View Article & Comments

view the latest news articles
The True Climate Mechanisms by Stephen Wilde
Friday, June 12th 2009, 1:44 PM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
Image AttachmentChanging global temperatures induce air circulation changes as the air seeks to restore the sea surface/surface air temperature equilibrium and at the same time resolve ocean induced variations in the sun to sea / air to space equilibrium.

The circulation changes alter all the processes involved in the rate of energy transfer from surface to space. In so far as the air circulation fails for a time to maintain temperature stability then radiation from surface to space will also change but in due course stabilty is always restored between the four said parameters (sea surface / surface air / sun to sea / air to space).

Only huge catastrophic changes capable of altering the temperature of the whole body of the oceans can set a new global equilibrium in the short term (less than millennia). The sun can also do it gradually but it takes centuries e.g. from Roman Warm Period to Mediaeval Warm Period to Little Ice Age to now. The solar effect is heavily modulated over time by ocean cycles. A change in the composition of the air alone cannot do it.

Article continues below this advert:

The role of water vapour combined with the latent heats of evaporation and condensation gives the circulation changes the major part of their ability to accelerate energy transfer from surface to space.

So, the most common and by far the largest forcing at any given time is multi decadal variations in energy emissions from the oceans. In the background are slow century scale changes in solar output.

Temperature changes induced by sun and oceans drive air circulation changes which drive changes in every aspect of climate including convection, conduction, evaporation, condensation, precipitation, windiness, cloudiness, albedo and humidity as regards both quantities and distribution.

Water vapour in itself is not a driver nor does it have cycles or periodicities of it's own. It's a very useful contibutor to the whole process though and without it the Earth would be entirely different

Any ocean surface warming is caused by solar energy previously absorbed working it’s way back to the surface.

It is true that warmer and/or more humid air above that water slows down the energy flow from water to air but that has no effect on the temperature of the main body of the oceans.

When the energy flow from water to air slows down there is no overall warming of the oceans. All that happens is that the energy flowing from ocean to air ‘pools’ for a while at the surface. It effectively waits in a ‘queue’ at the surface until the air circulation and weather systems increase their speed of ejection of energy to space and neutralise the warming.

That is what happens when oceans naturally increase their emission of energy and the response of the air is exactly the same whether the warmer ocean surface is a result of enhanced energy emission from the ocean or enhanced energy in the air from another cause such as more humidity or more CO2.

The air has to balance both the energy from ocean to air with energy from air to space AND energy from sun to ocean and energy from air to space over time. Everything we observe is a feature of that interplay.

To deal adequately with any warming of the air from extra CO2 or any other increased GHG the air circulation and weather systems just shift their size and/or positions to adjust the rate of energy emission to space to restore equilibrium.

The equilibrium they work back towards is set by the rate of energy flow from the sun modulated by the rate of energy flow through the oceans.

The air circulation changes ensure that over time the energy radiated to space matches the energy received from the sun despite disruptions in the flow caused by the effects of the ocean cycles or changes in the composition of the air.

It has taken me a year to get to this point and I see nothing in AGW theory or literature to counter it.

The occasional surges of warmth in the stratosphere in winter fit into my scenario. When a large surge of polar air moves equatorward it draws a pulse of energy from the oceans in the lower latitudes and pumps it into the stratosphere where most of that energy is pushed out to space but a portion is not pushed out and descends again thus strengthening the high pressure systems on the poleward side of the mid latitude jets.

Features such as that occur more frequently and are larger when the oceans globally are in net absorption mode (surface cooling) such as now. At such times the poleward air masses are ’stronger’ than the equatorward weather systems. The opposite applies when the oceans are in net emission mode as I describe more fully in my articles.

Everything we see in the air and the oceans is part of that natural energy balancing interaction and human emissions have no part to play other than a very small insignificant human induced shift in positions or intensities of the main high pressure systems. Wholly imperceptible in the face of natural variability.

