wattsupwiththat--2020-03-24--New 3D view of methane tracks sources

New 3D view of methane tracks sources

NASA ’ s new 3-dimensional portrait of methane concentrations shows the world ’ s second largest contributor to greenhouse warming , the diversity of sources on the ground , and the behavior of the gas as it moves through the atmosphere .
Combining multiple data sets from emissions inventories , including fossil fuel , agricultural , biomass burning and biofuels , and simulations of wetland sources into a high-resolution computer model , researchers now have an additional tool for understanding this complex gas and its role in Earth ’ s carbon cycle , atmospheric composition , and climate system .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the atmosphere have more than doubled .
After carbon dioxide , methane is the second most influential greenhouse gas , responsible for 20 to 30 % of Earth ’ s rising temperatures to date .
“ There ’ s an urgency in understanding where the sources are coming from so that we can be better prepared to mitigate methane emissions where there are opportunities to do so , ” said research scientist Ben Poulter at NASA ’ s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt , Maryland .
A single molecule of methane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a molecule of carbon dioxide , but because the lifetime of methane in the atmosphere is shorter and carbon dioxide concentrations are much higher , carbon dioxide still remains the main contributor to climate change .
Methane also has many more sources than carbon dioxide , these include the energy and agricultural sectors , as well as natural sources from various types of wetlands and water bodies .
“ Methane is a gas that ’ s produced under anaerobic conditions , so that means when there ’ s no oxygen available , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Poulter .
In addition to fossil fuel activities , primarily from the coal , oil and gas sectors , sources of methane also include the ocean , flooded soils in vegetated wetlands along rivers and lakes , agriculture , such as rice cultivation , and the stomachs of ruminant livestock , including cattle .
“ It is estimated that up to 60 % of the current methane flux from land to the atmosphere is the result of human activities , ” said Abhishek Chatterjee , a carbon cycle scientist with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Similar to carbon dioxide , human activity over long time periods is increasing atmospheric methane concentrations faster than the removal from natural ‘ sinks ’ can offset it .
As human populations continue to grow , changes in energy use , agriculture and rice cultivation , livestock raising will influence methane emissions .
However , it ’ s difficult to predict future trends due to both lack of measurements and incomplete understanding of the carbon-climate feedbacks.
” Researchers are using computer models to try to build a more complete picture of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office at Goddard .
“ We have pieces that tell us about the emissions , we have pieces that tell us something about the atmospheric concentrations , and the models are basically the missing piece tying all that together and helping us understand where the methane is coming from and where it ’ s going.
” To create a global picture of methane , Ott , Chatterjee , Poulter and their colleagues used methane data from emissions inventories reported by countries , NASA field campaigns , like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) and observations from the Japanese Space Agency ’ s Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite ( GOSAT Ibuki ) and the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument aboard the European Space Agency ’ s Sentinel-5P satellite .
They combined the data sets with a computer model that estimates methane emissions based on known processes for certain land-cover types , such as wetlands .
The model also simulates the atmospheric chemistry that breaks down methane and removes it from the air .
Then they used a weather model to see how methane traveled and behaved over time while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their results shows methane ’ s ethereal movements and illuminates its complexities both in space over various landscapes and with the seasons .
Once methane emissions are lofted up into the atmosphere , high-altitude winds can transport it far beyond their sources .
When they first saw the data visualized , several locations stood out .
In South America , the Amazon River basin and its adjacent wetlands flood seasonally , creating an oxygen-deprived environment that is a significant source of methane .
Globally , about 60 % of methane emissions come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s important to understand the various human and natural sources , said Poulter .
Over Europe , the methane signal is not as strong as over the Amazon .
European methane sources are influenced by the human population and the exploration and transport of oil , gas and coal from the energy sector .
In India , rice cultivation and livestock are the two driving sources of methane .
“ Agriculture is responsible for about 20 % of global methane emissions and includes enteric fermentation , which is the processing of food in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but also includes how we manage the waste products that come from livestock and other agricultural activities , ” said Poulter .
China ’ s economic expansion and large population drive the high demand for oil , gas and coal exploration for industry as well as agriculture production , which are its underlying sources of methane .
The Arctic and high-latitude regions are responsible for about 20 % of global methane emissions .
“ What happens in the Arctic , doesn ’ t always stay in the Arctic , ” Ott said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of carbon that ’ s stored in the northern high latitudes .
One of the things scientists are really concerned about is whether or not , as the soils warm , more of that carbon could be released to the atmosphere .
Right now , what you ’ re seeing in this visualization is not very strong pulses of methane , but we ’ re watching that very closely because we know that ’ s a place that is changing rapidly and that could change dramatically over time.
” “ One of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been to reconcile the atmospheric perspective on where we think methane is being produced versus the bottom-up perspective , or how we use country-level reporting or land surface models to estimate methane emissions , ” said Poulter .
“ The visualization that we have here can help us understand this top-down and bottom-up discrepancy and help us also reduce the uncertainties in our understanding of the global methane budget by giving us visual cues and a qualitative understanding of how methane moves around the atmosphere and where it ’ s produced.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transport will also help in the planning of both future field and satellite missions .
Currently , NASA has a planned satellite called GeoCarb that will launch around 2023 to provide geostationary space-based observations of methane in the atmosphere over much of the western hemisphere .

NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
NASA’s new 3-dimensional portrait of methane concentrations shows the world’s second largest contributor to greenhouse warming, the diversity of sources on the ground, and the behavior of the gas as it moves through the atmosphere. Combining multiple data sets from emissions inventories, including fossil fuel, agricultural, biomass burning and biofuels, and simulations of wetland sources into a high-resolution computer model, researchers now have an additional tool for understanding this complex gas and its role in Earth’s carbon cycle, atmospheric composition, and climate system.
Since the Industrial Revolution, methane concentrations in the atmosphere have more than doubled. After carbon dioxide, methane is the second most influential greenhouse gas, responsible for 20 to 30% of Earth’s rising temperatures to date.
“There’s an urgency in understanding where the sources are coming from so that we can be better prepared to mitigate methane emissions where there are opportunities to do so,” said research scientist Ben Poulter at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.
A single molecule of methane is more efficient at trapping heat than a molecule of carbon dioxide, but because the lifetime of methane in the atmosphere is shorter and carbon dioxide concentrations are much higher, carbon dioxide still remains the main contributor to climate change. Methane also has many more sources than carbon dioxide, these include the energy and agricultural sectors, as well as natural sources from various types of wetlands and water bodies.
“Methane is a gas that’s produced under anaerobic conditions, so that means when there’s no oxygen available, you’ll likely find methane being produced,” said Poulter. In addition to fossil fuel activities, primarily from the coal, oil and gas sectors, sources of methane also include the ocean, flooded soils in vegetated wetlands along rivers and lakes, agriculture, such as rice cultivation, and the stomachs of ruminant livestock, including cattle.
“It is estimated that up to 60% of the current methane flux from land to the atmosphere is the result of human activities,” said Abhishek Chatterjee, a carbon cycle scientist with Universities Space Research Association based at Goddard. “Similar to carbon dioxide, human activity over long time periods is increasing atmospheric methane concentrations faster than the removal from natural ‘sinks’ can offset it. As human populations continue to grow, changes in energy use, agriculture and rice cultivation, livestock raising will influence methane emissions. However, it’s difficult to predict future trends due to both lack of measurements and incomplete understanding of the carbon-climate feedbacks.”
Researchers are using computer models to try to build a more complete picture of methane, said research meteorologist Lesley Ott with the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office at Goddard. “We have pieces that tell us about the emissions, we have pieces that tell us something about the atmospheric concentrations, and the models are basically the missing piece tying all that together and helping us understand where the methane is coming from and where it’s going.”
To create a global picture of methane, Ott, Chatterjee, Poulter and their colleagues used methane data from emissions inventories reported by countries, NASA field campaigns, like the Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) and observations from the Japanese Space Agency’s Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite (GOSAT Ibuki) and the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument aboard the European Space Agency’s Sentinel-5P satellite. They combined the data sets with a computer model that estimates methane emissions based on known processes for certain land-cover types, such as wetlands. The model also simulates the atmospheric chemistry that breaks down methane and removes it from the air. Then they used a weather model to see how methane traveled and behaved over time while in the atmosphere.
The data visualization of their results shows methane’s ethereal movements and illuminates its complexities both in space over various landscapes and with the seasons. Once methane emissions are lofted up into the atmosphere, high-altitude winds can transport it far beyond their sources.
When they first saw the data visualized, several locations stood out.
In South America, the Amazon River basin and its adjacent wetlands flood seasonally, creating an oxygen-deprived environment that is a significant source of methane. Globally, about 60% of methane emissions come from the tropics, so it’s important to understand the various human and natural sources, said Poulter.
Over Europe, the methane signal is not as strong as over the Amazon. European methane sources are influenced by the human population and the exploration and transport of oil, gas and coal from the energy sector.
In India, rice cultivation and livestock are the two driving sources of methane. “Agriculture is responsible for about 20% of global methane emissions and includes enteric fermentation, which is the processing of food in the guts of cattle, mainly, but also includes how we manage the waste products that come from livestock and other agricultural activities,” said Poulter.
China’s economic expansion and large population drive the high demand for oil, gas and coal exploration for industry as well as agriculture production, which are its underlying sources of methane.
The Arctic and high-latitude regions are responsible for about 20% of global methane emissions. “What happens in the Arctic, doesn’t always stay in the Arctic,” Ott said. “There’s a massive amount of carbon that’s stored in the northern high latitudes. One of the things scientists are really concerned about is whether or not, as the soils warm, more of that carbon could be released to the atmosphere. Right now, what you’re seeing in this visualization is not very strong pulses of methane, but we’re watching that very closely because we know that’s a place that is changing rapidly and that could change dramatically over time.”
“One of the challenges with understanding the global methane budget has been to reconcile the atmospheric perspective on where we think methane is being produced versus the bottom-up perspective, or how we use country-level reporting or land surface models to estimate methane emissions,” said Poulter. “The visualization that we have here can help us understand this top-down and bottom-up discrepancy and help us also reduce the uncertainties in our understanding of the global methane budget by giving us visual cues and a qualitative understanding of how methane moves around the atmosphere and where it’s produced.”
The model data of methane sources and transport will also help in the planning of both future field and satellite missions. Currently, NASA has a planned satellite called GeoCarb that will launch around 2023 to provide geostationary space-based observations of methane in the atmosphere over much of the western hemisphere.
###
From EurekAlert!
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-03-25--Hump Day Hilarity – The Mouse That ….Coughed

Sometimes , life imitates art .
Sometimes , the universe makes a hard left turn .
Or resident cartoonist , @ @ @ @ @ this after it was suggested on another blog .
From the Wikipedia description : The @ @ @ @ @ 1955 Cold War satirical novel by Irish American writer Leonard Wibberley , which launched a @ @ @ @ @ an imaginary country in Europe called the Duchy of Grand Fenwick .
Wibberley went beyond @ @ @ @ @ the premise to make commentaries about modern politics and world situations , including the nuclear @ @ @ @ @ in general , and the politics of the United States .
Like the work ?
@ @ @ @ @ ( though all the bars are closed ) .

Sometimes, life imitates art. Sometimes, the universe makes a hard left turn. Our resident cartoonist, Josh, came up with this after it was suggested on another blog. From the Wikipedia description:
The Mouse That Roared is a 1955 Cold War satirical novel by Irish American writer Leonard Wibberley, which launched a series of satirical books about an imaginary country in Europe called the Duchy of Grand Fenwick. Wibberley went beyond the merely comic, using the premise to make commentaries about modern politics and world situations, including the nuclear arms race, nuclear weapons in general, and the politics of the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mouse_That_Roared
The Mouse Coughs… H/t John P.A. Ioannidis via @JWSpry
https://climatism.blog/2020/03/21/corona-panic-a-fiasco-in-the-making/
Like the work? Buy Josh a pint here (though all the bars are closed).
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-03-25--Guardian: Covid-19 Teaches Us Delaying Climate Action is “Deadly”

In the minds of climate alarmists , the climate crisis is every bit as immediate and deadly as the Chinese Coronavirus epidemic .
Delay is deadly : what Covid-19 tells us about tackling the climate crisis Rightwing governments have denied the problem and been slow to act .
With coronavirus and the climate , this costs lives .
The coronavirus pandemic has brought urgency to the defining political question of our age : how to distribute risk .
As with the climate crisis , neoliberal capitalism is proving particularly ill-suited to this .
Like global warming , but in close-up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how lives are lost or saved depending on a government ’ s propensity to acknowledge risk , act rapidly to contain it , and share the consequences .
On these matters , competence and ideology overlap .
Governments willing to intervene have been more effective at stemming the virus than laissez-faire capitalists .
The further right the government , the more inclined it is to delay action and offload blame elsewhere .
International comparisons suggest this could be making infection and death rates steeper .
Take the US , where Donald Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic after weeks of claiming fears were exaggerated .
Until recently , his government put more money into shielding the oil industry than providing adequate testing kits .
He reportedly ordered officials to downplay early warnings because he did not want bad news in an election year .
The US now has one of the fastest rising numbers of new cases in the world .
In the UK , Boris Johnson acknowledged the risk , but did little about it .
Though not as extreme in his denial as Trump or Bolsonaro , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then dabbled with a policy of “ herd-immunity ” that was reportedly driven by Dominic Cummings ’ desire to protect the economy , even if it cost pensioners ’ lives .
The UK has since shifted tack and enforced a lockdown , but its controls are still haphazard .
Last week , daily deaths in the UK were reckoned to be on a steeper upward curve than Italy was at the same stage .
In Asia , China initially attempted to hide the problem from the public when the virus emerged in Wuhan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforce a strict lockdown and provide extra hospital beds .
South Korea , Taiwan and Thailand also appear to have turned the corner thanks to different combinations of extensive testing , quarantine measures and public health education .
Chinese Communists lying about an outbreak of a new disease is not a new thing .
I ’ m angry at China for lying , yet again , and I ’ m upset that many of our politicians complacently accepted China ’ s assurances .
People in all of our governments must have been aware @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lying about SARS .
Given China ’ s track record of lies and bad decisions , to uphold China as model of how to respond to a crisis is as out of touch with reality as claiming climate change is a problem .
The Covid-19 crisis only occurred because Chinese authorities silenced doctors who tried to warn people .
Early action could have stopped the virus in Wuhan .
China claims they have now contained the outbreak , but after all the lies , how can we trust anything the Chinese government says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the stable door after the horse has bolted , then trying to hide the truth .
There is a country which really does deserve praise for their response to a recent outbreak , a country which a few years ago demonstrated skill , courage and determination when dealing with a deadly disease .
That country is Nigeria .
In 2014 , a deadly Ebola outbreak which could have torn through the Nigerian capital Lagos , a city of 21 million people , was contained to 19 people , 7 of whom sadly died @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cover up what was happening , or pretend it was business as usual .
Nigerian authorities were honest , open and decisive .
Their efforts stopped the deadly 2014 Lagos outbreak in its tracks .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
In the minds of climate alarmists, the climate crisis is every bit as immediate and deadly as the Chinese Coronavirus epidemic.
Delay is deadly: what Covid-19 tells us about tackling the climate crisis
Jonathan Watts
Rightwing governments have denied the problem and been slow to act. With coronavirus and the climate, this costs lives.
The coronavirus pandemic has brought urgency to the defining political question of our age: how to distribute risk. As with the climate crisis, neoliberal capitalism is proving particularly ill-suited to this.
Like global warming, but in close-up and fast-forward, the Covid-19 outbreak shows how lives are lost or saved depending on a government’s propensity to acknowledge risk, act rapidly to contain it, and share the consequences.
On these matters, competence and ideology overlap. Governments willing to intervene have been more effective at stemming the virus than laissez-faire capitalists. The further right the government, the more inclined it is to delay action and offload blame elsewhere. International comparisons suggest this could be making infection and death rates steeper.
Take the US, where Donald Trump is only now acknowledging the seriousness of the pandemic after weeks of claiming fears were exaggerated. Until recently, his government put more money into shielding the oil industry than providing adequate testing kits. He reportedly ordered officials to downplay early warnings because he did not want bad news in an election year. The US now has one of the fastest rising numbers of new cases in the world.
…
In the UK, Boris Johnson acknowledged the risk, but did little about it. Though not as extreme in his denial as Trump or Bolsonaro, Johnson’s government first dithered, then dabbled with a policy of “herd-immunity”that was reportedly driven by Dominic Cummings’ desire to protect the economy, even if it cost pensioners’ lives. The UK has since shifted tack and enforced a lockdown, but its controls are still haphazard. Last week, daily deaths in the UK were reckoned to be on a steeper upward curve than Italy was at the same stage.
…
In Asia, China initially attempted to hide the problem from the public when the virus emerged in Wuhan, then mobilised huge public resources to enforce a strict lockdown and provide extra hospital beds. South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand also appear to have turned the corner thanks to different combinations of extensive testing, quarantine measures and public health education.
…


