All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at:
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at:
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at:

Sunday, 2 October 2011


 by Vincent Gray


I came across this revealing statement on page 247 of the Third Report (2001). paragraph 4.1.4. Chapter  4

      "The atmospheric lifetime is truly a scale factor relating (i) constant emissions (Tg/yr) to a steady-state burden  (Tg), or (ii) an emission pulse (Tg) to the time-integrated burden of that pulse (Tg-yr). The lifetime is often implicitly assumed to be constant, independent of the sources, and is likewise assumed to represent the decay time (e-fold) of a perturbation.  These assumptions apply rigorously only for a gas whose local chemical lifetime is constant in space and time such as for the radioactive noble gas radon, whose lifetime is a fixed nuclear property. In such a case the mean atmospheric lifetime equals the local lifetime: the lifetime that relates global emissions to the global burden is exactly the decay time of a perturbation.  
     This general applicability of the atmospheric lifetime breaks down for greenhouse gases and criteria pollutants whose chemical losses vary in space and time.  NOx, for instance, has a local lifetime of <1 d in the lower troposphere, but >5 d in the upper troposphere; and both times are less than the time required for vertical mixing of the troposphere. In this case emission of NOx into the upper troposphere will produce a larger atmospheric burden than the same emission into the lower troposphere. As a consequence the definition of the atmospheric lifetime of NOx is not unique and depends on the location (and season) of its emissions. The same is true for any gas whose local lifetime is variable and on average shorter than about 0.5 yr, the decay time of a north-south difference between hemispheres and one of the longer time scales for tropospheric mixing.  The majority of greenhouse gases considered here have atmospheric lifetimes greater than 2 yr, much longer than tropospheric mixing times; and hence their lifetimes are not significantly altered by the location of sources within the troposphere. When lifetimes are reported for gases in Table 4.0, it is assumed that the gases are uniformly mixed throughout the troposphere.  This assumption is unlikely for gases with lifetimes <1 yr, "and reported values must be viewed only as approximations."  (My emphasis)

This shows why they are so concerned to fiddle the measured results  of gas concentrtations to try and argue they are "well-mixed" and  have no variability. So all results they don't like are  suppressed as "noise", the many previous results, publicised by Beck, are suppressed, and measurements over land surfaces are forbidden. There is overwhelming evidence that none of the gases are "well-mixed", so all of the Global Warming figures are Phoney.

 The Global Warming Potential of Methane used by the NZ Ministry of Environment at

puts the Global Warming Potentials (100yr basis) of Methane at 21 and N2O as 310

This appears to be based on the Third IPCC Report (2001)

However, the  2007 Fourth Report has increased the 100yr value to 25 for CH4 and reduced  to 298 for N2O.  (page 212   Table 2.9 chapter 2).  as follows

 Have they changed to the new value?


Vincent Gray

"To kill an error is as good a service as, and sometimes better than, the establishing of a new truth or fact"     Charles Darwin


  1. There is a parallel to Charles Darwin among Insurance Surveyors in determining the proportion of risk between events that are unforeseen and those that may be likely to occur. Where a theory is not supported by the facts, then try a new theory.
    Clearly, the computer modeling that spawned the theories to launch the carbon tax remain unsupported by the facts. That climate change is indeed real with its cycles of naturally occurring extremes from one period in time to another has, to my knowledge and experiences, been selectively distorted to direct constant and repetitive attention to human causes. A psychological ploy of Goebbels ( The Nuremberg Files, 1934)
    The lie is evident as this reply is being written. Huge bushfires around the Alice and 1000 sq miles of the inaccessible ponderosa pines aflame in Arizona are spewing thousands of tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere every hour. The remains of Doug Mawson's snow tractor in Antarctica, last seen as the ice cover receded in 1931 and again in 2004-5 is again iced out of sight. It is fact, the cold wind shear from the South these past weeks has delayed budburst on my fraxinus aurea by one month. Will computer modeling tell me when for budburst in the future?

  2. It's dangerous to stick your head in the sand when sea levels are rising.
    Sir Douglas Mawson

    The best thing about improvements in health care is that all the hyper-ventilating climate disruption deniers are now going to live long enough to see how wrong they were.

    Denialists of a feather stick together.

    Denialism is just a fad whose followers will sadly find themselves mugged by the sting of reality.


  3. Spot on Yori. Hear is a post on the deniers:

    The sooner we rid the world of the deniers, the better off the world will be.


All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!