This article was originaly placed in the ClimateRealists.Com "Forum" on the 19th March, please feel free to read the comments.
Comments section below this advert:

Comments

Have Your Say

Posted by questioner (forum) on Jun 12th 2009, 8:14 PM EDT
The narrative of Stephen Wilde makes a lot of claims about the role of air circulation and oceans. These claims are totally unsubstantiated in his article. There are no references to any equations or specific observations which back up his statements.
An example of an unsupported claim is:

Only huge catastrophic changes capable of altering the temperature of the whole body of the oceans can set a new global equilibrium in the short term (less than millennia). The sun can also do it gradually but it takes centuries e.g. from Roman Warm Period to Mediaeval Warm Period to Little Ice Age to now. The solar effect is heavily modulated over time by ocean cycles. A change in the composition of the air alone cannot do it.

Proving something impossible is hard to do. Mr. Wilde makes no attempt to do so and doesn't reference any scientific sources that support his claim. This is not good science. In fact the consensus of climate scientists is that a long lasting increase in surface temperature can be driven by changes in the composition of the atmosphere.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/28/0812721106.short

In fact modelling is not the only evidence that changes in air composition can initiate a change in temperature that is lasting.
The permian extinction 250M years ago is believed to have resulted from emissions of CO2 and CH4 over a period of millions of years from volcanoes in Siberia.

http://palaeo.gly.bris.ac.uk/Essays/wipeout/default.html

...Oxygen isotopes are used as a palaeothermometer. Oxygen occurs in two forms, oxygen-16 and oxygen-18. These are incorporated into the calcite skeletons of marine creatures at different rates depending on the water temperature, more oxygen-18 at low temperatures, and more oxygen-16 at high. At the base of bed 25, the main mass extinction level, there was a sudden shift in the oxygen isotope ratios indicating a worldwide rise in temperature of 6 °C. This may not sound much, but it would have a profound effect on the world's ecology. Climatologists have been getting very excited recently about a half-a-degree rise in global temperatures.

The carbon isotopes suggest what might have caused the temperature increase. They show a massive shift towards the light isotope, carbon-12, exactly at the time of the big extinction. Pulses of carbon-12 in the geological record are usually indicative of a volcanic eruption or a large die-off (plants, animals and bacteria concentrate carbon-12 in their bodies and release it when they die). Both certainly happened at the end of the Permian. But the carbon-12 pulse is far too big to be explained by these mechanisms alone. Calculations of global carbon budgets have suggested that, even if every plant, animal, and microbe died and was buried, altogether they would only account for about one-fifth of the observed carbon shift. The Siberian Traps would have added another fifth. Where did the remaining three-fifths come from?

The extra carbon-12 was probably buried, frozen deep under the oceans in the form of gas hydrates. These are extraordinary accumulations of carbon-12-rich methane locked up in cages of ice at very high pressure. If the atmosphere and oceans warm up sufficiently, these gas reserves can suddenly melt and release their contents in a catastrophic way. The explosion of gas through the surface of the oceans has been termed a "methane burp". A very large methane burp at the end of the Permian could have produced enough carbon-12 to make up the deficit.

The cause of the burp was probably global warming triggered by huge releases of CO2 from the Siberian Traps. Methane is a greenhouse gas too, so a big burp raises global temperatures even further. Normally, long-term global processes act to bring greenhouse gas levels down. This kind of negative feedback keeps the Earth in equilibrium. But what happens if the release of methane is so huge and fast that normal feedback processes are overwhelmed? Then you have a "runaway greenhouse". This is a positive feedback system: excess carbon in the atmosphere causes warming, the warming triggers the release of more methane from gas hydrates, this in turn causes yet more warming, which leads to the release of more methane and so on. As temperatures rise, species start to go extinct. Plants and plankton die off and oxygen levels plummet. This is what seems to have happened 251 million years ago.
Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on Jun 13th 2009, 1:44 AM EDT
Q:
The narrative of Stephen Wilde makes a lot of claims about the role of air circulation and oceans. These claims are totally unsubstantiated

The problem is Q the very same is said about AGW, the REAL world does NOT work or respond like the prediction of your computer model and yet you continue as if it does. You quote from source references that support the views of AGW, Stephen on the other hand produces logical answers to changes we see for REAL not the changes in a test tube.
Posted by questioner (forum) on Jun 13th 2009, 5:43 PM EDT
CO2sceptic wrote,
Q:
" The narrative of Stephen Wilde makes a lot of claims about the role of air circulation and oceans. These claims are totally unsubstantiated."

