|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 20, 2011 16:43:18 GMT 1
But his "evidence" is sorely lacking.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 20, 2011 17:45:08 GMT 1
His "evidence" is the result of adjustment and homogenisation, aka fiddling the books.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 26, 2011 12:49:31 GMT 1
Phlogiston on WUWT noted on 24th April 2011
Richard Lindzen was right to say that climate stasis would be more worrying than change / oscillation – “it would be like someone being dead”. And also that “the idea that the early twentieth century represented some sort of climate perfection is not a sign of intelligence”.
------
Right on, Richard!
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Apr 26, 2011 20:23:01 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Apr 27, 2011 3:19:15 GMT 1
Nice to see you again, Stu! Welcome back.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jul 12, 2011 10:53:42 GMT 1
Latest interview with Dr Richard Lindzen conducted by Dr Denis Rancourt in Ottowa. July 7, 2011 The 5 o'clock Train's Denis Rancourt interviewed Professor Richard Lindzen (Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, MIT) on the broad question of the practice of global warming science. Why would a warming even as large as 5 degrees C be of concern?Listen here trainradio.blogspot.com/2011/07/professor-richard-lindzen-on-global.html
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Nov 25, 2011 10:27:30 GMT 1
Climate sensitivity to CO2 probedBy Jennifer Carpenter Science reporter, BBC News www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15858603(Models are used to project future climatic scenarios !!!) Global temperatures could be less sensitive to changing atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) levels than previously thought, a study suggests. The researchers said people should still expect to see "drastic changes" in climate worldwide, but that the risk was a little less imminent. (Phew! Precisely the sort of spin we expect from warmists and from the oh-so-balanced reporting of the ho ho BBC!) The results are published in Science. Previous climate models have used meteorological measurements from the past 150 years to estimate the climate's sensitivity to rising CO2. From these models, scientists find it difficult to narrow their projections down to a single figure with any certainty, and instead project a range of temperatures that they expect, given a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from pre-industrial levels. The new analysis, which incorporates palaeoclimate data into existing models, attempts to project future temperatures with a little more certainty. Lead author Andreas Schmittner from Oregon State University, US, explained that by looking at surface temperatures during the last Ice Age - 21,000 years ago - when humans were having no impact on global temperatures, he, and his colleagues, show that this period was not as cold as previous estimates suggest. "This implies that the effect of CO2 on climate is less than previously thought," he explained --------- Here is the paper (note the "Estimated" from Models - what else!) Climate Sensitivity Estimated From Temperature Reconstructions of the Last Glacial Maximum by Andreas Schmittner, Nathan M. Urban, Jeremy D. Shakun, Natalie M. Mahowald, Peter U. Clark, Patrick J. Bartlein, Alan C. Mix,1 Antoni Rosell-Melé See also this Q & A with one of the authors: www.princeton.edu/~nurban/pubs/lgm-cs-uvic.pdfhttp://newscience.planet3.org/2011/11/24/interview-with-nathan-urban-on-his-new-paper-climate-sensitivity-estimated-from-temperature-reconstructions-of-the-last-glacial-maximum/See also this Q & A with one of the authors -------- Speculation is fascinating, isn't it, but should not be confused with facts and observations!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 28, 2012 10:54:18 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 28, 2012 11:35:05 GMT 1
Not much chance of seeing that on the BBC parliament channel! Apparently only one MP turned up!!!
|
|