Posts Tagged ‘computer modelling’

Climate models don’t need the sun – “Venus is similar to Earth” !!!

August 17, 2010

Japanese Spacecraft Approaches Venus

Venus Climate Orbiter “AKATSUKI”

This from NASA Science News:

[Global view of Venus]

Imamura is the project scientist for Akatsuki, a Japanese mission also called the Venus Climate Orbiter. The spacecraft is approaching Venus and will enter orbit on December 7, 2010. Imamura believes a close-up look at Venus could teach us a lot about our own planet.

“In so many ways, Venus is similar to Earth. It has about the same mass, is approximately the same distance from the sun, and is made of the same basic materials,” says Imamura. “Yet the two worlds ended up so different. We want to know why.”

Considering NASA’s own Venus fact sheet and the fact that Venus is about 41 million km closer to the sun it is – in the kindest interpretation – sloppy to permit a statement that “Venus is similar to earth.. approximately the same distance from the sun”.

“By comparing Venus’s unique meteorology to Earth’s, we’ll learn more about the universal principles of meteorology and improve the climate models we use to predict our planet’s future” says Imamura.

Of course the models will no doubt take into account that solar radiation on Venus is about  2688 J while the Earth receives 1365 J or perhaps the models don’t need the sun and will base everything on the heating effects of carbon dioxide.

I would have thought that it is the differences between Venus and Earth which can be revealing and to consider a distance of 41 million km closer to the sun as being negligible does not inspire confidence in any subsequent climate modelling.

New Carbon Dioxide Emissions Model !!

August 3, 2010

Yet another model which seems to indulge in circular argument – again.

The now discredited methodology  of the 4th IPCC Asessment report will be used to produce model calculations for the 5th IPCC Asessment report and, I suppose the 5th will lead to the 6th and so on ad infinitum!

It seems like a methodology to ensure the keeping of climate modellers in work for ever.

Erich Roeckner, Marco A. Giorgetta, Traute Crueger, Monika Esch, Julia Pongratz. Historical and future anthropogenic emission pathways derived from coupled climate-carbon cycle simulationsClimatic Change, DOI: 10.1007/s10584-010-9886-6

According to Science Daily

The scientists used a new method with which they reconstructed historical emission pathways on the basis of already-calculated carbon dioxide concentrations. To do this, Erich Roeckner and his team adopted the methodology proposed by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for simulations being carried out for the future Fifth IPCC Assessment Report: earth system models that incorporate the carbon cycle were used to estimate the anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions that are compatible with a prescribed concentration pathway. In this case, the emissions depend solely on the proportion of the anthropogenic carbon in the model that is absorbed by the land surface and the oceans. Repetition of the experiments using different pre-industrial starting dates enabled the scientists to distinguish between anthropogenic climate change and internal climate variability.

“It will take centuries for the global climate system to stabilise,” says Erich Roeckner.

And perhaps decades for the funding to continue.

Solar Cycle 24: Landscheidt minimum looking more likely

June 14, 2010


The sunspot numbers and the solar flux for May are not keeping up even with the reduced expectations for this cycle.

Are we in the Landscheidt minimum or is it still to come?

Even though many of the alarmists of Global Warming reject the notion of the Solar Cycle having much influence on climate, there is little doubt that the period of the Maunder Minmum coincided with the Little Ice Age. It has been unfortunate that the so-called mathematical models on which Global Warming conclusions are based have descended to the level of glorified arithmetic even though there is little understanding of what the arithmetic represents.

It is time for science to return into the debate and for incomplete mathematical models relying on “fudge factors” to validate the model against temperature proxies (which are themselves highly unlikely to be solely dependant upon temperature) to be treated with the utmost scepticism. In fact it is time for scepticism to return to science.

Predictions of a global cooling over the next 20 or 30 years seem to be gaining substance.

Alarmism and the perversion of science

June 6, 2010

Alarmism clearly pays.

The use of inflated fears of catastrophe to extract vast amounts of funding  is not perhaps a new phenomenon but in recent times has become so prevalent that it has led to the perversion of the scientific method, the utterly meaningless and false „precautionary principle“ and the prostitution of the peer-review process.

The Y2K hype surrounding doomsday scenarios of computers crashing around the world led to vast amounts of money  being spent by governments, industry and individuals for totally unnecessary activities and preparations. The experiences in those countries (such as Ukraine or Romania) where virtually nothing was done and nothing happened clearly demonstrate that the fears had been grossly exaggerated.The „precautionary principle“ replaced common sense and was used to justify the doing of even useless things to avoid catastrophe. I doubt there was any real conspiracy but I am convinced that the realisation that exagerrated fears of catastrophe could be used to extract large sums of money from those unable or unwilling to apply common sense led to a global wave of opportunism from the IT and related consultants. I too was caught up in the hype and hindsight is wonderful but I never did come across an IT professional who could clearly explain what would happen though each one had a different version of what could happen.

The arrogance of the Global Warming brigade and the prostitution of the peer review process by a select few (the Hockey Stick Team) has been used by pseudo-scientists, a few genuine scientists and innumerable politicians to extract huge sums of money for funding so-called „Climate Science“ projects – though no such science exists. Whole departments of „Climate Science“ have been established, the now infamous IPCC was established by the UN, results from poor and mediocre mathematical models have been taken as Gospel and the scientific method has been perverted. The sun and its overwhelming influence has been ignored. Carbon dioxide has become the villain and data has been fudged. The effects of clouds and water vapour –though having a dominating influence – have been too difficult to model and have been ignored. „Greenhouse gas“ has become a dirty word though we continue to expand our use of greenhouses to nurture life. No doubt the amount of money involved has provided an irresistable temptation.

But Global Warming has run its course and the new alarmism surrounding Global Cooling is gaining momentum.We may be entering a new Maunder minimum (perhaps to be called the Landscheidt minimum) which portends a new mini-ice-age. There is money to be made and the more the alarm the greater the funding that can be extracted.

The exagerrated fear of a swine-flu pandemic has led to the useless and unnecessary production and stockpiling of drugs and mass vaccinations. Whether this was a concerted effort by the pharmaceutical companies and their hired helpers in the medical world can never be proven, but it is another example of alarmism and the replacement of common sense by the „precautionary principle“ generating the flow of huge sums of money.

The WHO’s response caused widespread, unnecessary fear and prompted countries to waste millions of dollars, according to one report. At the same time, the Geneva-based arm of the United Nations relied on advice from experts with ties to drug makers in developing the guidelines it used to encourage countries to stockpile millions of doses of antiviral medication, according to the second report.”

UK Airspace was never actually closed !!!

April 19, 2010

As criticism mounts over the alarmist behaviour based largely on bureaucratic processes, in turn based on computer modelling, it turns out that UK airspace was never legally closed following the Icelandic dust cloud !!!

Criticism is also growing in Sweden and Norway for blindly following UK Met Office projections without confirming them by measurement.

The Financial Times reports:

The National Air Traffic Services body has appeared to be the one legally responsible for closing Britain’s airspace. This is because NATS, which provides airlines with air traffic control services, made the first announcements on April 14 about airspace restrictions after the cloud of ash began drifting over the UK. On Sunday night, it announced that restrictions would be in place until at least 7pm, Monday . NATS is not a regulator, however, and cannot legally close airspace. That power lies with the Civil Aviation Authority, which regulates aviation on behalf of the Department of Transport. So far, the CAA has not used this power. “At no point has UK airspace been shut. It’s legally open,” a CAA spokesman said.

%d bloggers like this: