Climate change news


The Lindzen paper, it seems, found that climate models are routinely exagerating climate sensitivity. It was accepted for publication on May 22nd and was written by Richard Lindzen of MIT and Song Choi of Seoul. All climate models rely on the hypothesis of feedback increasing the warming effect, the idea being that water vapour increases with rising temperatures so as to inhibit infrared cooling. Clouds become less reflective and cause increased solar absorption and therefore further and deeper amounts of warming.

An alarmist throat hold on information

This story can be seen at .... (see also June 10th) ... Professor Richard Lindzen is not flavour of the month with AGW alarmists. It seems he alarms the climate science fraternity and their political lackeys - inside science and not just in government.

All things green and wonderful

At (or at simply June 6th) there is an interesting post by Doug Keenan on a paper by Koutsoyiannis which seems to show little empirical evidence of rising global temperatures and that the case supporting AGW rests almost entirely on computer simulation - but everybody knows that already. Basically, IPCC climate scientists make an assumption known as ARI - derived from the statistical concept of 'first order autoregression'.


Willis Eschenbach at raises an interesting point. Extinction events in the past have involved lots of dead bodies and fossils in rocks - but where are the dead bodies of the modern AGW induced extinction event?

The Hockey just won't go away

This story is at is by Willis Eschenbach. It homes in on the hockey stick climate model which seems to have a life of its own. In spite of being discredited over and over again it keeps on sparking back into life. Why? That is the question Eschenbach seeks to answer.

Games people Play

The Los Angeles Times in 1979 quoted two scientists ( a professor of engineering and a research scientist in geochemistry) that had taken an interest in past, present, and future climate trends. They predicted, in one of those eerie prophecies, that 1980-2000 would be much warmer than 1950-1980 - but this would be followed by cooling. This is exactly what has happened - so far. They used past proxy climate data, such as ice cores and tree rings, to reach their conclusion. This is just like alarmist AGW climate scientists that claim to use similar data.

AGW claim of no MWP in the southern hemisphere is debunked ... again

At ... this post is based on a paper published last week in PNAS on research in South America and appears to show, and indeed it does show quite transparently that warmth in the northern hemisphere coincides remarkably well with lower precipitation in the Peruvian Andes. A sediment core taken from a lake displays evidence of big swings in rainfall levels.

The oceans and the climate - a new study

This story occurs at May 20th and Pierre Gosselin is faintly sarcastic in his description of a new study just published by Nature that says the oceans play a role in climate that is still not understood. In a cynical post he casts a jaundiced eye on the surprise expressed by the climate scientists - his take on their enthusiastic description of previously unknown fluctuations of currents and ocean temperatures in the tropical Atlantic.

Biogas ... the latest green dream going bottom up

The story is at May 19th, 'German Biogas plants produce deadly botulism - could be catastrophic to wildlife' - the wildlife element comes in as the story was blown by a shooting and country magazine. It seems the push to produce green electricity via biogas is looking hazardous. The lid has been kept on the subject for 10 years - by politics and by environmentalists.

The ozone hole is off the radar - why?

The discovery of an ozone hole a couple of weeks ago was all over the doomsaying news - but not anymore. Why? Its because the ozone hole has gone away (see May 18th). EM Smith suggests the ozone hole is driven by external forces such as UV from the Sun, Birkeland currents from the Sun, and possibly even cosmic ray variations. He says it seems to have nothing whatsoever to do with the distribution of gases in the upper atmosphere - such as CFCs.