Climate Conversation Group

Taking the heat out of global warming

For the first time in history, people shouting “the end is nigh” are somehow
the sane ones, while those of us who say it is not are now the lunatics.

  • rss
  • Home
  • Open threads
    • Climate – how to use open threads
      • Meteorology
      • Global warming
      • Climate science
        • Climate Models
        • Papers
        • Atmosphere
        • Temperature records
        • Energy and fuel
        • Solar
        • Ocean heat content
        • Radiation, radiative imbalance
        • Sea levels
        • Ocean acidification
        • Polar regions, glaciers and ice
      • Regions
        • Europe
        • Asia
        • South America
        • Africa
        • Australia
        • UK
        • USA
        • Pacific
        • New Zealand
      • News
      • Controversy and scandal
        • Skeptical Science
      • Disproving AGW
      • Economics
    • Politics
      • ETS and carbon taxes
    • UN
      • IPCC organisation
      • IPCC politics
      • IPCC science
      • NIPCC
  • Opinion polls
    • SckSckSck
    • Your view of CO2
    • Collective noun for icebergs
    • Stop the ETS
  • Climate of Freedom Tour
  • Files
    • Climate Realists
      • Newsletter #17 6 May 2010
      • Newsletter #16 28 Apr 2010
      • Newsletter #6 11 Feb 2010
      • Newsletter #4 2011
    • News releases
      • February 8, 2010
      • December 20, 2010
    • Wind turbine failures
  • About

Hansen refuses to explain why he does it

Richard Treadgold | April 30, 2010
Dr James Hansen

Dr James Hansen, former respected space scientist, “father” of global warming, now an unrepentant activist warning of nothing less than the imminent destruction of the world — which at one time was the very definition of ‘crank’.

While on the subject of awkward, unanswered emails, let me pass on a message I recently sent to Dr James Hansen, the scientist widely famed as the “father” of global warming. I still hope he will offer some explanation.

4 March 2010

Dear Dr Hansen,

The Climate Conversation Group and I have become interested in the very meaning of “taking the temperature”, calculating the so-called “average” temperature for a place and a region and the meaning of doing so. I have just seen your web page [The Elusive Absolute Surface Air Temperature (SAT)], discussing these and related matters. It is an interesting and informative page.

You say there is no agreed method of measuring surface air temperatures and, in fact, there are numerous practical and theoretical obstacles to ever achieving such a measurement.

There is a very obvious question raised by that discussion. We are interested to know why, if it cannot be done, do you do it?

Regards,

Richard Treadgold
Convenor
Climate Conversation Group

Categories
General
Tags
Air temperature, Air temperature, Climate research, James Hansen
Comments rss
Comments rss
Trackback
Trackback

« Renwick goes off the air The New Zealand temperature vexation »

5 Responses to “Hansen refuses to explain why he does it”

  1. CEKay says:
    May 2, 2010 at 6:01 pm

    Sorry to hark back, but I note you’ve closed the thread on ocean acidification.

    The EPA in the US has decided this week that it is interested in storm-water runoff, because this might carry more carbon dioxide into the ocean and make the seawater less alkaline.

    So the EPA would rather see CO2 being left in the atmosphere rather than having it dissolved in the oceans. Well, this is good news, because that is what will happen if the world heats up.

    The EPA thinks ocean heat content is increasing and, as we all know, a warmer ocean cannot hold as much CO2 as a colder ocean. The catastrophists point to an argument that warming oceans could keep out-gassing CO2 to cause even warmer oceans – in a vicious circle.

    But if this happens, then we won’t have to worry about the oceans becoming less alkaline, will we? People with ocean-acid phobia only need to worry about the sceptics – because they say the oceans are not warming and can therefore dissolve more CO2.

    Reply
    • Richard says:
      May 2, 2010 at 6:33 pm

      Sorry, I wasn’t aware of any closed threads. The ones I’ve checked are open; what’s the link?

      Your analysis is exactly right. You’ve removed the acidic threat fears, as long as the warming continues. If you throw in the fact that the temperature response to increasing CO2 is logarithmic, so the more it increases, the less the temperature rises, then the vicious circle of outgassing causing further (dangerous) warming is also refuted. Of course, the oceans are cooling at the moment, too …

      That warming just isn’t a happening thing right now! Who’d be a warmista?