wattsupwiththat--2020-03-25--Astronaut Christina Koch Services a 3-D Biological Printer

In this image from Dec. 2019 , astronaut Christina Koch handles media bags that enable the manufacturing of organ-like tissues @ @ @ @ @ BFF ) , a 3-D biological printer on the International Space Station .
The BFF @ @ @ @ @ a larger system capable of manufacturing whole , fully functioning human organs from existing patient @ @ @ @ @ more about science experiments aboard the station and how it helps improve life on Earth @

Copyright Notice
Material on this website is copyright © 2006-2022, by Anthony Watts, and may not be stored or archived separately, rebroadcast, or republished without written permission. (Miriam O’Brien aka slandering “Sou” from Hotwhopper, that means you.)
For permission, contact us. See the About>Contact menu under the header.
All rights reserved worldwide.
Some material from contributors may contain additional copyrights of their respective company or organization.


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-17--Climate Change – Ebb and Flow of the Tide –Part 2 of 3

[ apologies to readers for the delay between Part 1 and Part 2 has been too long .
Because of this I am repeating the introduction .
~cr ] The topic of global warming and climate change is far more scientifically complex than the public is led to believe .
Myriads of newspaper , magazine and TV items over decades have tended to simplify the science to the point at which the general public believes that it is all so simple that any fool can see what is happening .
Public groups often accuse world leaders and scientists of being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ act on simple messages projected by individuals or public groups .
One often hears phrases like : ‘ The science is settled.
’ It is not .
Even more worrying is that the reality of the correct science is actually very different to much of the simple public perception .
An additional complicating factor is that there are political groupings wanting to change the world social order and who are using the climate change issue as a vehicle to achieve these objectives .
They want the ‘ science ’ to say what they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interested in the truth .
Sections of the public , with noble good intentions , then frequently do not realize that they are being induced by such elements to unwittingly support a political agenda , which in reality is unrelated to the climate issue .
I found myself in an informal social debate on these topics , with some people getting rather heated .
Attempts to cool the conversation temperature were not so successful .
The political aspects of the climate change issue , as always , entered into the discussion .
Points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ were made with much emotion , and UN and various government political votes on the science were referred to , as if a political vote settled the scientific facts .
Sadly , so much of the climate debate is the result of votes and not of sound science , as determined by scientific methodology and protocol which has been developed over centuries .
From the day when Archimedes ran down the street shouting ‘ Eureka , ’ science method has evolved along strict lines , highly conscious of the fact that bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ methodology and protocols are not followed .
The heated social debate , which I referred to , jumped and jolted from point to point .
One moment it was science , then politics , then economics ; all generating a rather random ‘ Brownian motion ’ of comment .
People with no scientific qualifications of any sort were claiming equal right to a scientific opinion , in competition to the opinions of those of the qualified scientists present .
A result of all this was that a few days later I wrote a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on during the discussion .
The numbered list contained science , politics and economics points and I listed them in some logical sequence , to my mind .
I emailed the list to a number of the people who were present that evening , and also to a number of other people who were interested , and it was well received .
So I later enhanced the list , and the expanded list is presented here .
It is not intended to be totally complete and it does not contain all the scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a scientific paper .
I wanted to make it easy reading .
It is also not written as a unified flowing single article , but I believe that it presents a useful guideline to the nature of the current worldwide climate debates .
These debates have huge economic consequences for all people .
Politicians , bankers and business people have significant power with respect to the national and international outcomes , but tend to be exposed largely to the daily ‘ street science ’ on the topic .
So we really do need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science into the various debates , in their correct perspective .
20 .
It has been claimed by numbers of groups of people that an Enhanced Greenhouse Effect is taking place , due to man-induced CO production , leading to Anthropogenic Global Warming ( AGW ) .
The real evidence for this is suspect and circumstantial .
21 .
What is generally meant by ‘ man-induced ’ or ‘ anthropogenic ’ CO , by those opposing CO production , is the CO that is produced by modern industry .
What is particularly targeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to produce electricity .
What are overlooked are the millions of low-income human beings who are daily cooking and heating , using wood , dung and charcoal fires , which produce considerable pollution and CO .
22 .
The modern Swedish schoolgirl phenomenon is a direct descendant of this sentiment , that only modern mankind is to blame .
One can see in many groups , such as the radical movement Extinction Rebellion , that they carry posters demanding political reorientation .
The concept of an ‘ Environmental Crisis ’ is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is therefore not surprising that many people do not want to establish the scientific truth about climate change , CO , methane , or any of the factors in the climate debate .
They don ’ t want to find a solution , because a solution would destroy their political platform for demanding their political objectives for a reorganized world order .
23 .
What is scientifically accurate is that there has been a planetary temperature rise of less than 1C since the Crimean War and US Civil War .
That has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like ; 0.8C .
Today , temperatures are measured on the ground using highly accurate electronic thermometers , accurate to a few decimal places .
Temperatures are also measured from satellites , with a great degree of accuracy .
But what was the level of sophistication of temperature measurement at the time of the Crimean War ?
The really accurate thermometers at that time were mercury-in-glass handheld thermometers .
Any accuracy of measurement , better than one degree , depended very much on the skill and experience of the person holding the thermometer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were some very skilled physicists and meteorologists who could reliably measure temperature to about a quarter of a degree , but there were not very many of them .
Also , there were no automatic temperature measuring devices , which could be left far out in the countryside , to measure daily temperatures for months , to produce a continuous representative record of a region .
Furthermore , temperatures would have been measured where the person happened to be , or where the person was prepared travel to , which would most probably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ town .
So one must wonder just how representative those Crimean War era temperature records are , when wanting to compare them to modern electronic measurements of large areas .
So , how confident are we really that the reported 0.8C rise , since Darwin published his ground-breaking book , is accurate .
If that figure is being fed into highly complex modern computer models , how confident are we about the computer output scenarios .
Even with the accurate modern ground-based thermometers there are potential problems related to the Heat Island Effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been moved in decades , during which time buildings , roads , or other activities have developed around them which have increased the localised temperatures which have been reported .
This is known as the Heat Island Effect .
25 .
In 1992 the great Rio Earth Summit took place , to much fanfare .
It was officially named the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development ( UNCED ) and was the greatest gathering of world leaders seen in the history of the planet .
It was not possible to get so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world trade , but it was possible to gather them for the environment and to ‘ save the Planet ’ .
An impressive 172 Nations were represented , with 108 heads of state arriving .
Also in attendance were nearly 10 000 journalists and interestingly 2 400 NGOs were represented .
An additional 17 000 NGO representatives attended a parallel NGO forum that provided ‘ recommendations ’ to the Earth Summit .
On 4 June journalist Paul Brown reported from Rio , in The Guardian , that during the opening ceremony of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Maurice Strong , had said : “ One part of the world can not live in an orgy of unrestrained consumption where the rest destroys its environment just to survive .
No one is immune from the effects of the other.
” Strong added that rich countries must provide more money to the developing world and cancel Third World debt .
Over years Strong has also been frequently quoted for his sentiment that : “ What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rich countries ?
In order to save the planet , the group decides : Isn ’ t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse ?
Isn ’ t it our responsibility to bring that about ?
” 26 .
So all this shows clearly that the Rio Summit , plus many subsequent offshoot meetings , did not only have the environment as a concern but that they also had an objective of rearranging structures of world power and finances .
27 .
A major fundamental in world political and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a well-known graph in economics which shows that the GDP and economic prosperity of a country is directly proportional to its energy consumption .
Thus one can see that green political objectives to control CO emissions means ; controlling economic growth .
More economic growth means more industrial output and therefore more CO .
So clearly , from a green political perspective , it is good to limit energy supply .
28 .
A way to control and limit energy supply is to advocate solar and wind power , and to go even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ household having solar panels on their roof , so that ‘ everybody contributes collectively ’ .
This also has the effect of aiming to remove large central power stations where big power resides ; big power electrically speaking and big power politically speaking .
The sentiment also explains why there are many groups who advocate moving away from fossil fuels and adopting ‘ clean energy ’ like solar and wind , but who so frequently , are also opposed to nuclear power , which emits no CO .
Nuclear power represents centres of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t want .
However , large nuclear power stations can be sited anywhere where there is adequate water cooling , whereas economic reality dictates that large wind and solar generating points have to be sited where the wind and solar conditions are ideal .
These wind and solar sites can be far from where the consumers are , particularly in large African countries .
So the dream of decentralized citizen-controlled wind and solar power production is not as easy as that may at first seem .
