures (but are absolutely fundamental to every climate model)
- Never mind that temperatures in Västmanland this summer are nothing out of the ordinary.
Never mind the facts, just feel the fear. They came out with this picture yesterday even though the Västmanland fire has yet to be brought under control.
“We cannot afford to ignore Climate Change” it reads.
I get the impression that the Swedish Greens have prostituted themselves on the altar of global warming orthodoxy (sorry – climate change >> sorry – extreme events >> sorry – global cooling?).
mp västmanland
But the temperature anomalies in Västmanland are nothing out of the ordinary.
Västmanland temperatures – The Stockholm Initiative
Cold records simultaneously in both hemispheres are inconsistent with global warming.
August 6, 2014Cold records simultaneously in both hemispheres (Death Valley and Adelaide) don’t prove anything of course. They don’t prove that global cooling is underway but are not inconsistent with that hypothesis.
But they certainly are inconsistent with global warming.
Death Valley, Calif., which is known for being the world’s hottest location, maxed out at a relatively chilly 89 degrees on Sunday. This temperature – nearly 30 degrees below average – was its coolest high temperature on record for the date by a whopping 15 degrees. The previous record of 104 was set in 1945.
This was only the eighth time that a high in the 80s has occurred in Death Valley in July or August, and there hasn’t been a high less than 90 since 1984. Weather records in Death Valley go back to 1911.
Locations that were hotter than Death Valley yesterday include Spokane Wash. (93), Missoula, Mont. (91), Casper, Wy. (92), and Boise, Idaho (99).
The average June high in Death Valley is 110 degrees, July is 117 degrees, and August is 115. This makes Sunday’s high temperature a ridiculous 26 degrees below normal.
Death Valley set the world’s record hottest temperature of 134 degrees on July 10, 1913.
Adelaide has woken to its coldest start to an August day in 126 years and it was colder across other parts of South Australia.
The weather bureau said it was the coldest August morning since 1888. It was also the coldest day Adelaide has experienced in any month in six years.
Senior forecaster Mark Anolak said the low temperature has been brought on by cold air from the Antarctic moving over Adelaide. “Under a ridge of high pressure that we are experiencing at the moment, clear skies have led to very cold temperatures over the last couple of days,” he said. “Murray Bridge has had its coldest ever start to the day in August at -2.7 degrees this morning.”
Most of regional South Australia woke to cold and frosty conditions.
The weather bureau said it got down to -5.6C in Renmark, just above freezing in Lameroo and -3.9C in Loxton.
Swedish forest fire largest in recent times but a tiny fraction of pre-industrial times
August 6, 2014
Västmanland, Sweden
Increasing humidity and some rain has limited the spread of the largest forest fire which has been ongoing for 7 days in the northern part of Västmanland in Sweden. One person has been found dead and some 4,000 homes were evacuated a few days ago. Some of those evacuated can now begin to return.
The fire followed 2 weeks of quite warm weather over the entire country with temperatures around 30ºC (high, but not unknown at this times of year and no records were broken).
What became quite clear was that the equipment available to the emergency services was sadly lacking. Three successive governments have taken the easy opportunity of cutting emergency services and there were just no helicopters or planes available in the country for containing the fire. One was requested from Italy yesterday but could not be sent. Another from France is only arriving today. Needless to say they will probably arrive after the point at which they could have done the most good. If it continues to rain today, they will be irrelevant.
Before 1850, fires consumed 250 times larger areas of forest in Sweden than today. It has been the “industrial harvesting” of forests which has drastically reduced the incidence of forest fires. And it has been the complacency brought about by the low incidence of forest fires which has led to a reduced preparedness to fight the fires when they do occur.
The climate alarmists (and there are many of them in Sweden) have not been slow to blame the fire on global warming. A little depressing to hear people so ready to switch off all their rational faculties and parroting what sounds like a climate catechism.!!
But a few sane voices can also be heard.
Two hundred years ago forest fires raged much more freely in Swedish forests. It was when humans began to harvest the forest that fires reduced.
“Swedish forests burned much more in historical times” says Bengt-Gunnar Jonsson, professor of plant ecology at Mid- University. “Just a few hundred years ago one percent of Swedish forests burned each year. 250 thousand hectares every year. Today only about a thousand acres are lost to forest fires every year“.
Bengt-Gunnar Jonsson sees three separate eras of fires in the Swedish forests. From prehistoric times to the seventeenth century there were only a few but very large fires. From the seventeenth century until the mid-nineteenth century, when the population increased and people started residing there, the number of fires increased but they were smaller. In the mid-nineteenth century industrial forestry started and the number of forest fires declined sharply. There was a dramatic shift to a landscape where people – rather than fire – harvested the trees.
“Even the very first people in Sweden might have affected how much it burned in the woods”, according to Bengt-Gunnar Jonsson. “Although we have observed fires for several thousand years, we cannot really explain effects of climate and lightning. Many argue that even the ancient fires had a human footprint. It could be that humans have influenced fire history since the ice retreated”.
Västmanland forest fire 2014 – Jocke Berglund -TT
The k2p blog 