The problem is Q the very same is said about AGW, the REAL world does NOT work or respond like the prediction of your computer model and yet you continue as if it does. You quote from source references that support the views of AGW, Stephen on the other hand produces logical answers to changes we see for REAL not the changes in a test tube.

The point that I made was the Mr Wilde has shown no evidence to support his statement from any scientific research. We have no facts and logic behind Mr Wilde's claim, only his unsupported statement.

I have shown examples of 2 articles representing peer reviewed research that shows changes in the composition of the air causes earth's climate to change. This GHE theory of the Atmosphere has thousands of scientific papers behind it, over a 150 year history. This contrasts with the idea of Mr Wilde, which was not supported by any references to scientific research.

In addition, the atmospheric composition of the planets has been shown to have a profound influence on their surface temperatures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus


Venus has an extremely dense atmosphere, which consists mainly of carbon dioxide and a small amount of nitrogen. The atmospheric mass is 93 times that of Earth's atmosphere while the pressure at the planet's surface is about 92 times that at Earth's surface—a pressure equivalent to that at a depth of nearly 1 kilometer under Earth's oceans. The density at the surface is 65 kg/m³ (6.5% that of water). The CO2-rich atmosphere, along with thick clouds of sulfur dioxide, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the solar system, creating surface temperatures of over 460 °C (860 °F).[27] This makes Venus's surface hotter than Mercury's which has a minimum surface temperature of -220 °C and maximum surface temperature of 420 °C, even though Venus is nearly twice Mercury's distance from the Sun and receives only 25% of Mercury's solar irradiance.

As a matter of fact, the greenhouse effect on venus was so powerful, it resulted in the elimination of liquid water from the surface of the Venus.

http://filer.case.edu/sjr16/advanced/venus.html

Venus is the case of a runaway greenhouse effect. The temperature and pressure of the atmosphere decrease with height, so water vapor rises in the atmosphere and encounters conditions that cause it to condense back into liquid water and fall back to the surface - a region called the "cold trap." On Earth, this is at a height of 9-15 km (5-9 miles) above the surface, but on Venus it lies at an altitude around 50 km (31 miles) due to the planet's closer proximity to the sun.

On Earth, the ozone layer is several kilometers above this, and the ozone prevents ultraviolet light from destroying water in our atmosphere. On Venus, there is no ozone layer, and the atmosphere doesn't become opaque to ultraviolet light until a depth is reached below the cold trap. This allows ultraviolet light to destroy water between this height and the cold trap's.

So, as water rises in Venus' atmosphere and reaches this region, dUV light dissociates it into two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. The hydrogen is much lighter than the water molecule was, and so it easily escapes Venus' atmosphere. The water will usually quickly recombine with a carbon or carbon monoxide molecule to form carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide. This is probably one reason why there is so much carbon dioxide in Venus' atmosphere today.

Heavy water, however, which is composed of one oxygen, one hydrogen, and one deuterium (a proton and one neutron), cannot reach the requisite height as easily. If it does, it can still be dissociated just like normal water, but this happens at a much slower rate. Thus, a measurement of how much deuterium compared with how much hydrogen today shows that Venus has much more deuterium in its atmosphere for each hydrogen atom than Earth does. This is the strongest evidence that Venus has lost a massive amount of water in its history.

This process is a runaway one in that once less water is available to wash CO2 from the atmosphere, the CO2 level rises. This results in a stronger greenhouse effect, so the temperature rises. The higher temperature moves the cold trap higher, and the cycle continues at an accelerated rate because there is a larger region where water can become dissociated.

Under such circumstances, it is reasonable to state that the burden of proof is on Mr Wilde to provide more evidence that what he says about the atmospheric content being unable to influence the climate is true.
Posted by Stephen Wilde (forum) on Jun 13th 2009, 6:23 PM EDT
One cannot reproduce the Earth's climate in a laboratory.