29 .
A very influential philosopher of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Martin Heidegger .
One of his intellectual positions was that he condemned the view of nature being considered as a mere resource for human exploitation .
He described this position in his 1954 essay “ The Question Concerning Technology ” .
In this essay he wrote : “ modern technology puts to nature the unreasonable demand that it supply energy which can be extracted and stored as such… Air is now set upon to yield nitrogen , the earth to yield ore , ore to yield uranium…to yield atomic energy.
” Heidegger then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human society to unreliable energy flows , and he praised windmills because they “ do not unlock energy in order to store it ” .
In a 1962 book “ Our Synthetic Environment ” author Murray Bookchin agreed with Heidegger and said that the goal of renewables was to turn modern industrial societies back into agrarian ones .
He said that his view : “ conjures up an image of cultural isolation and social stagnation , of a journey backward in history to the agrarian societies of the medieval and ancient worlds.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has some charm , and projects a quiet simple life , rather than a hectic , complex , modern one .
One can also see how others can advocate this lifestyle .
But they omit to mention what happens when your child desperately needs antibiotics , or emergency surgery , or when your crops fail and there is no mechanism for the importation of food .
If people want to live this way they are welcome to do so , but is it reasonable for them to try to force everyone else to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Africans be denied advanced medical care , education , and modern technology , because some moralistic first world people feel that it is better for Africans to live ‘ in harmony with nature ’ and not to have a reliable high power electricity supply .
30 .
Concentrations of CO in the atmosphere have always varied since life started to appear on the planet .
A high of 4000ppm ( parts per million ) was detected in the Cambrian period of 500 million years ago , compared to a low of 180ppm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two million years .
At the time of the presidency of Abraham Lincoln , the Earth ’ s atmospheric concentration of CO was about 280ppm and in January 2020 it measured at just over 400ppm .
In modern times , of course , CO concentrations in air can be measured with great scientific accuracy .
For the bygone periods a method used is to examine the bubbles of air that have been trapped in Arctic and Antarctic ice .
They are excellent ‘ time capsules ’ which can be dated far back in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give rather accurate results , so scientists have been able to show that atmospheric CO concentrations rose by about 12ppm , or about 4 % , during the lifetime of Queen Victoria .
So there is no scientific dispute that atmospheric CO concentrations have gone up and down dramatically during Earth ’ s history .
There is also no scientific dispute that since the Crimean War , atmospheric CO concentration has increased from about 280ppm to about 400ppm .
31 .
There is some scientific evidence that although the trapped ice bubbles give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trapped less CO than was actually present in the past .
But for now we will put that consideration aside .
If it turns out to be true it will mean that the case for CO -induced AGW is weaker , so putting the consideration aside for now will not affect the thrust of this argument .
32 .
Over the last 200 years the CO concentration has continued to rise steadily , although not on a smooth curve .
33 .
The scientifically observed global warming which has been measured since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the observed rise in atmospheric CO concentration .
However the claimed correlation ( not causality ) is not at all good .
At times , during the past two centuries , when CO concentration continued to rise , temperature did not .
34 .
Another interesting observation , which is regularly overlooked , is that there are clear indications that atmospheric temperature increase precedes CO concentration , and not the other way around .
An interesting link to this observation is that there is a huge amount of CO which is dissolved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or glossed over , is the time delay .
The oceans are so large that heating or cooling and CO release take a very long time , as much as a century .
Anybody who has used a home carbonation device to make fizzy cooldrinks knows that you always use cold water , the colder the better , because cold water absorbs much more CO than does warmer water .
So if even a shallow depth of the oceans warms by a small amount , huge amounts of CO would be expected to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lagging behind temperature change strikes one as extremely logical .
So why is this fact so skilfully ignored by the proponents of anthropogenic global warming ?
35 .
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) was set up by the UN in 1988 .
Many such initiatives are set up in a well-meaning fashion with people ’ s hearts in the right place .
No doubt the IPCC was set up in this manner .
The actual task of the IPCC , as defined by the United Nations Framework @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , originally limited their scope to examining human causes only .
It stated : - “ a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is , in addition , to natural climate variability observed over considerable time periods.
” This definition was used during the first three IPCC reports , those of 1990 , 1995 and 2001 .
The definition is fine , it states : “ over considerable time periods ” and it specifies human activity “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then in the 2007 report the definition was altered in a rather dishonest manner .
It was done , very quietly and unobtrusively in a footnote , in the Summary for Policy Makers ( SPM ) .
The footnote states : “ Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change in climate over time , whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity .
This usage differs from that in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change , where climate change refers to a change of climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere , and that is in addition to natural climate variability , observed over comparable time periods.
” So now we are in a position in which we have to view the IPCC as a political body which chooses what it will tell the world , rather than viewing it as being a scientific body which reports scientific results for other scientists to interpret in a professional manner .
( see the book : ‘ The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science ’ by Dr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brings out large scientific reports every few years .
But a few days before the scientific reports are released , a summary is released for the media , and for easy reading for governments around the world .
These summaries are called the Assessment Reports ( AR ) .
In the first few reports they were called the Summary for Policy Makers ( SPM ) .
Unfortunately the media and governments mostly do not look at the actual large detailed scientific reports ; they only look at what the AR claims that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put together by government representatives who debate and then vote on what goes into the AR .
AR1 in 1990 based its entire claim for Anthropogenic Global Warming ( AGW ) on the fact that both CO concentration and surface temperature increased during the 20th Century , even though they did not follow the same curve .
The AR assigned the significant warming of 1910 to 1940 to human activity , but did not explain why during the post-war , post 1945 boom in consumer industrialisation , there was minimal warming .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ period in the 1970s there was actually a world fear of global-cooling , while during all of that time the CO continued to increase .
37 .
In the translation from the original IPCC science reports to the summaries for the media and governments , there were instances of what can only be interpreted as intentional changes of meaning .
For example , in the 1995 science report it stated : “ While some of the pattern-base discussed here have claimed detection of a significant climate change , no study to date has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change observed to man-made causes.
” But then in the Summary for Policy Makers the lead author of Chapter 8 , Mr Benjamin Santer rewrote this statement as : “ The body of statistical evidence in chapter 8 , when examined in the context of our physical understanding of the climate system , now points to a discernible human influence on the global climate ” .
Predictably the phrase ; ‘ discernible human influence ’ became major media headline material , yet this sentiment did not even appear in the original scientific report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is important to pause to consider the difference between the terms ‘ correlation ’ and ‘ causality ’ .
These two terms are very frequently confused by people not trained in the sciences .
‘ Correlation ’ is when two or more different variables move in sync with one another , or which when drawn graphically appear to have the same or similar pattern .
‘ Causality ’ is when one can show definitely that one action causes another .
If you happen to notice fruit delivery records from a farming area , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fruit is regularly delivered to City A than to City B , it is tempting to conclude that the people in City A eat much more fruit than do those in City B .
This is a ‘ correlation ’ situation , which shows that one city seems to be absorbing five times more fruit than the other , on a regular basis .
But then you take a closer look and discover that City A is a port city and that most of the fruit delivered there is exported , and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same amount of fruit , per person , as in City B .
It all too frequently happens that people look at graphs or at records and conclude some result , or they conclude that one action causes another , when in fact it does not .
So establishing real causality is very important .
39 .
AR3 of 2001 uses the infamous Hockey Stick graph to ‘ prove ’ that human-induced global warming is happening and that it was actually far worse than imagined .
AR3 claimed to be at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were responsible for 20th Century warming .
But then Canadian scientific investigators Steven McIntyre and Ross McKitrick showed that the Hockey Stick was not only incorrect , but actually intentionally fraudulent .
After an embarrassing public exposure concerning the inaccuracy of the Hockey Stick Graph the IPCC stealthily distanced themselves from it , but this action never received anywhere near the publicity that the original false Hockey Stick claim received .
In 2007 AR4 claimed that the climate computer models showed that a doubling of CO concentration would lead to a temperature rise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IPCC was 90 % certain of this .
Half a dozen years later in 2013 , AR5 widened the uncertainty to a span of 1.5C to 4.5C but then claimed 95 % certainty .
In other words : more certainty on a less certain prediction .
Interesting move !
Interestingly both AR4 and AR5 ignored the fact that essentially no surface warming had been detected during the 21st Century .
They also ignored the absence of any significant warming in the troposphere , or the ocean record during the critical preceding 1979 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had so confidently predicted , as necessary to prove AGW .

