Saturday, 26 March 2011

Reputable Scientists and Flim Flam Men

Andrew Bolt interviewed Tim Flannery on Friday. (Link in title)

Flannery made some amazing admissions.
Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery joins us - but refuses to say by how much the world’s temperature will fall thanks to Julia Gillard’s global warming policies. Later he concedes that even if the whole world slashes its emissions we won’t know what difference it will make for maybe a thousand years. Doesn’t sound like much of a deal to me. 
Tim Flannery
Not much of a difference. And not for maybe a thousand years. Perhaps, after his previous predictions have all been shown to be wrong, he will only make predictions well into the future when we are all gone.

Andrew said that he wouldn't go into past history.

In Dec 09,  on ABC, Mr Flannery said: "“Trust is the issue ... Would you trust Andrew Bolt on climate change?” Well, would anyone trust Tim Flannery?
  • In March 2008, Flannery warned that “the water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by early 2009”.
  • In June 2007, he warned that Brisbane’s “water supplies are so low they need desalinated water urgently, possibly in as little as 18 months” It was because of predictions like this that Wivenhoe dam was overfull before the disastrous Queensland floods this year.
  • In 2005, he predicted Sydney’s dams could be dry by 2007. 
  • In 2004, Flannery said global warming would cause such droughts that “there is a fair chance Perth will be the 21st century’s first ghost metropolis”. 
  • In 2008, Flannery warned that scientists feared “this may be the Arctic’s first ice-free year”.
Not a correct prediction in any of his predictions. Although his book, the Weather Makers came out after the MBH98 Hockey Stick had been exposed as fraudulent. Tim Flannery still included it in the book. Do you think that was reputable, Mr Flannery?

Flannery agreed that Julia Gillard was wrong to say that every reputable climate scientist backs her view of man-made warming. Flannery admitted that Richard Lindzen was reputable but inferred that John Christy, The two Roger Pielkes were not.

Let's look at John Christy. From Wikipedia:
Christy received a B.A. in Mathematics (1973) from the California State University, Fresno, and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences (1984, 1987) from the University of Illinois. He is a distinguished professor of atmospheric science, and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He was appointed Alabama's state climatologist in 2000. For his development of a global temperature data set from satellites he was awarded NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement, and the American Meteorological Society's "Special Award."[3] In 2002, Christy was elected Fellow of the American Meteorological Society. John is a former lead author for the IPCC's assessment reports.
If you look at Flannery's failures and Christy's achievements, Flannery calling John Christy disreputable is quite frankly pathetic!


MARCH 26th 2011

Vincent Gray. IPCC Lead Author

I pointed out in Newsletter No 264 that the real greenhouse effect  is the mechanism whereby the atmosphere cools the earth. A greenhouse merely inhibits this mechanism by preventing complete mixing of the air inside it. It cools the earth by day and warms it at night

The amount of net cooling is part of the "Earth's Energy Budget" but the amount is so uncertain that we are unable at present to find whether it is increasing or falling, or to what extent it is influenced by human activity.

The warmth of a greenhouse does not depend on the warming of the air by absorption of infra red radiation  by atmospheric trace gases. So the use of the  terms "Greenhouse Effect"and Greenhouse Gases  is deliberately misleading. This is the Fake Greenhouse Effect .

The origin of the term is ascribed by the Oxford English Dictionary to Glen Thomas Trewartha (1937)

<1937 “The so-called greenhouse effect of the atmosphere.”—Introduction to Weather & Climate by G. T. Trewartha, i. page 25> [[OED’s earliest quote]]

The absorption of infra red by atmospheric trace gases  was discovered by Tyndall in the 1860s. He  found that the most important trace gas was carbon dioxide

Arrhenius (1896) attempted to involve carbon dioxide but a careful reading of his paper showed that he failed to do this.

He did not make measurements himself but relied on the measurements of Langley on radiation from the moon. When compared with the radiation from the earth he claimed to be able to find the absorption from trace gases. This procedure is dubious for a number of reasons

  • He seems to have missed the predominant proportion of water vapour in the atmosphere and thus assumed that most of the absorption was caused by carbon dioxide. He does report some aberrant results but ignores them. One can only conclude that he must have been confused by the extremely variable distribution of water vapour in the atmosphere.
  • He depended on radiation from the full moon and the full earth. Night radiation is ignored
  •  He says "Now the temperature of the moon is nearly the same as that of the earth."
It is unclear what was found by Langley, but this is so far wrong that it is difficult to accept that the two infra red spectra coming from surfaces at very different temperatures can be directly compared in this way
Arrhenius' paper should not be accepted as a useful contribution to the idea that atmospheric carbon dioxide warms the earth, as he subsequently admitted.