There is no laboratory experiment that can encompass the full variability of climate.

The test of my description of the climate mechanisms can only be from real world observations.

Thus far it fits very well and if that continues for just a little longer then acceptance of my description will be inevitable.
Posted by questioner (forum) on Jun 14th 2009, 12:21 AM EDT
Posted by Stephen Wilde on Jun 13th 2009, 6:23 PM EDT
One cannot reproduce the Earth's climate in a laboratory.

There is no laboratory experiment that can encompass the full variability of climate.

The test of my description of the climate mechanisms can only be from real world observations.

Thus far it fits very well and if that continues for just a little longer then acceptance of my description will be inevitable.
My posts specifically dealt with your statement that the composition of the air could not affect climate in the long run.

They pointed out that climate models and observations of actual climate on Venus and paleoclimatology research involving the Permian era proves that this statement was wrong.

The accepted theories of physics are based on laboratory work. That does not make them invalid. The climate models are based in part on valid physics, and in part on observations of phenomena in the atmosphere. There is uncertainty in the output that they produce, but all say that the composition of the atmosphere will affect the earths temperature on long time scales.

The paleological record of the Permian era which points to atmospheric CO2 inducing climate change are real world observations.

All of these contradict your statement.

By contrast, you haven't produced any references or observations to support your sweeping statement that air composition cannot drive climate in the long term.

You only repeat the same generalities that your theories are correct, and cite real world observations, but never specifically identify any.
Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on Jun 14th 2009, 5:49 AM EDT
I can only state to any reader of your comments that the article is against your understanding on climate change and not the author(s)

Q, This daily battle of wills with articles that are posted on a site that is against "Man Made Climate Change" is not something I wish you to do, please use the forum to voice your opinion on AGW and any article in this section. We have all noticed the articles will always be against YOUR understanding on Climate Change, it serves no use for you to put forward the AGW side in the ClimateRealist.Com News Blog section, we are not here to promote AGW.

Gabriel (site owner of ClimateRealists.Com)
Posted by Ian (forum) on Jun 14th 2009, 11:47 AM EDT
Q. I believe the dust from volcanic emissions caused climate cooling and rapid glacial advance. There is evidence of explosive eruptions. Cooling is a more effective killer than warming and ice cores show it can happen in a very brief time frame. There are other theories too so to use one that weakly supports human emissions (~3% of ~2ppm pa) as a climate controller is tentative to say the least.
7 comments found
showing page 1 of 1
« previous    1    next »

Comments Login

Login with your Twitter or Forum Account

Sign in with Twitter

OR

Sign in with your existing Forum Account







I forgot my password






Register Now

Show #11-20

Current Poll
» Will humans continue to be responsible with the resources of the Earth when the AGW Climate Change theory has been disproved?
I will continue to be responsible with the resources of the Earth.
It would make no difference to the Earths resources if we did not recycle household waste.
I'm confused and only recycle to save the world from "Man Made Climate Change."