[apologies to readers for the delay between Part 1 and Part 2 has been too long. Because of this I am repeating the introduction. ~cr]
Continued from Part 1
Emotional, agenda-driven politics confronts sound, evidence-based science
Dr Kelvin Kemm
The topic of global warming and climate change is far more scientifically complex than the public is led to believe.
Myriads of newspaper, magazine and TV items over decades have tended to simplify the science to the point at which the general public believes that it is all so simple that any fool can see what is happening. Public groups often accuse world leaders and scientists of being fools, if they do not instantly act on simple messages projected by individuals or public groups.
One often hears phrases like: ‘The science is settled.’ It is not. Even more worrying is that the reality of the correct science is actually very different to much of the simple public perception.
An additional complicating factor is that there are political groupings wanting to change the world social order and who are using the climate change issue as a vehicle to achieve these objectives. They want the ‘science’ to say what they want it to say and are not interested in the truth. Sections of the public, with noble good intentions, then frequently do not realize that they are being induced by such elements to unwittingly support a political agenda, which in reality is unrelated to the climate issue.
I found myself in an informal social debate on these topics, with some people getting rather heated. Attempts to cool the conversation temperature were not so successful. The political aspects of the climate change issue, as always, entered into the discussion. Points like: ‘saving mankind from disaster’ were made with much emotion, and UN and various government political votes on the science were referred to, as if a political vote settled the scientific facts.
Sadly, so much of the climate debate is the result of votes and not of sound science, as determined by scientific methodology and protocol which has been developed over centuries.
From the day when Archimedes ran down the street shouting ‘Eureka,’ science method has evolved along strict lines, highly conscious of the fact that bad mistakes can be made if the correct methodology and protocols are not followed.
The heated social debate, which I referred to, jumped and jolted from point to point. One moment it was science, then politics, then economics; all generating a rather random ‘Brownian motion’ of comment. People with no scientific qualifications of any sort were claiming equal right to a scientific opinion, in competition to the opinions of those of the qualified scientists present.
A result of all this was that a few days later I wrote a numbered list of points which were touched on during the discussion. The numbered list contained science, politics and economics points and I listed them in some logical sequence, to my mind. I emailed the list to a number of the people who were present that evening, and also to a number of other people who were interested, and it was well received. So I later enhanced the list, and the expanded list is presented here.
It is not intended to be totally complete and it does not contain all the scientific references that would have been inserted for a scientific paper. I wanted to make it easy reading. It is also not written as a unified flowing single article, but I believe that it presents a useful guideline to the nature of the current worldwide climate debates. These debates have huge economic consequences for all people.
Politicians, bankers and business people have significant power with respect to the national and international outcomes, but tend to be exposed largely to the daily ‘street science’ on the topic. So we really do need to get the facts and the real science into the various debates, in their correct perspective.
What about Enhanced Greenhouse Effect?
20. It has been claimed by numbers of groups of people that an Enhanced Greenhouse Effect is taking place, due to man-induced CO 2 production, leading to Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). The real evidence for this is suspect and circumstantial.
21. What is generally meant by ‘man-induced’ or ‘anthropogenic’ CO 2 , by those opposing CO 2 production, is the CO 2 that is produced by modern industry. What is particularly targeted is the CO 2 produced by fossil fuels used to produce electricity. What are overlooked are the millions of low-income human beings who are daily cooking and heating, using wood, dung and charcoal fires, which produce considerable pollution and CO 2 .
22. The modern Swedish schoolgirl phenomenon is a direct descendant of this sentiment, that only modern mankind is to blame. One can see in many groups, such as the radical movement Extinction Rebellion, that they carry posters demanding political reorientation. The concept of an ‘Environmental Crisis’ is a powerful platform for other political objectives.
It is therefore not surprising that many people do not want to establish the scientific truth about climate change, CO 2 , methane, or any of the factors in the climate debate. They don’t want to find a solution, because a solution would destroy their political platform for demanding their political objectives for a reorganized world order.
23. What is scientifically accurate is that there has been a planetary temperature rise of less than 1C since the Crimean War and US Civil War. That has been measured to be a figure something like; 0.8C. Today, temperatures are measured on the ground using highly accurate electronic thermometers, accurate to a few decimal places.
Temperatures are also measured from satellites, with a great degree of accuracy. But what was the level of sophistication of temperature measurement at the time of the Crimean War? The really accurate thermometers at that time were mercury-in-glass handheld thermometers. Any accuracy of measurement, better than one degree, depended very much on the skill and experience of the person holding the thermometer.
24. At the time there were some very skilled physicists and meteorologists who could reliably measure temperature to about a quarter of a degree, but there were not very many of them. Also, there were no automatic temperature measuring devices, which could be left far out in the countryside, to measure daily temperatures for months, to produce a continuous representative record of a region.
Furthermore, temperatures would have been measured where the person happened to be, or where the person was prepared travel to, which would most probably have been near buildings or in a town. So one must wonder just how representative those Crimean War era temperature records are, when wanting to compare them to modern electronic measurements of large areas. So, how confident are we really that the reported 0.8C rise, since Darwin published his ground-breaking book, is accurate. If that figure is being fed into highly complex modern computer models, how confident are we about the computer output scenarios.
Even with the accurate modern ground-based thermometers there are potential problems related to the Heat Island Effect. Many temperature measuring sites have not been moved in decades, during which time buildings, roads, or other activities have developed around them which have increased the localised temperatures which have been reported. This is known as the Heat Island Effect.
25. In 1992 the great Rio Earth Summit took place, to much fanfare. It was officially named the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and was the greatest gathering of world leaders seen in the history of the planet. It was not possible to get so many world leaders together for disarmament or world trade, but it was possible to gather them for the environment and to ‘save the Planet’. An impressive 172 Nations were represented, with 108 heads of state arriving.
Also in attendance were nearly 10 000 journalists and interestingly 2 400 NGOs were represented. An additional 17 000 NGO representatives attended a parallel NGO forum that provided ‘recommendations’ to the Earth Summit. On 4 June journalist Paul Brown reported from Rio, in The Guardian, that during the opening ceremony of the day before, the Conference Secretary General, Maurice Strong, had said: “One part of the world cannot live in an orgy of unrestrained consumption where the rest destroys its environment just to survive. No one is immune from the effects of the other.”
Strong added that rich countries must provide more money to the developing world and cancel Third World debt. Over years Strong has also been frequently quoted for his sentiment that: “What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
26. So all this shows clearly that the Rio Summit, plus many subsequent offshoot meetings, did not only have the environment as a concern but that they also had an objective of rearranging structures of world power and finances.
27. A major fundamental in world political and industrial power is energy. There is a well-known graph in economics which shows that the GDP and economic prosperity of a country is directly proportional to its energy consumption. Thus one can see that green political objectives to control CO 2 emissions means; controlling economic growth. More economic growth means more industrial output and therefore more CO 2 . So clearly, from a green political perspective, it is good to limit energy supply.
28. A way to control and limit energy supply is to advocate solar and wind power, and to go even further and advocate a system of every household having solar panels on their roof, so that ‘everybody contributes collectively’. This also has the effect of aiming to remove large central power stations where big power resides; big power electrically speaking and big power politically speaking.
The sentiment also explains why there are many groups who advocate moving away from fossil fuels and adopting ‘clean energy’ like solar and wind, but who so frequently, are also opposed to nuclear power, which emits no CO 2 . Nuclear power represents centres of large centralised power which they don’t want.
However, large nuclear power stations can be sited anywhere where there is adequate water cooling, whereas economic reality dictates that large wind and solar generating points have to be sited where the wind and solar conditions are ideal. These wind and solar sites can be far from where the consumers are, particularly in large African countries. So the dream of decentralized citizen-controlled wind and solar power production is not as easy as that may at first seem.
29. A very influential philosopher of the 20th century was the German, Martin Heidegger. One of his intellectual positions was that he condemned the view of nature being considered as a mere resource for human exploitation. He described this position in his 1954 essay “The Question Concerning Technology”. In this essay he wrote: “modern technology puts to nature the unreasonable demand that it supply energy which can be extracted and stored as such… Air is now set upon to yield nitrogen, the earth to yield ore, ore to yield uranium…to yield atomic energy.”
Heidegger then argued that the solution was to link human society to unreliable energy flows, and he praised windmills because they “do not unlock energy in order to store it”.
In a 1962 book “Our Synthetic Environment” author Murray Bookchin agreed with Heidegger and said that the goal of renewables was to turn modern industrial societies back into agrarian ones. He said that his view: “conjures up an image of cultural isolation and social stagnation, of a journey backward in history to the agrarian societies of the medieval and ancient worlds.”
One can see how the Heidegger sentiment has some charm, and projects a quiet simple life, rather than a hectic, complex, modern one. One can also see how others can advocate this lifestyle. But they omit to mention what happens when your child desperately needs antibiotics, or emergency surgery, or when your crops fail and there is no mechanism for the importation of food.
If people want to live this way they are welcome to do so, but is it reasonable for them to try to force everyone else to do it too. Why should millions of Africans be denied advanced medical care, education, and modern technology, because some moralistic first world people feel that it is better for Africans to live ‘in harmony with nature’ and not to have a reliable high power electricity supply.
Carbon Dioxide: Humps and Dips
30. Concentrations of CO 2 in the atmosphere have always varied since life started to appear on the planet. A high of 4000ppm (parts per million) was detected in the Cambrian period of 500 million years ago, compared to a low of 180ppm during the Quaternary Glaciation of the last two million years.
At the time of the presidency of Abraham Lincoln, the Earth’s atmospheric concentration of CO 2 was about 280ppm and in January 2020 it measured at just over 400ppm. In modern times, of course, CO 2 concentrations in air can be measured with great scientific accuracy. For the bygone periods a method used is to examine the bubbles of air that have been trapped in Arctic and Antarctic ice.
They are excellent ‘time capsules’ which can be dated far back in time. In fact the trapped bubbles give rather accurate results, so scientists have been able to show that atmospheric CO 2 concentrations rose by about 12ppm, or about 4%, during the lifetime of Queen Victoria.
So there is no scientific dispute that atmospheric CO 2 concentrations have gone up and down dramatically during Earth’s history. There is also no scientific dispute that since the Crimean War, atmospheric CO 2 concentration has increased from about 280ppm to about 400ppm.
31. There is some scientific evidence that although the trapped ice bubbles give very accurate readings, they may have trapped less CO 2 than was actually present in the past. But for now we will put that consideration aside. If it turns out to be true it will mean that the case for CO 2 -induced AGW is weaker, so putting the consideration aside for now will not affect the thrust of this argument.
32. Over the last 200 years the CO 2 concentration has continued to rise steadily, although not on a smooth curve.
33. The scientifically observed global warming which has been measured since the time of Lincoln is attributed by some to the observed rise in atmospheric CO 2 concentration. However the claimed correlation (not causality) is not at all good.
At times, during the past two centuries, when CO 2 concentration continued to rise, temperature did not.
34. Another interesting observation, which is regularly overlooked, is that there are clear indications that atmospheric temperature increase precedes CO 2 concentration, and not the other way around. An interesting link to this observation is that there is a huge amount of CO 2 which is dissolved into the oceans. Another factor ignored or glossed over, is the time delay. The oceans are so large that heating or cooling and CO 2 release take a very long time, as much as a century.
Anybody who has used a home carbonation device to make fizzy cooldrinks knows that you always use cold water, the colder the better, because cold water absorbs much more CO 2 than does warmer water. So if even a shallow depth of the oceans warms by a small amount, huge amounts of CO 2 would be expected to be released. So CO 2 atmospheric concentration lagging behind temperature change strikes one as extremely logical. So why is this fact so skilfully ignored by the proponents of anthropogenic global warming?
35. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was set up by the UN in 1988. Many such initiatives are set up in a well-meaning fashion with people’s hearts in the right place. No doubt the IPCC was set up in this manner. The actual task of the IPCC, as defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), originally limited their scope to examining human causes only.
It stated:-“a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is, in addition, to natural climate variability observed over considerable time periods.”
This definition was used during the first three IPCC reports, those of 1990, 1995 and 2001. The definition is fine, it states:“over considerable time periods” and it specifies human activity “in addition” to natural. But then in the 2007 report the definition was altered in a rather dishonest manner. It was done, very quietly and unobtrusively in a footnote, in the Summary for Policy Makers (SPM). The footnote states:
“Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. This usage differs from that in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, where climate change refers to a change of climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere, and that is in addition to natural climate variability, observed over comparable time periods.”
So now we are in a position in which we have to view the IPCC as a political body which chooses what it will tell the world, rather than viewing it as being a scientific body which reports scientific results for other scientists to interpret in a professional manner. (see the book: ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science’ by Dr Tim Ball)
36. The IPCC brings out large scientific reports every few years. But a few days before the scientific reports are released, a summary is released for the media, and for easy reading for governments around the world. These summaries are called the Assessment Reports (AR). In the first few reports they were called the Summary for Policy Makers (SPM). Unfortunately the media and governments mostly do not look at the actual large detailed scientific reports; they only look at what the AR claims that the scientific report says.
The AR is put together by government representatives who debate and then vote on what goes into the AR. AR1 in 1990 based its entire claim for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) on the fact that both CO 2 concentration and surface temperature increased during the 20th Century, even though they did not follow the same curve.
The AR assigned the significant warming of 1910 to 1940 to human activity, but did not explain why during the post-war, post 1945 boom in consumer industrialisation, there was minimal warming. It also does not explain why for a period in the 1970s there was actually a world fear of global-cooling, while during all of that time the CO 2 continued to increase.
37. In the translation from the original IPCC science reports to the summaries for the media and governments, there were instances of what can only be interpreted as intentional changes of meaning. For example, in the 1995 science report it stated: “While some of the pattern-base discussed here have claimed detection of a significant climate change, no study to date has positively attributed all or part of climate change observed to man-made causes.”
But then in the Summary for Policy Makers the lead author of Chapter 8, Mr Benjamin Santer rewrote this statement as: “The body of statistical evidence in chapter 8, when examined in the context of our physical understanding of the climate system, now points to a discernible human influence on the global climate”. Predictably the phrase; ‘discernible human influence’ became major media headline material, yet this sentiment did not even appear in the original scientific report.
38. At this point it is important to pause to consider the difference between the terms ‘correlation’ and ‘causality’. These two terms are very frequently confused by people not trained in the sciences. ‘Correlation’ is when two or more different variables move in sync with one another, or which when drawn graphically appear to have the same or similar pattern. ‘Causality’ is when one can show definitely that one action causes another.
If you happen to notice fruit delivery records from a farming area, and you see that five times more fruit is regularly delivered to City A than to City B, it is tempting to conclude that the people in City A eat much more fruit than do those in City B. This is a ‘correlation’ situation, which shows that one city seems to be absorbing five times more fruit than the other, on a regular basis.
But then you take a closer look and discover that City A is a port city and that most of the fruit delivered there is exported, and in fact the people living there eat exactly the same amount of fruit, per person, as in City B. It all too frequently happens that people look at graphs or at records and conclude some result, or they conclude that one action causes another, when in fact it does not. So establishing real causality is very important.
39. AR3 of 2001 uses the infamous Hockey Stick graph to ‘prove’ that human-induced global warming is happening and that it was actually far worse than imagined. AR3 claimed to be at least 66% certain that greenhouse gas emissions were responsible for 20th Century warming. But then Canadian scientific investigators Steven McIntyre and Ross McKitrick showed that the Hockey Stick was not only incorrect, but actually intentionally fraudulent.
After an embarrassing public exposure concerning the inaccuracy of the Hockey Stick Graph the IPCC stealthily distanced themselves from it, but this action never received anywhere near the publicity that the original false Hockey Stick claim received.
In 2007 AR4 claimed that the climate computer models showed that a doubling of CO 2 concentration would lead to a temperature rise of 2.0C to 4.5C and that the IPCC was 90% certain of this. Half a dozen years later in 2013, AR5 widened the uncertainty to a span of 1.5C to 4.5C but then claimed 95% certainty. In other words: more certainty on a less certain prediction. Interesting move!
Interestingly both AR4 and AR5 ignored the fact that essentially no surface warming had been detected during the 21st Century. They also ignored the absence of any significant warming in the troposphere, or the ocean record during the critical preceding 1979 to 1997 period, which many computer models had so confidently predicted, as necessary to prove AGW.
5 1 vote Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-16--A new method for correcting systematic errors in ocean subsurface data

