A renowned astronomer reminds everyone — the public, the astronomy community, and most importantly the press — that the data collected on most exoplanets is far more uncertain than often claimed.

The uncertainty of science: A renowned astronomer reminds everyone — the public, the astronomy community, and most importantly, the press — that the data collected on most exoplanets so far are far more uncertain than is often claimed.

A planet’s atmosphere is the gateway to its identity, including how it was formed, how it developed and whether it can sustain life, stated Adam Burrows, author of the review and a Princeton University professor of astrophysical sciences. But the dominant methods for studying exoplanet atmospheres are not intended for objects as distant, dim and complex as planets trillions of miles from Earth, Burrows said. They were instead designed to study much closer or brighter objects, such as planets in Earth’s solar system and stars.

Nonetheless, scientific reports and the popular media brim with excited depictions of Earth-like planets ripe for hosting life and other conclusions that are based on vague and incomplete data, Burrows wrote in the first in a planned series of essays that examine the current and future study of exoplanets. Despite many trumpeted results, few “hard facts” about exoplanet atmospheres have been collected since the first planet was detected in 1992, and most of these data are of “marginal utility.”

The good news is that the past 20 years of study have brought a new generation of exoplanet researchers to the fore that is establishing new techniques, technologies and theories. As with any relatively new field of study, fully understanding exoplanets will require a lot of time, resources and patience, Burrows said. “Exoplanet research is in a period of productive fermentation that implies we’re doing something new that will indeed mature,” Burrows said. “Our observations just aren’t yet of a quality that is good enough to draw the conclusions we want to draw. “There’s a lot of hype in this subject, a lot of irrational exuberance. Popular media have characterized our understanding as better than it actually is,” he said. “They’ve been able to generate excitement that creates a positive connection between the astrophysics community and the public at large, but it’s important not to hype conclusions too much at this point.” [emphasis mine]

Burrows’ point is absolutely right. Every single story describing the atmosphere or make-up of any particular exoplanet at this point in time is essentially fantasy. The data are too weak or vague, and hardly robust enough to come to any solid conclusions. In fact, this research repeatedly reminds me of the conclusions many scientists drew from the flimsy spectrographic data that was gathered before the space age about the solar system’s planets. When we finally got spacecraft to those planets, we found those conclusions were routinely wrong.

This is not to say that our new knowledge of exoplanets is not exciting or significant. It is both. We just shouldn’t put too much faith in it at this time.

Orbital images from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter have confirmed that the mysterious rock that appeared near Opportunity was not ejecta from a nearby meteorite impact.

Orbital images from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter have confirmed that the mysterious rock that appeared near Opportunity was not ejecta from a nearby meteorite impact.

The scientists theorized that there was a very remote chance that a nearby impact has thrown the rock into place, but the images show nothing nearby. Moreover, if there had been an impact we probably would have seen more rocks raining down all around. The images are further confirmation that the rock was kicked up by the rover itself as it rolled along.

Europe approves its own more advanced version of Kepler to launch in 2024 and hunt for exoplanets across half the sky.

Europe approves its own more advanced version of Kepler to launch in 2024 and hunt for exoplanets across half the sky.

During its six year long planned mission, PLATO will observe one million stars, leading to the likely discovery and characterisation of thousands of new planets circling other stars. PLATO will scan and observe about half the sky, including the brightest and nearest stars.

PLATO consists of an array of 34 individual telescopes mounted on an observing platform in the space probe. The satellite will be positioned at one of the so-called Lagrangian Points , where the gravitational pull of the Sun and the Earth cancel each other out so the satellite will stay at a fixed position in space. Each of the 34 telescopes has an aperture of 12 centimeters. The individual telescopes can be combined in many different modes and bundled together, leading to unprecedented capabilities to simultaneously observe both bright and dim objects. PLATO will be equipped with the largest camera-system sensor ever flown in space, comprising 136 charge-coupled devices (CCDs) that have a combined area of 0.9 square metres.

More here and here.

What I like about this is that this project is essentially putting another optical telescope in space. The more of these we have the more discoveries we will make, as even a tiny optical telescope in the vacuum of space is more productive than a giant ground-based telescope looking through the foggy atmosphere of Earth.

Three relatively large near Earth asteroids have just been discovered.

Chicken Little report: In October of last year three relatively large near Earth asteroids were discovered unexpectedly.

Read the report, which is the second notice at the link. I missed it at the time. Each of these new discoveries was interesting and surprising. Key quote: “The delayed discovery of 2013 US10 is a bit harder to explain, since current population models suggest that almost all near-Earth asteroids of this size and orbit should have already been found.” Apparently not.

In related news, a several hundred foot wide asteroid zipped past the Earth this evening.

Governments spent $359 billion in 2012, about the same as 2011, on their effort to stop global warming.

Where the big money really is in climate science: Governments spent $359 billion in 2012, about the same as 2011, on their effort to stop global warming.