So what is this theory dependent on?  It is supposed to depend on the concentration of trace gases in the atmosphere with absorption bands in the infra red

The concentration of water vapour in the atmosphere is extremely variable and estimates of its mean value are not published, so the chance of finding out whether it is increasing or decreasing, or whether it is influenced by humans are poor. Most authorities give a range of 0 to 4% with a reluctant mean of about 2.5%. This is  650 times the supposed concentration of carbon dioxide,  which is 0.0383 %.

Although it might be considered so concentrated that it saturates most of its absorption bands, it is also so variable that there would still be regions susceptible to increases in concentration.

It is clear that changes in water vapour concentration swamp any changes in carbon dioxide. Yet there are no calculations of "Radiative Forcing"or "Climate Sensitivity" for water vapour. It is just assumed to  be a "feedback" to temperature increases caused by the minor absorbing gas , carbon dioxide

The water vapour is assumed to have a constant relative humidity. There are very few weather stations in the world that measure carbon dioxide, but almost all of them measure relative humidity and they show that it is not a constant. The assumption of "feedback" is just plain wrong.

The measurements of carbon dioxide concentration also need to be questioned. The 40,000 measurements made by many observers between 1850 and 1958 and published in respectable scientific journals have just been suppressed, as have most contemporary measurements which do not comply with strict requirements over the ocean.  Measurements over land are almost non existent.

The sparse literature shows that concentrations are higher over industrial areas and lower over forests and pastures. Since the supposed "radiative forcing" depends on the logarithm of concentration it is less effective over industrial areas where it is claimed to promote warming and most effective over forests and pastures where it promotes plant growth.

The only conclusion is that the fake greenhouse effect is a fake,


Vincent Gray

Alarming Report - Greenland Melting

There is a lot of water in this world -323,722,000 cubic miles of it in the oceans alone-and there is more coming.
According to Dr. Hans Ahlmann, a Swedish geophysicist, a mysterious warming of the Arctic climate is melting the Arctic ice, including the vast Greenland ice-cap. As this ice melts, water is pouring into the ocean and raising the sea level at what geologists regard as a dizzy rate.

Dr. Ahlmann told the Geophysical Institute of the University of California that the ocean level in the Spitzbergen area had risen one inch in thc last 25 years. He said that if the ice areas continued melting at the present rate, the ocean surface would rise to catastrophic proportions and peoples living in lowlands bordering the seashores would be inundated.
"The Arctic change is so serious that I hope an international agency can speedily be formed to study conditions on a global basis," he said.

This report is from the Perth Sunday Times, Sunday 22 June, 1947.

Everything old is new again!  
Thanks to Steve Goddard's Real Science.

Lights on for "Earth Hour".

A statement by Viv Forbes, Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition.
For Immediate Release, 25 March 2011

The Carbon Sense Coalition said today that celebrating “Blackout Night” at the time of the March equinox, half-way between mid-summer and mid-winter in both hemispheres, shows that "Earth Hour" is nothing more than green tokenism.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that this date, with the sun exactly on the equator, was cynically placed on the mildest night of the year to ensure that the candles and champagne parties are unlikely to be inconvenienced by summer heat or winter snow.

"Sensible people know that the sun, the planets and the seasons control earth's cycles of weather and climate, and they appreciate man's magic of electricity which allows them to moderate nature's periodic extremes of heat and cold at the flick of a switch.

“Instead of sneering at human achievements, they should salute the people who provide light, heat and cooling for the other 364 days of the year.

“Our salute will be to turn on every light on our property, and we urge all supporters to do the same."

For those who would like to read more see:

Return to the caves:

Hail to Electricity:

The Road to more Blackout nights:

Earth Hour – a Dissent

Authorised by :                    
Viv Forbes       Chairman,

The Carbon Sense Coalition
MS 23, Rosewood, Qld 4340

0754 640 533