A homogeneous , consistent , high-quality in situ temperature data set covering some decades in time is crucial for the detection of climate changes in the ocean .
Systematic errors in the global archive of temperature profiles pose a significant problem for the estimation and monitoring of the global ocean heat content , a most reliable indicator of climate change .
During almost four decades between 1940-1970s the majority of temperature observations in the ocean within the upper 200 meters was obtained by means of mechanical bathythermographs ( MBT ) .
Actually MBT contributes to 68 % of ocean subsurface @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Viktor Gouretski and Lijing Cheng from the Institute for Atmospheric Physics , Beijing , published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology investigates the quality of MBT data by comparing these data with reference profiles obtained by means of Nansen bottle casts and Conductivity-Temperature-Depth profilers ( CTD ) .
This comparison reveals significant systematic errors in MBT data .
The MBT temperature bias is as large as 0.2°C before 1980 on the global average and reduces to less than 0.1°C after 1980 .
To eliminate this bias from the original data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data is derived , where the MBT correction is country- , depth , and time- dependent .
Several bias correction schemes were tested .
In order to objectively assess the performance of the schemes , four metrics were introduced and for each correction scheme and bias reduction factors were calculated .
The scheme accounting for the depth bias and the thermal bias showed the best performance significantly reducing the original bias .
Further , the new MBT correction scheme suggests a better performance compared with three MBT correction schemes proposed earlier in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of America and Germany ) .
The reduction of the biases increases the homogeneity of the global ocean database being mostly important for climate change related studies , such as the improved estimation of the ocean heat content changes .
“ This new technique will be used in IAP ocean gridded temperature product and ocean heat content estimate in 2020.
” said CHENG , “ We expect it to significantly improve their quality during the 1940-1970 period.
” This study is funded by National Key R & D Program ( 2016YFC1401800 and 2017YFA0603202 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CAS ) President ’ s International Fellowship Initiative ( PIFI ) .

