Here is a treat for those following the discussion of Miskolczi’s new theory of greenhouse warming. Noor van Andel has sent a simplified explanation of Miskolczi’s theory, put on Wikichecks here. Noor is actually in the greenhouse business!
CommentsIs Kirchhoff’s rule in atmosphere proven by the Cabauw measurements, or not? I had earlier received a note on calculations by Noor van Andel claiming, yes, Kirchoff’s relationship as used in Miskolczi’s theory was confirmed by the linear regression of Ed (longwave down radiation) and Su(1-Ta) (longwave surface up, without transmitted longwave). Miskolczi also confirmed this result, using older results in a the previous post in this series.
CommentsThe venue for more formal debate on controversial topics is the scientific journals. As part of my trek into the desert of drought predictions in Australia, I submitted a review of the Drought Exceptional Circumstances report (abstract below) two days ago to the Australian Meteorological Magazine. To date I have not received an acknowledgement of its receipt.
CommentsWhile contributors Barton, Jan, Neal and Nick have been grilling Ferenc Miskolczi on another thread, and been doing a fantastic job of clarifying for average readers the use of the Virial Theorem in Miskolczi’s paper, Ferenc has sent some results pertaining to the use of Kirchhoff’s Law, which was another source of contention.
CommentsChanges in the exceptionally dry years (droughts) have been estimated in the Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report (DECR) in two ways: (a) a statistical modification of the observed rainfall data (Box 3); and (b) analysis of simulations from 13 climate models. Up until now I have been looking at the modeling in approach (b). Today I started to look at approach (a). As mean rainfall declines the probability of exceptionally low rainfall increases. This is graphed in Box 3 (see also Table 6).
The parameters used in this simple extrapolation exercise have curious inconsistencies with their source. The DECR report says:
CommentsAny claims or representations made by a business must be accurate and truthful. If a business has been dishonest, exaggerated the truth, or created a misleading impression, then there is a very broad provision in the Trade Practices Act to prohibit such conduct by a corporation.
For example, the ACCC webpage on misleading and deceptive conduct gives an example of a business predicting the health benefits of a therapeutic device or health product but having no proof that such benefits can be attained. Note that there is no need to show that the product has no benefit in fact, rather it is misleading to make a claim when there is no proof. In general:
CommentsStewart Franks, a hydroclimatologist at the University of Newcastle School of Engineering has spoken out, that the Murray Darling Basin drought was caused by an entirely natural phenomenon, the 2002 El Nino event, and there is no evidence that CO2 has had any significant role. He goes on:
Numerous politicians, environmentalists and especially scientists have made spectacular leaps of faith in their adherence to the doctrine of climate change over recent years, too many to document here.
And in a clear reference to the recent Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report (DECR), the subject of two critical articles by Ian Castles, former Australian Statistician, and a report that I have reviewed, written letters about, and now possibly starting an FOI request he says:
CommentsHowever, the most literally fantastic claim on climate change must go to Kevin Rudd, who has guaranteed that rainfall will decline over coming decades; one can only assume he’s based his view on deficient climate models and bad advice.
Below my reply to the letter here from Andrew Ash, Director of the Climate Adaptation Flagship. Concerning the Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report (DECR) there was an earlier more technical draft that could have contained validation information, but was returned by the client (DAFF) because it was unsuitable for stakeholder policy work. What does that mean? The earlier report should show what/if validation was performed to determine if the models had skill at predicting drought, and what changes were made to the report to make it palatable for the policy wonks, that is, sounding more like a disaster movie.
CommentsBelow is the reply received from Andrew Ash, Director of the Climate Adaptation Flagship, to my letter to CSIRO here, concerning the Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report (DECR). There are a number of unsubstantiated statements here (as in the DECR), to which I reply in another letter. Is the reliance on climate models with no predictive value in the DECR so narrow as not to affect the conclusions? Note also the desire to ‘move on’.
CommentsHere is an email from Hennessy about the CSIRO/BoM Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report. He raises some classic chestnuts that are easily dispatched:
Commentsdate Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 9:26 AM
subject RE: climate model evaluation
mailed-by csiro.au
signed-by csiro.auThanks David.
We are not withdrawing the DEC report because we are satisfied with the model evaluation done prior to publication.
Read the rest of this entry…
In my quest to verify that an increase in droughts is likely, as claimed in the Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report, I have spent a few weeks corresponding with Kevin Hennessy the lead author. Despite more than one request, he has not provided technical information, reports, or any evidence to support the claims made in the report.
Providing evidence in support of claims is fundamental to science, which is why I am so amazed that CSIRO has not responded abundantly with proof of their confident assertions that droughts are going to be more likely. As the key claims of the report can’t be validated, the only responsible course is to retract the report until such time as the claims can be demonstrated to be true, or amend the report. I therefore sent the following letter to the heads of two institutions responsible for the DECR. (Actually I have received a reply, and will report back in a few days.)
CommentsHow many narcissists does it take to change a light bulb?
Just one — but he has to wait for the whole world to revolve around him.
The short history of the Drought Exceptional Circumstances Report (DECR) raises concerns about the relationship between government policy and climate change research. The Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd told ABC1’s Insiders the report paints a very disturbing picture about the future of droughts in Australia:
CommentsOK, here are the solutions I received to the home work quiz. Thanks to Alan D. McIntire, Peter Gallagher, Jan Pompe, BobD and Josh for contributions.
CommentsI give you 3 digits and a result and you must put all the signs necessary to restore the equality.
I’ll give you an example. The remainder you solve by yourself.
2 + 2 + 2 = 6
Easy isn’t this? It’s the same for the remainder.
Comments