      Reply
  2. CEKay says:
    May 2, 2010 at 9:31 pm

    Thread at http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/category/ocean-acidification – no place to add a post.

    Reply
    • Richard says:
      May 2, 2010 at 9:36 pm

      Ah, I see what has happened; you’ve clicked on a category. “Ocean acidification” is a category, not a thread. It lists two posts, either of which you’ll find you can comment on. Hope that helps.

      Reply
  3. Climate Conversation Group » A swelling debate — Chris has questions says:
    August 29, 2010 at 3:34 pm

    [...] March the Climate Conversation Group sent him a message: “There is a very obvious question raised by that discussion. We are interested to know why, [...]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

buy FastProof now

          • Climate Conversation Group •
   • more than 1,400,000 visits a year
   • over 7,600,000 hits a year
               — join the Conversation —

Hot off the press

  • GWPF, RS talk climate change
  • Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Emotional knowledge
  • Global warming less than we thought
  • Climate porkies from TV One
  • Renwick doesn’t blame AGW for drought
  • Renowden a scaring warmist
  • Hide sticks it to Renwick
  • The incredibly elusive absolute surface air temperature
  • Faults, fallacies and failures of wind power
  • For real striving, give up the driving
  • Cost to ‘restore climate’ a game-changer
  • Signs of strain in justifying climate predictions
  • Is the game nearly over
  • IPCC created and controlled by activists
  • Policy: politicians write it but scientists incite it
  • The industry of denial
  • Lord Monckton complains to VUW
  • Climate forecasts fulfilled or what?
  • Snip-it

Latest comments

  • Richard C (NZ) on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Richard C (NZ) on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Richard C (NZ) on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Richard C (NZ) on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Richard C (NZ) on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Richard C (NZ) on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Andy on Skeptical Science
  • Richard Treadgold on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Richard Treadgold on Renwick doesn’t blame AGW for drought
  • Andy on Renwick doesn’t blame AGW for drought
  • Bob D on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • David on Renwick doesn’t blame AGW for drought
  • D Cotton on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Richard Treadgold on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Andy on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Bob D on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Andy on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Australis on Painting wanting rebuttal
  • Andy on Global warming less than we thought
  • Alexander K on Emotional knowledge

PayPal Tip Jar
Even a couple of dollars helps us
(if you're in the mood). Thanks!


Click to get your own widget

Tags

Activists AGW Air temperature Air temperature Alarmists Alternative energy Australia Carbon dioxide Carbon Sense Carbon trading CCG blog Christopher Monckton Climate Conversation Group Climate research Climate Science Court action Data quality Disproving AGW Economics Energy supply Environmentalism ETS General Global temperature Global warming Hot Topic IPCC Journalism New Zealand NIWA NIWAgate NZCSC NZ Herald NZ temperature records Oceans Politics Royal Society Sceptics Science bias Scientists Sea levels United Nations USA Watts Up With That What is the evidence

Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

Climate change links

  • Bishop Hill
  • Carbon Sense Coalition
  • Climate Audit—a science blog
  • Climate Debate Daily
  • Climate Depot
  • Climate Etc. (Judith Curry)
  • Climate Realists
  • Global warming at a glance
  • Jo Nova
  • Kiwi Thinker
  • NZ Climate Science Coalition
  • Science of Doom
  • Watts Up With That

 

April 2010
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Previous posts

Oil prices

models v. reality
Latest climate models v. reality

As the models continue to leave actual temperature readings in their dust, sizeable warming halted about 1995 — although it might resume at any time. It must hasten to have any hope of catching up with the predictions.

If you claim warming continues, we want evidence of continued warming — eminently reasonable. Making us wait for 17 years for that evidence invites us to doubt you.

Claiming that warming hasn't stopped is the same as claiming it has — and both are ridiculous, for nobody knows the future. The best you can do is describe the past.

Click graph for larger version.

 

rss Comments rss valid xhtml 1.1 design by jide powered by Wordpress get firefox