Comparing the Earth, as seen by Russian and American satellites
Comparing the view of Earth, interpreted differently by Russian and American satellites.
Comparing the view of Earth, interpreted differently by Russian and American satellites.
From Watts Up With That: New sea level data shows that there has been “no acceleration of global sea level over the past 100 years,โ despite the increase in temperatures. Key quote from the paper:
It is essential that investigations continue to address why this worldwide-temperature increase has not produced acceleration of global sea level over the past 100 years, and indeed why global sea level has possibly decelerated for at least the last 80 years.
The question of human-caused climate change – unclear now and unclear 8,000 years ago.
This is a good sign: The Senate vote on restricting the power of the EPA has been postponed by Harry Reid as he struggles to get Democrat votes.
The uncertainty of science: a paper published today in Geophysical Research Letters has concluded that the the long term random variations of the climate, sometimes lasting as long as three or four decades, are large enough to hide any actual changes to the climate. In the quote from the abstract below, the term “random walk” is jargon for a long term random fluctuation having nothing to do with climate change.
This result indicates that the shorter records may not totally capture the random variability of climate relevant on the time scale of civilizations, for which the random walk length is likely to be about 30 years. For this random walk length, the observed standard deviations of maximum temperature and minimum temperature yield respective expected maximum excursions on land of 1.4 and 2.3ยฐC and over the ocean of 0.5 and 0.7ยฐC, which are substantial fractions of the global warming signal.
In other words, it might simply be too soon to be making predictions about the climate, based upon the presently available data.
Continue budget problems at NASA: Two climate missions each face a one year schedule slip.
Earlier this week NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center published its monthly update of the Sun’s sunspot cycle. As I do every month, I’ve posted the newest graph below, showing the continuing slow rise in sunspots (blue/black lines) in comparison with the consensis prediction made by the solar science community in May 2009 (red line).
» Read more
NASA scientists have published a paper warning that there is growing evidence that the melting at the polar caps is accelerating. From the press release:
The pace at which the polar ice sheets are losing mass was found to be accelerating rapidly. Each year over the course of the study, the two ice sheets lost a combined average of 36.3 gigatonnes more than they did the year before. In comparison, the 2006 study of mountain glaciers and ice caps estimated their loss at 402 gigatonnes a year on average, with a year-over-year acceleration rate three times smaller than that of the ice sheets.
Several things to note after reading the actual paper:
There was a hearing in Congress today on climate science, though it apparently changed nothing: the Republican leadership in the committee is going to proceed with legislation to try to roll back the EPA regulations relating to carbon dioxide imposed by the Obama administration.
The most interesting detail I gleaned from the above article however was this quote, written by the Science journalist himself, Eli Kintisch:
The hearing barely touched on the underlying issue, namely, is it appropriate for Congress to involve itself so deeply into the working of a regulatory agency? Are there precedents? And what are the legal and governance implications of curtailing an agency’s authority in this way?
What a strange thing to write. If I remember correctly, we are a democracy, and the people we elect to Congress are given the ultimate responsibility and authority to legislate. There are no “legal or governance implications.” If they want to rein in a regulatory agency, that is their absolute Constitutional right. That Kintisch and his editors at Science don’t seem to understand this basic fact about American governance is most astonishing.
The Glory climate satellite has crashed in the Pacific when its rocket failed during launch today.
The uncertainty of science: Unexpectedly large amounts of flowing water and refrozen ice found at the bottom of the Antarctic icecap. Key quote:
It’s too early to know whether this new finding means that global warming will melt ice sheets slower or faster than scientists have predicted. But the work does suggest that current models of ice sheet dynamics are missing a huge factor, said glaciologist Donald Blankenship of the University of Texas, Austin. “The take-home message of this work is that [the bottom of ice sheets] can no longer be ignored” in the models, he says.
Two high-priority climate missions dropped from NASAโs budget by the White House. And what’s most amazing: No one’s squealing!
โRemoval of these missions was not what we desired and not what the administration desired, but it was a clear recognition and acknowledgement of the budget issues we face as a nation,โ [said Steve Volz, associate director for flight programs at NASAโs Earth Science Division]. โItโs cleaner to be allowed to delete the scope that goes along with the dollars than to have to figure out how to do more with less.โ
The inspector general of the Department of Commerce has just issued a review of NOAA’s response to the climategate emails and has essentially given the agency a clean bill of health. You can download the full report here [pdf].
It’s. just. another. whitewash. Let me quote just one part of the report’s summary, referring to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to NOAA in June 2007 in which the agency responded by saying they had no such documents:
» Read more
More launch news: The launch of the climate satellite Glory was postponed again today. No new launch date is set.
Glory launch postponed until early Friday.
Update: The launch was scrubbed.
Is there a crack in the monolith? A play about the persecution of a scientist who expresses skepticism about global warming is running in London, with favorable reviews!
Listen to the squealing: Scientists criticize the House vote to cut off funds to the IPCC. Key quote:
Without the federal support, [Stanford ecologist Chris Field] said, โWeโd have no ability to organize meetings, weโd have no ability to coordinate chapters.โ
In other words, no more jaunts to Cancun in the midst of winter. What a shame!
Considering the insincere effort of the IPCC and its scientists to correct its numerous errors, as well as their admitted political agenda, it seems completely appropriate to stop funding it with U.S. tax dollars. If these environmentalists want to issue a report, they should pay for it themselves.
In today’s listing of new science papers published by the American Geophysical Union, two papers illustrate quite clearly why the certainty of knowledge expressed by Presidential Science Advisor John Holdren in his testimony before Congress on Thursday is both mistaken and dangerous.
» Read more