Global investment in climate change plateaued at USD $359 billion in 2012, roughly the same as the previous year, according to a new Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) study, “The Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2013.” Once again the figure falls far short of what’s needed. The International Energy Agency projects that an additional investment of USD 5 trillion is required by 2020 for clean energy alone, to limit warming to two degrees Celsius. However, the gap is likely wider: The World Bank projects we are on a path to four degree Celsius warming, suggesting that efforts to scale up finance are falling further and further behind.

I include the quote above to make it clear that the source is very much a supporter of the human-caused global warming scenario. And while the article also details the large amounts of money invested in fossil fuels, it is important to recognize the difference. The money for stopping global warming is almost entirely used for fake research or public relations propaganda efforts or to support government regulatory agencies. The money for fossil fuels is money used to invest in actual energy production.

Cosmologists, using new data, are now reconsidering their theories on the manner in which the universe began organizing itself after the Big Bang.

The uncertainty of science: Cosmologists, using new data, are now reconsidering their theories on the manner in which the universe began organizing itself after the Big Bang.

Scientists call it the epoch of reionization, the period in which a newborn universe went from darkness to light as the first stars, galaxies and black holes began forming and radiating energy.

In a paper published Thursday in Nature, researchers are challenging one long-held conception about how quickly the universe began warming during this transition period. Based on observations of X-ray emissions from binary star systems, as well as new mathematical models, cosmologists at Tel Aviv University and Harvard say that heating of the universe progressed much more slowly, and uniformly, than previously thought.

A close review of the sources cited in the four studies that claimed a 97% scientific consensus supporting global warming has found that claim to be false.

More global warming fraud: A close review of the sources cited in the studies that claimed a 97% scientific consensus supporting global warming has found that claim to be false.

Instead of a 97% consensus, the review found that only 1 to 3% supported global warming. Quite a difference, eh?

The review’s press release nicely summarizes the incompetence or downright dishonesty of three of these consensus studies:

The Oreskes (2004) study claimed 75% consensus and a “remarkable lack of disagreement” by the other 25% of the abstracts she reviewed. Peiser (2005) re-ran her survey and found major discrepancies. Only 1.2% or 13 scientists out of 1,117 agreed with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) view that human activity is the main cause of global warming since 1950. Peiser found that 34 scientists rejected or doubted the alleged ‘consensus’ position outright and 44 claimed natural factors as more influential. At least 470 papers expressed no position on Anthropogenic (human-caused) Global Warming (AGW) whatsoever.

Doran & Zimmerman (2009) only assessed 79 scientists out of 3,146 respondents. Many scientists sent them emails protesting the survey design.

The recent Cook et al (2013) began with the broadest possible ‘consensus’ definition – rendering the idea of ‘consensus’ meaningless. Only 0.54% (or 64 scientists) explicitly agreed. Though Cook’s graphics on The Consensus Project website focus on fossil fuels, his study used the 1996 Houghton declaration which includes other human factors like agriculture and land-use change. Some 7983 scientists or 67% of the ~12,000 papers in the Cook study had no position on climate change. Many scientists publicly denounced Cook for wrongly assessing their work as supporting AGW when it does not.

Based on my experience talking to climate scientists as well as reading innumerable papers, I have always thought that the 97% consensus claim was weak or fishy. Now we not only have proof, we have evidence that the claim was based on lies.

Data tampering to create the illusion of global warming by James Hansen and NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies.

Data tampering to create the illusion of global warming by James Hansen and NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies.

The evidence shows that the data was adjusted to cool the past so that the present looks hotter. The question is: Why were these adjustments made? I can think of no justification, other than fraud and political manipulation.

The uncertainty of knowledge

NOAA this week posted its monthly update of the solar cycle, showing the sunspot activity for the Sun in January. As I do every month, I am posting it here, below the fold, with annotations.

Back in October the Sun’s sunspot activity had plummeted, following almost two years of very weak activity. At that time, I wrote, “It appears the solar maximum has ended. The only question now is how long and deep the upcoming solar minimum will be.”

Well, talk about foolish predictions. I should shake hands with Al Gore and James Hansen for making the mistake of announcing the future as if I know what will happen. The truth is that no one truly understands the Sun’s sunspot cycle.

In January the Sun continued the high sunspot activity of the previous three months, once again producing sunspots in numbers close to the actual predictions of the solar science community. And while all their predictions remain generally high when compared to the actual numbers, they can now feel reassured that the overall length and strength of this solar maximum is beginning to resemble the prediction of the solar scientists who thought this would be a weak maximum.
» Read more

Scientists claim that global warming will cause big waves that will exhaust fish!

I am not making this up: Scientists claim that global warming will cause big waves that will exhaust fish!

Anthony Watts does a nice job of tearing apart this truly bad research. As he says, “This is what passes for science now; it looks like a high school science fair project.” He also digs down to check their claim that global warming will cause bigger waves and finds it baseless.

But then, when did most global warming advocates ever care that much about actual data?

An analysis of the rotation of the peanut-shaped asteroid 25143 Itokawa suggests that its smaller end is actually far denser than its bigger end.

An analysis of the rotation of the peanut-shaped asteroid 25143 Itokawa suggests that its smaller end is actually far denser than its bigger end.