News Release 8-Apr-2020
IMAGE: Ocean heat content is a most reliable indicator of climate change. view more Credit: Jiang Zhu
A homogeneous, consistent, high-quality in situ temperature data set covering some decades in time is crucial for the detection of climate changes in the ocean.
Systematic errors in the global archive of temperature profiles pose a significant problem for the estimation and monitoring of the global ocean heat content, a most reliable indicator of climate change. During almost four decades between 1940-1970s the majority of temperature observations in the ocean within the upper 200 meters was obtained by means of mechanical bathythermographs (MBT). Actually MBT contributes to 68% of ocean subsurface data within 1940-1966.
The new study by Viktor Gouretski and Lijing Cheng from the Institute for Atmospheric Physics, Beijing, published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology investigates the quality of MBT data by comparing these data with reference profiles obtained by means of Nansen bottle casts and Conductivity-Temperature-Depth profilers (CTD).
This comparison reveals significant systematic errors in MBT data. The MBT temperature bias is as large as 0.2°C before 1980 on the global average and reduces to less than 0.1°C after 1980. To eliminate this bias from the original data a new empirical correction scheme for MBT data is derived, where the MBT correction is country-, depth, and time- dependent.
Several bias correction schemes were tested. In order to objectively assess the performance of the schemes, four metrics were introduced and for each correction scheme and bias reduction factors were calculated. The scheme accounting for the depth bias and the thermal bias showed the best performance significantly reducing the original bias. Further, the new MBT correction scheme suggests a better performance compared with three MBT correction schemes proposed earlier in the literature (from Japan, United States of America and Germany).
The reduction of the biases increases the homogeneity of the global ocean database being mostly important for climate change related studies, such as the improved estimation of the ocean heat content changes.
“This new technique will be used in IAP ocean gridded temperature product and ocean heat content estimate in 2020.” said CHENG, “We expect it to significantly improve their quality during the 1940-1970 period.”
This study is funded by National Key R&D Program (2016YFC1401800 and 2017YFA0603202) and Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) President’s International Fellowship Initiative (PIFI).
###
From EurekAlert!
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-17--Kepler-1649c: Earth-Size, Habitable Zone Planet Hides in Plain Sight

A team of transatlantic scientists , using reanalyzed data from NASA ’ s Kepler space telescope , has discovered an @ @ @ @ @ star ’ s habitable zone , the area around a star where a rocky planet @ @ @ @ @ Scientists discovered this planet , called Kepler-1649c , when looking through old observations from Kepler @ @ @ @ @ in 2018 .
While previous searches with a computer algorithm misidentified it , researchers reviewing @ @ @ @ @ look at the signature and recognized it as a planet .
Out of all the @ @ @ @ @ this distant world – located 300 light-years from Earth – is most similar to Earth @ @ @ @ @ .
This artist ’ s illustration shows what Kepler-1649c could look like from its surface @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Reddit Ask Me Anything on Friday , April 17 , from 2:00 to @ @ @ @ @ participate , go to : https : //www.reddit.com/r/space/

