Climate For All

An All Around Science Blog

Monthly Archives: March 2010

Jupiter’s Ground-breaking News

NEWS FLASH

Today, there is an article on the European Southern Observatory’s (ESO) website , announcing that scientists for the first time, have detailed weather maps of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot, enabling them to make conclusions that temperature, winds, pressure, and composition is responsible for its color.

Here are a few excerpts from the article:

“Scientists Get First Look at Weather Inside the Solar System’s Biggest Storm”

16 March 2010

This is our first detailed look inside the biggest storm of the Solar System,” says Glenn Orton, who led the team of astronomers that made the study. “We once thought the Great Red Spot was a plain old oval without much structure, but these new results show that it is, in fact, extremely complicated.

“The observations reveal that the reddest colour of the Great Red Spot corresponds to a warm core within the otherwise cold storm system, and images show dark lanes at the edge of the storm where gases are descending into the deeper regions of the planet. The observations, detailed in a paper appearing in the journal Icarus, give scientists a sense of the circulation patterns within the solar system’s best-known storm system.”

One of the most intriguing findings shows the most intense orange-red central part of the spot is about 3 to 4 degrees warmer than the environment around it,” says lead author Leigh Fletcher. This temperature difference might not seem like a lot, but it is enough to allow the storm circulation, usually counter-clockwise, to shift to a weak clockwise circulation in the very middle of the storm. Not only that, but on other parts of Jupiter, the temperature change is enough to alter wind velocities and affect cloud patterns in the belts and zones.

This is the first time we can say that there’s an intimate link between environmental conditions — temperature, winds, pressure and composition — and the actual colour of the Great Red Spot,” says Fletcher. “Although we can speculate, we still don’t know for sure which chemicals or processes are causing that deep red colour, but we do know now that it is related to changes in the environmental conditions right in the heart of the storm.

Read more of this post

Is the Arctic Sea Ice in Retreat ?

Is the Arctic Sea Ice in Retreat?

UPDATE :   Its been a year now since I posted this article and felt it was time update a little bit. Here is the latest graph from IARC-JAXA:

April 29th 2011

Back in January of this year, it was very noticeable that many writers chose to no longer wait till minimum ice extent data in September, and chose to inundate many readers about how Arctic Sea Ice was at its lowest for December. That was very poor commentary, even for the ‘hot-heads’.

The measurement of annual Arctic Sea Ice , for good or bad, has always come at minimum ice extent in September. It is upon many predictions, that Co2 will create ice-free summers in the Arctic in the not so distant future.

When sea ice extent didn’t reach the milestone year of 2007, the hot-heads have had to alarm the media in other ways. Stories about thinning multi-year ice, increased concentrations of Co2, methane, and cherry-picking data has become the norm.

The alarmist suggests, that though the Arctic Ice hasn’t fallen below 2007, that it is just a matter of time. The alarmist will emphatically tell you that man-made Co2 will eventually create enough heat to end all of the debate over CAGW( Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming).

The mantra in the media is hype every weather occurrence  as man-made.

Be it glaciers, the Arctic, floods, drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, whatever. It’s pathetic to see such desperation, from so many people, to convince themselves and others, that YOU are to blame, for EVERYTHING.

The facts no longer matter. Its your belief that matters now.

The alarmist wants us all to just believe. The alarmist wants us to disregard any theory.

Because any theory or fact that sheds doubt over our blame, is untrue, unproven, political incorrect, and conspiratorial.

The alarmist want to shame you into belief. The alarmist wants to control what you think.

The media inundates us with news on, ‘How to talk to a skeptic’, ‘Its worse than expected’, ‘We’ve gone beyond the tipping point’, It’s our children that will suffer’, ‘The fossil fuel industry is only protecting it’s interests’. So on and so forth.

Rubbish.

The only thing in retreat is common sense from those that would have you believe YOU caused all this.

Anyways, come check back by here in September, and lets see if there is anything worth feeling alarmed about. Read more of this post

You’ve Got To Be Kidding Me !

‘Don’t Demonize the Messenger!’

Once again, we have the green movement feigning innocence and that familiar message,’ Nothing to see here people, please move on.’

Elizabeth E. May is the co-author with Zoe Caron of Global Warming for Dummies  and leader of the Green Party of

Canada. So its no wonder that the National Post printed this article she wrote for them Thursday, March 11th, 2010:

‘Climate scientists are ethical and honest. They just happen to have some bad news.’