skip to results

Articles by Climate Realists and Topics

» Recently used highlighted

ALL #-E F-J K-O P-T U-Z
2010 Forecast
A Moment Of Clarity
Acidic Oceans
Adrian MacNair
Advert
AfricaGate
Al Ritter
Alan Broone
Alan Carlin
Alan Caruba
Alan Cochrane
Alan Nicholl
Alan Siddons
Alan Tichmarsh
Alex Jones
Alex Newman
Allan Macrae
Allen Quist
Amanda Baillieu
Amazon Rain Forests
AmazonGate
American Meteorological Society
Andrew Bolt
Andrew Kenny
Andrew Montford
Andrew Neil
Andrew Orlowski
Ann McElhinney
Ann Widdecombe
Anna Sanclement
Anthony G. Martin
Anthony J. Sadar
Anthony Watts
ArcticSnap.Com
Arno Arrak
Art Horn
Arthur Rorsch
Arthur Wiegenfeld
Audio
Barry Brill
Barry Napier
Barry Schwartz
Barun S. Mitra
BBC
Benny Peiser
Betting
Bill Board
Bill DiPuccio
Bill Stratton
Bjorn Lomborg
Blast From the Past
Bo Christiansen
Bob Ashworth
Bob Carter
Bob Ellis
Bob Tisdale
Bob Webster
Book
Brainwashing
Brent Bozell
Bring It On
Bruce Thompson
Burger King Sign
C. R. de Freitas
Calem Smith
Cameron English
Carbon Trading
Cartoon
Cathy Taibbi
Catlin Arctic Survey
Cause & Effect
Censorship
CFACT
Charles Anderson
Christian Gerondeau
Christmas Donation
Christopher Booker
Christopher C. Horner
Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Pearson
Claes Johnson
Claude Allègre
Claude Sandroff
Cliff OLLIER
Climate Fools Day
Climate Protest
ClimateGate
ClimateRealists.Com
climaterealists.org.nz
Climatic Research Unit
Clive James
Clouds
CO2 Is Green
CO2 Level
CO2 Propaganda
Comment
Comment On Article
Conrad Black
conservation
Copenhagen Conference
CowGate
Craig Idso
Dan Miller
Dan Pangburn
Daniel Compton
Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Henninger
Darren Pope
Dave Dahl
Dave Epstein
Dave Hatter
David Appell
David Archibald
David Bellamy
David Deming
David Dick
David E. Sumner
David Evans
David H. Douglass
David Henderson
David Icke
David Ivory
David Lappi
David Lungren
David R. Legates
David Rose
David Spiegelhalter
David Whitehouse
Dean Grubbs
Debra J. Saunders
Delayed
Denis Rancourt
Dennis Ambler
Dennis Boothby
Dennis T. Avery
Derek Alker
Deroy Murdock
Dexter Wright
Dominic Lawson
Don Blankenship
Don Easterbrook
Don Parkes
Don Petersen
Donald Trump
Donna Laframboise
Doreen Alli Linder
Doug L. Hoffman
Doug Wyatt
Douglas Cohen
Douglas J. Keenan
Duncan Davidson
E. Calvin Beisner
Ed Berry
Ed Hiserodt
Ed West
Editorial
Education
Edward Barnes
Edward F Blick
Edward Lane
Edward Moran
Edward R. Long
Edward Wimberley
Edwin X Berry
Elisa Pardo
Energy & Fuel
Erl Happ
Exclusive
Facebook
Fan Page
FAQ
Ferenc Miskolczi
Film & TV
Financial
Fire James Hansen
FloodGate
Floor Anthoni
Forum
Frank J. Tamel
Frank J. Tipler
Frank Lansner
Fraser Nelson
Fred Dardick
Fred Singer
Frederick Forsyth
Freeman Dyson
Front Page News
Frozen Al Gore
Funding
Garth Paltridge
Gary Novak
Gary Sutton
Gary Thompson
Geert Groot Koerkamp
Geoffrey Lean
Geological Society of America (GSA)
George Giles
George Jonas
George Will
Gerald T. Westbrook
Gerald Traufetter
Gerald Warner
Gerhard Kramm
Gerhard Loebert
Gerrit van der Lingen
Girma Orssengo
Glenn Beck
Godfrey Bloom
Gordon J. Fulks
Green Cars
Green Ideology
Green Religion
Green Tax
Green Tories
GreenViolence
Greenwashing
Gregory Fegel
Gregory Young