Previously, some researchers have proposed that Itokawa is actually two asteroids in contact with one another, a scenario strongly supported by the new results, the team contends. It’s not clear whether the odd configuration results from the merger of a two-asteroid system or merely clumps of material that fell back together after a larger asteroid was blasted apart by an immense collision.

The researchers also found that the asteroid’s rotation is actually increasing by 45 milliseconds per year.

Scientists have found that bumblebees have the capability of flying at altitudes higher than the top of Mount Everest.

Scientists have found that bumblebees have the capability of flying at altitudes higher than the top of Mount Everest.

In a study published today in Biology Letters, two zoologists, Michael Dillon, now at the University of Wyoming in Laramie, and Robert Dudley of the University of California, Berkeley, tested whether bumblebees’ vertical range was limited by aerodynamics and physiology. Working in the mountains of Sichuan, China, the duo caught five male bumblebees (Bombus impetuosus) foraging at 3,250 meters and placed them in a plexiglas chamber. Once the bees began to fly upwards, the pressure inside the chamber was reduced using a hand pump to simulate altitude increases in 500-meter intervals. All five bees could hover at air pressures equivalent to elevations of 7,400 meters; three could fly above 8,000 meters; and two got to above 9,000 meters.

If you read the entire article, you will notice that it completely ignores the false urban legend that bumblebees are aerodynamically unsound and shouldn’t be able to fly. Scientists have known for decades that it is false, but for some reason it keeps getting repeated.

Jupiter’s shrinking Great Red Spot.

Jupiter’s shrinking Great Red Spot.

In the 1880s the GRS resembled a huge blimp gliding high above white crystalline clouds of ammonia and spanned 40,000 km (25, 000 miles) across. You couldn’t miss it even in those small brass refractors that were the standard amateur observing gear back in the day. Nearly one hundred years later in 1979, the Spot’s north-south extent has remained virtually unchanged, but it’s girth had shrunk to 25,000 km (15,535 miles) or just shy of two Earth diameters. Recent work done by expert astrophotographer Damian Peach using the WINJUPOS program to precisely measure the GRS in high resolution photos over the past 10 years indicates a continued steady shrinkage.

Lots more fascinating information at the link. Read it all.

NOAA fudges the numbers to turn a January cooling trend since 1930 into a warming trend.

More climate manipulation: NOAA fudges the numbers to turn a January cooling trend since 1930 into a warming trend.

Adjusting the numbers might be justified in certain situations, but NOAA never explains why, and the adjustments they impose always create the illusion of a warming trend, even if the raw numbers say otherwise. If the adjustments were honest, I would expect them to move the numbers up and down much more randomly. That these adjustments only go one way — in favor of global warming — either suggests they are unconsciously allowing their biases to influence their work, or they are intentionally allowing their biases to influence their work.

Either way, their work is meaningless and untrustworthy, and should be ignored as less than worthless.

Better medicine through engineering

For me, the last eight months have been very interesting when it comes to medical treatment. I have had my left hand rebuilt to eliminate chronic pain, I had my heart inspected to make sure it was working properly, and this week I had the retina in my right eye re-attached using some very clever engineering.

For once, this essay will not be about the politics of medicine and the disaster of Obamacare, which is still ongoing. Instead, I will outline how freedom and human creativity has now made possible a whole range of modern medical techniques that are either improving the quality of life for patients or literally saving their lives.
» Read more

In celebration of the tenth anniversary of Opportunity’s landing on Mars, the journal Science publishes a special section of the newest findings from Mars.

In celebration of the tenth anniversary of Opportunity’s landing on Mars, the journal Science has published a special section of the newest findings from Mars.

The main conclusion of all this research is that Mars was once potentially habitable, though there is no evidence so far to show that anything actually inhabited it. The data obtained however is now giving scientists clues on the best places to look for the remains of that ancient life, should it exist.

For more information about that newly discovered supernova in the nearby galaxy M82 go here and here.

For more information about that newly discovered supernova in the nearby galaxy M82 go here and here.

The first link notes that the supernova has brightened to 11.5 magnitude and could get even brighter in the next two weeks. Though still too dim for the naked eye, it is easily bright enough right now for most amateur telescopes and binoculars. How much brighter it will get remains a question.

Astronomers have detected water vapor spurting from Ceres, the solar system’s largest asteroid.

Using the Herschel Space Telescope astronomers have detected water vapor spurting from Ceres, the solar system’s largest asteroid.

Herschel’s sensors spied plumes during three of the four observation periods. The strength of absorption varied over a matter of hours, a trend probably caused by relatively small sources of water vapour rotating in and out of view of Earth, the researchers say.

Data gathered in March 2013 suggest that the plumes originated from two widely separated, 60-kilometre-wide spots in the dwarf planet’s mid-latitude regions. Together, these spots ejected about 6 kilograms of water vapour into space each second. Neither ground-based observations nor images from the Hubble Space Telescope are keen enough to identify the as-yet-mysterious areas, says Küppers. “We don’t know what these features are, we just know that they’re darker than their surroundings,” he notes.

The NASA probe Dawn will arrive at Ceres early next year, and take a good look at these plumes. Should be exciting.

1 195 196 197 198 199 280