From NASA
April 16, 2020
A team of transatlantic scientists, using reanalyzed data from NASA’s Kepler space telescope, has discovered an Earth-size exoplanet orbiting in its star’s habitable zone, the area around a star where a rocky planet could support liquid water.
Scientists discovered this planet, called Kepler-1649c, when looking through old observations from Kepler, which the agency retired in 2018. While previous searches with a computer algorithm misidentified it, researchers reviewing Kepler data took a second look at the signature and recognized it as a planet. Out of all the exoplanets found by Kepler, this distant world – located 300 light-years from Earth – is most similar to Earth in size and estimated temperature.
This artist’s illustration shows what Kepler-1649c could look like from its surface.
Learn more at NASA’s Reddit Ask Me Anything on Friday, April 17, from 2:00 to 3:30 p.m. EDT. To participate, go to: https://www.reddit.com/r/space/
Image Credit: NASA/Ames Research Center/Daniel Rutter Last Updated: April 16, 2020 Editor: Yvette Smith
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...


wattsupwiththat--2020-04-17--Very Large Telescope sees star dance around supermassive black hole, proves Einstein right

Observations made with ESO ’ s Very Large Telescope ( VLT ) have revealed for the first time that a star orbiting the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way moves just as predicted by Einstein ’ s theory of general relativity .
Its orbit is shaped like a rosette and not like an ellipse as predicted by Newton ’ s theory of gravity .
This effect , known as Schwarzschild precession , had never before been measured for a star around a supermassive black hole .
This artist ’ s impression illustrates the precession of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effect exaggerated for easier visualisation .
Credit : ESO/L .
Calçada Observations made with ESO ’ s Very Large Telescope ( VLT ) have revealed for the first time that a star orbiting the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way moves just as predicted by Einstein ’ s general theory of relativity .
Its orbit is shaped like a rosette and not like an ellipse as predicted by Newton ’ s theory of gravity .
This long-sought-after result was made possible by increasingly precise measurements over nearly 30 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mysteries of the behemoth lurking at the heart of our galaxy .
“ Einstein ’ s General Relativity predicts that bound orbits of one object around another are not closed , as in Newtonian Gravity , but precess forwards in the plane of motion .
This famous effect—first seen in the orbit of the planet Mercury around the Sun—was the first evidence in favour of General Relativity .
One hundred years later we have now detected the same effect in the motion of a star orbiting the compact radio source Sagittarius A* @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This observational breakthrough strengthens the evidence that Sagittarius A* must be a supermassive black hole of 4 million times the mass of the Sun , ” says Reinhard Genzel , Director at the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics ( MPE ) in Garching , Germany and the architect of the 30-year-long programme that led to this result .
Located 26 000 light-years from the Sun , Sagittarius A* and the dense cluster of stars around it provide a unique laboratory for testing physics in an otherwise unexplored and extreme regime of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ S2 , sweeps in towards the supermassive black hole to a closest distance less than 20 billion kilometres ( one hundred and twenty times the distance between the Sun and Earth ) , making it one of the closest stars ever found in orbit around the massive giant .
At its closest approach to the black hole , S2 is hurtling through space at almost three percent of the speed of light , completing an orbit once every 16 years .
“ After following the star in its orbit for over two and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ robustly detect S2 ’ s Schwarzschild precession in its path around Sagittarius A* , ” says Stefan Gillessen of the MPE , who led the analysis of the measurements published today in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics .
Most stars and planets have a non-circular orbit and therefore move closer to and further away from the object they are rotating around .
S2 ’ s orbit precesses , meaning that the location of its closest point to the supermassive black hole changes with each turn , such that the next orbit is rotated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creating a rosette shape .
General Relativity provides a precise prediction of how much its orbit changes and the latest measurements from this research exactly match the theory .
This effect , known as Schwarzschild precession , had never before been measured for a star around a supermassive black hole .
The study with ESO ’ s VLT also helps scientists learn more about the vicinity of the supermassive black hole at the centre of our galaxy .
“ Because the S2 measurements follow General Relativity so well , we can set stringent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as distributed dark matter or possible smaller black holes , is present around Sagittarius A* .
This is of great interest for understanding the formation and evolution of supermassive black holes , ” say Guy Perrin and Karine Perraut , the French lead scientists of the project .
This result is the culmination of 27 years of observations of the S2 star using , for the best part of this time , a fleet of instruments at ESO ’ s VLT , located in the Atacama Desert in Chile .
The number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s position and velocity attests to the thoroughness and accuracy of the new research : the team made over 330 measurements in total , using the GRAVITY , SINFONI and NACO instruments .
Because S2 takes years to orbit the supermassive black hole , it was crucial to follow the star for close to three decades , to unravel the intricacies of its orbital movement .

From phys.org
by ESO
Observations made with ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT) have revealed for the first time that a star orbiting the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way moves just as predicted by Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Its orbit is shaped like a rosette and not like an ellipse as predicted by Newton’s theory of gravity. This effect, known as Schwarzschild precession, had never before been measured for a star around a supermassive black hole. This artist’s impression illustrates the precession of the star’s orbit, with the effect exaggerated for easier visualisation. Credit: ESO/L. Calçada
Observations made with ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT) have revealed for the first time that a star orbiting the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way moves just as predicted by Einstein’s general theory of relativity. Its orbit is shaped like a rosette and not like an ellipse as predicted by Newton’s theory of gravity. This long-sought-after result was made possible by increasingly precise measurements over nearly 30 years, which have enabled scientists to unlock the mysteries of the behemoth lurking at the heart of our galaxy.
“Einstein’s General Relativity predicts that bound orbits of one object around another are not closed, as in Newtonian Gravity, but precess forwards in the plane of motion. This famous effect—first seen in the orbit of the planet Mercury around the Sun—was the first evidence in favour of General Relativity. One hundred years later we have now detected the same effect in the motion of a star orbiting the compact radio source Sagittarius A* at the centre of the Milky Way. This observational breakthrough strengthens the evidence that Sagittarius A* must be a supermassive black hole of 4 million times the mass of the Sun,” says Reinhard Genzel, Director at the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics (MPE) in Garching, Germany and the architect of the 30-year-long programme that led to this result.
Located 26 000 light-years from the Sun, Sagittarius A* and the dense cluster of stars around it provide a unique laboratory for testing physics in an otherwise unexplored and extreme regime of gravity. One of these stars, S2, sweeps in towards the supermassive black hole to a closest distance less than 20 billion kilometres (one hundred and twenty times the distance between the Sun and Earth), making it one of the closest stars ever found in orbit around the massive giant. At its closest approach to the black hole, S2 is hurtling through space at almost three percent of the speed of light, completing an orbit once every 16 years. “After following the star in its orbit for over two and a half decades, our exquisite measurements robustly detect S2’s Schwarzschild precession in its path around Sagittarius A*,” says Stefan Gillessen of the MPE, who led the analysis of the measurements published today in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics.
Most stars and planets have a non-circular orbit and therefore move closer to and further away from the object they are rotating around. S2’s orbit precesses, meaning that the location of its closest point to the supermassive black hole changes with each turn, such that the next orbit is rotated with regard to the previous one, creating a rosette shape. General Relativity provides a precise prediction of how much its orbit changes and the latest measurements from this research exactly match the theory. This effect, known as Schwarzschild precession, had never before been measured for a star around a supermassive black hole.
The study with ESO’s VLT also helps scientists learn more about the vicinity of the supermassive black hole at the centre of our galaxy. “Because the S2 measurements follow General Relativity so well, we can set stringent limits on how much invisible material, such as distributed dark matter or possible smaller black holes, is present around Sagittarius A*. This is of great interest for understanding the formation and evolution of supermassive black holes,” say Guy Perrin and Karine Perraut, the French lead scientists of the project.
This result is the culmination of 27 years of observations of the S2 star using, for the best part of this time, a fleet of instruments at ESO’s VLT, located in the Atacama Desert in Chile. The number of data points marking the star’s position and velocity attests to the thoroughness and accuracy of the new research: the team made over 330 measurements in total, using the GRAVITY, SINFONI and NACO instruments. Because S2 takes years to orbit the supermassive black hole, it was crucial to follow the star for close to three decades, to unravel the intricacies of its orbital movement.
Full article here
0 0 votes Article Rating
Share this: Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
GETTR
Telegram
Like this: Like Loading...