Guillermo Gonzalez
GV Chilingar
Habibullo Abdussamatov
Haiti Earthquake
Hans H.J. Labohm
Hans Jelbring
Hans Schreuder
Harold Ambler
Harold W. Lewis
Harrison Schmitt
Harry Jackson
Harvey M. Sheldon
Headline Story
Heinz Lycklama
Henrik Svensmark
Henry Lamb
Hide The Decline Video
Himalayan Glacier Data
How to Comment
Howard Hayden
Iain Murray
Ian McEwan
Ian Plimer
Ian Wishart
Important Announcement
Important Notice
International Climate Science Coalition
IPCC Review
iPhone App
Ivan Kenneally
J. Winston Porter
J.R. Dunn
James A. Marusek
James Delingpole
James Heiser
James Inhofe
James Lewis
James M. Taylor
James Maropoulakis Denney
James R. Barrante
James Rust
JAMES SHOTT
Jan Janssen
Janet Albrechtsen
Janet Daley
Jarl R. Ahlbeck
Jay Ambrose
Jay Lehr
Jay Richards
Jean-Michel Bélouve
Jeff Kuhn
Jeffrey Bossert Clark
Jeffrey Folks
Jeffrey Glassman
Jeffrey T. Kuhner
Jennifer Marohasy
Jeremy Clarkson
Jeremy Ross
Jerome Bastien
Jerry Taylor
Jill Farrell
Jim Elsner
Jim Guirard
Jim Hollingsworth
Jim O'Neill
Jim Peden
Jim Salinger
Joanne Nova
Joe Bastardi
Joe Daleo
JOEL CONNELLY
John A. Shanahan
John Abbot
John Barnhart
John Brandt
John Christy
John Coleman
John Daly
John Droz, Jr
John Griffing
John H. Sununu
John Leonard
John Lott
JOHN M. BRODER
John Mackey
John Mangun
John McLaughlin
John McLean
John O'Sullivan
John P. Costella
John Reid
John Sutherland
John Vennari
John Ziraldo
Johnny Ball
Jonathan A. Lesser
Jonathan Drake
Jonathan Powell
Joseph A Olson
Joseph Bast
Joseph Farah
Josh Fulton
Judith Curry
Jürgen Krönig
Jyrki Kauppisen
Karl Bohnak
Kelly O'Connell
Ken Cuccinelli
Ken Green
Ken Stewart
Ken Ward Jr.
Kenneth Haapala
Kenneth P. Green
Kesten C. Green
Kevin Klees
Kevin Libin
Kevin Mooney
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
Kirk Melhuish
Kirk Myers
Kirtland Griffin
Klaus L.E. Kaiser
L. GORDON CROVITZ
Larrey Anderson
Larry Cosgrove
Laurence I. Gould
Law/Policy
Lawrence Solomon
Lee C. Gerhard
Leighton Steward
Leon Ashby
Leonard Weinstein
Letter
Letters@ClimateRealists.Com
Lewis Page
LF Khilyuk
Lord Beaverbrook
Lord Monckton
Lorne Gunter
Lorrie Goldstein
Lubos Motl
M. Paul Lloyd
Mac Johnson
MalariaGate
Malcolm Colless
Malcolm Roberts
Mann Made Climate Change
Marc Morano
Marc Sheppard
Marcus Brooks
Mark Howarth
Mark Landsbaum
Mark Lawson
Mark R. Warner
Mark Vogan
Mark W. Hendrickson
Martin Cohen
Martin Durkin
Martin Hertzberg
Matt and Janet Thompson
MATT PATTERSON
Matt Philbin
Matt Ridley
Matthew Cawood
Maurizio Morabito
Meetings
Melanie Phillips
Merv Bendle
Met Office
Michael Andrews
Michael Asher
Michael Asten
Michael Beenstock
Michael Coren
Michael Crichton
Michael J. Economides
Michael R. Fox
Michael Shermer
MIKE HULME
Mike Lockwood
Mike Norton-Griffiths
Mobile Site
Mohib Ebrahim
Mojib Latif
Muriel Newman
Music
Mytheos Holt
Nancy Neale
NASA
Nasif S. Nahle
NED ROZELL
Neil Reynolds
Newspaper Article
NICOLA SCAFETTA
Nigel Calder
Nigel Lawson
Niger Innis
Nils-Axel Mörner
Noel Sheppard
Norm Kalmanovitch
Norman Page
Norman Rogers
North Sea Storm Surge
Not Evil Just Wrong
NZ Climate Scandal
OG Sorokhtin
Oliver K. Manuel
Open Letter/Fax
Opinion
Orrin G. Hatch
Pachauri Conflict of Interest
Papers Challenging AGW
Pat Michaels
Patrick Henningsen
Patrick McMahon
