-- R.G. Menzies
LIBERTARIAN/CONSERVATIVE DIGEST AND COMMENTARY FROM AN ACADEMIC PSYCHOLOGIST in Brisbane, Australia. My academic publications are widely read
Click on the title of any post to bring up the sidebar
Reviving the global warming "hiatus"
"Hiatus" is actually a Warmist term. "Halt" would be less inferential. Orwell taught us about how language can aid thought control but for the sake of continuity I will use "hiatus".
The skeptical blogosphere has erupted in a storm of scorn at the attempt by Karl et al.to "adjust" the sea surface temperature record so that the terrestrial surface temperature shows some marginal warming in the 21st century.
I liked David Middleton's comment under the heading "Gavin says the funniest things!". He says in one short paragraph what I used a lot of paragraphs to say yesterday. Gavin Schmidt is Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), a great temple of Warmism. He is its High Priest.
The cleverest man on either side of the whole warming discussion is undoubtedly Lord Monckton. Everything seems easy for him. I will even admit that he is cleverer than I am -- which is not something I do often. So his contribution to the chorus must be looked to.
He makes a number of points that others do -- such as the fact that both sets of satellite measurements show no warming -- but he also makes a major point that I would like to draw maximum attention to. He points out that around 70% of the earth's surface is ocean and that the ocean surface is bounded by two great oceans, the water underneath it and the mainly nitrogen ocean above it that we refer to as the atmosphere.
Yet the temperature readings for the atmosphere show no warming at all and the temperature readings for the whole body of ocean water show much less warming than the surface readings that Karl et al. report. So where is Karl's warming coming from? The laws of thermodynamic undoubtedly apply to convection so any surface warming must in some way be reflected by warming above or below.
But it is not. There just does not exist the heat in the system that would be needed for the Karl et al. figures to be correct. With its emphasis on new adjustments, it was always pretty obvious that the Karl et al. work was another episode in a long line of Warmist "fudges" and Monckton's analysis proves it -- JR.
By JR on Monday, June 08, 2015
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment
All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them