Here are a few quotes from that post I thought was worth mentioning. If you like to read the article, just go here :

Climate scientists are now in a maelstrom of competing caricatures. In the Post last week, Patrick Keeney ( “Trust us, we’re experts,” March 5) described them as schemers, cooking the books, using PR and spin. Those who wish to believe the climate crisis is not the result of human activity herald as heroes scientists who disagree with the consensus view, while others deride them as corrupt.

Read more of this post

A Violent Backlash ?

The BM posted an article today called,”Violent backlash on against climate scientists”, written by Stephen Leahy.

Here is an excerpt of that post:

“I have hundreds” of threatening e-mails, Stephen Schneider, a climatologist at Stanford University in California, told Tierramérica.

He believes scientists will be killed over this.

“I’m not going to let it worry me…but you know it’s going to happen,” said Schneider, one of the most respected climate scientists in the world. “They shoot abortion doctors here.”

So this is how believers of global warming wish to engage and inform us about climate change.

If they can’t warn us about the impending doom of our planet because of man’s involvement, then suggest that climate scientists might be killed over their belief and/or stance on climate change.

The article goes on and reports:

On the surface, this campaign is about a few errors in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2,800-page report released in 2007 and some 10-year-old personal e-mails stolen from Britain’s University of East Anglia.

But deeper down, this is the last big effort by the fossil-fuel industry to delay action on fighting climate change, just as the tobacco industry successfully delayed understanding of the harmful effects of smoking for several decades, says Schneider.

“We’re up against the multibillion-dollar fossil-fuel industry and the haters of government. They spin and spin and cast doubt on the credibility of science,” he said.

The media are an accomplice in this, he said, because they have failed to put wild claims into context and continue to interview people like Inhofe and others who have no evidence or credibility on these issues.

“I’m pretty damn angry that media companies are putting profits ahead of truth. The media are deeply broken…That’s a real threat to democracy,” Schneider said.

There is no solid scientific dispute over the simple physics that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-effect gases warm the earth’s atmosphere, and that emissions of these gases from human activities are largely responsible for the increased temperatures over recent decades.

This is simply a very bizarre story being regurgitated by MSM to cast doubt on the skepticism of climate change.

Yeah, this story floats. Like a lead weight tied to a brick, sinking to the bottom of the ocean.

Read more of this post

Recent Gallop Poll Suggests….

In a recent poll by Gallop, an increased number of Americans believe that man-made global warming is exaggerated.

Lydia Saad reported that, “Although a majority of Americans believe the seriousness of global warming is either correctly portrayed in the news or underestimated, a record-high 41% now say it is exaggerated. This represents the highest level of public skepticism about mainstream reporting on global warming seen in more than a decade of Gallup polling on the subject.”
If mainstream media actually reported on the news and not just report only on news that supports its agenda, maybe the polls wouldn’t reflect the skepticism directed at them.
To give an example of mainstream media and the exaggerations they are guilty of, News Busters own Noel Sheppard, posted an article back on Feb. 16th of this year called,

Statement from the IoP

In a IoP statement, the following was written:

“2. The CRU e-mails as published on the internet provide prima facie evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with honourable scientific traditions and freedom of information law. The principle that scientists should be willing to expose their ideas and results to independent testing and replication by others, which requires the open exchange of data, procedures and materials, is vital. The lack of compliance has been confirmed by the findings of the Information Commissioner. This extends well beyond the CRU itself – most of the e-mails were exchanged with researchers in a number of other international institutions who are also involved in the formulation of the IPCC’s conclusions on climate change.”

I stress this section for one and obvious reason. The Information Commissioner(I.C.) finds lack of compliance and it extends beyond the CRU itself.

The implications are quite apparent and the logic of the I.C. is spot on. Forget about finger pointing and name calling, etc. This statement is a call for the scientific method to bear the weight of the truth and not the wishings of a few men to convey a certain truth that they wish to project into the scientific community.

This statement by the IoP for open exchange of data and procedures never should have had to be made. The hacked e-mails surrounds the possible reason why the emails were hacked in the first place. A man of some integrity, but lacking scientific knowledge asked for data to be submitted for review and he was subsequently treated in ways, as mentioned in those emails, quite negatively.

If the scientific method had truly been applied here and the data been revealed to be scrutinized and reviewed and tested, the scientific community wouldn’t have to defend itself. Yet, for reasons that are not forthcoming, all of science now bears the weight of scrutiny for the lack of openness. Read more of this post