Patrik Jonsson
Paul Biggs
Paul C. Knappenberger
Paul Chesser
Paul Driessen
Paul Hamaker
Paul Hudson
Paul M. Murray
Paul Macrae
Paul Murdock
Paul Shlichta
Paul Vreymans
Paul Wornham
Penny Rodriguez
PETE DU PONT
Peter C Glover
Peter Ferrara
Peter Foster
Peter Gill
Peter Hitchens
Peter J. Havanac
Peter Landesman
Peter Schwerdtfeger
Peter Spencer
Peter Taylor
PETITION
Petr Chylek
Phelim McAleer
Phil Brennan
Phil Green
Philip Foster
Philip J. Klotzbach
Philip Sherwell
Philip Stott
Phillip A W Bratby
PhotoGate
Pierre R. Latour
Piers Akerman
Piers Corbyn
Press Release
Public Polls
QR Code
Raven Clabough
Rebecca Terrell
Reply To Article
Reply To Letter
Reply To Media
Report
Rex Murphy
Rich Apuzzo
Richard Baehr
Richard Courtney
Richard F. Yanda
Richard Holle
Richard J. Grant
Richard James
Richard Lindzen
Richard Littlejohn
Richard Mackey
Richard North
Richard Treadgold
Richard Wellings
Rob Smith
Robert Bryce
Robert D. Brinsmead
Robert Ferguson
Robert H. Austin
Robert Hodges
Robert Laughlin
Robert Matthews
Robert Sprinkel
Robert Tracinski
Robert W. Endlich
Robert W. Felix
Robin Horbury
Rod Liddle
Roger F. Gay
ROGER HELMER
Roger L. Simon
Roger Pielke Jr.
Roger Pielke Sr.
Roger W. Cohen
Ron House
Ron Johnson
Ron Nurwisah
Ronald D. Voisin
Ronald R. Cooke
Ross Kaminsky
Ross McKitrick
Rosslyn Smith
Roy Clark
Roy Spencer
Royal Society Review
Rupert Wyndham
Russell Cook
Russian Temperature Data
Ruth Dudley Edwards
Sammy Benoit
Sammy Wilson
Samuel Rodriquez
Sarah Palin
SatelliteGate
Satire
Scott Armstrong
Scott Denning
Sea Level Gate
Selwyn Duke
Shunichi Akasofu
Simon Heffer
Site Announcements
Skeptic's Guide
Social Networking
Solar Climate Change
Solar Cycle 24
Solar Cycle 25
Solar News
SolarCycle25.com
Statement
Stephen Glover
Stephen Murgatroyd
Stephen Wilde
Sterling Burnett
Steve Bettison
Steve Fielding
Steve Goreham
Steve LaNore
Steve McIntyre
Steve Running
Steve Watson
Steven F. Hayward
Steven Goddard
Steven H. Yaskell
Steven Milloy
Stewart Franks
Stewart Meagher
Stuart Blackman
Stuart Clark
Svend Hendriksen
Swine Flu
Syun Akasofu
Terence Corcoran
Terri Jackson
Terry Crowley
Terry Hurlbut
Terry McCrann
The Branch Carbonian
The Marshall Institute
The Royal Society of New Zealand
Thomas E. Brewton
Thomas Fuller
Thomas Lifson
THOMAS P. SHEAHEN
Tim Ball
Tim Blair
Tim Coleman
Timothy Casey
Tom Bethell
Tom Chivers
Tom Harris
Tom Nelson
Tom Quirk
Tom Russell
Tom V. Segalstad
Tony Hake
Tony Newbery
Tony Pann
Transcript
TreeGate
Trudy Schuett
True or False?
Truth Squad
Try this at home
Twitter

Click to get your own widget

CO2 Contributed by
Human Activity:
12 to 15ppmv

Letters
Disclaimer
  • » News articles may contain quotes, these are copyright to the respective publication which will be stated, along with a link to the source article where available.
  • » If you feel your copyright has been violated please contact us and the article will be removed or amended at your request.
Articles Recently Viewed

4,129

Donations
  • » Support us by making a donation of just $5 towards
    site research, marketing,
    maintenance & administration.
Recent Most Read

Show #11-20

See Stephen Wilde's Latest Article

Show articles by Stephen Wilde

All Time Most Read

Show #11-20