Articles Tagged "John O'Sullivan"
Sorted by: Date Posted
Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 5:34 PM EDT
With an excellent discussion underway, unfortunately - but not surprisingly - Anthony Watts abruptly closed comments on his latest article attacking Principia Scientific International (PSI). From his readers’ feedback it is clear Mr. Watts went off half cocked with his mischaracterization that PSI had “misinterpreted” a revealing NASA press release about CO2, solar flares, and the thermosphere.
Mr Watts is probably aware that he has no valid response to many of the points made by PSI members in various papers and articles. PSI doesn't shut down debate so, for those interested in debating the issue, all are very welcome to come do so on our own forum thread here.
Beyond doubt, as Douglas Cotton pointed out in his prompt rebuttal article to the WUWT piece, Mr. Watts has missed the elephant in the room. Cotton writes, “So, clearly the atmosphere acts as an umbrella during sunlit hours, and yet Anthony Watts and many climatologists like to play down this cooling effect, if they even mention it.”
Working overtime to hide that elephant with its umbrella is climatologist, Dr.Roy Spencer. Not only did a world-leading expert in thermodynamics, Dr. Pierre R Latour, point out Spencer’s errors with his ‘No, Virginia’ rebuttal to Spencer’s ‘Yes, Virginia’ blog post we’ve seen many other highly-respected scientists disagreeing with Dr. Spencer.
UC Berkeley Discredits Spencer's Infinite Heat Sink
A look at a thermodynamics physics text from UC Berkley proves, using standard physics, that cold does not heat up warm even in the presence of “backradiation.” Problem #1023 shows that a radiation shield does not cause a source to become hotter if its radiation is trapped, and Problem #1026 shows that a sphere surrounded by a shell simply warms up the shell until the shell emits the same energy as the sphere, without requiring the sphere to become hotter and with the presence of backradiation. What Spencer, Watts, Willis, et al mistakenly believe, is that in order for something warm to heat up something cool, the warmer thing has to heat up itself! As absurd a proposition as an ice cream licking itself.
Saturday, March 30th 2013, 10:49 AM EDT
In this article on his “WattsUpWithThat” (WUWT) website, Anthony Watts alleges that Principia Scientific International (PSI) whom he “truly dislikes giving any attention to” has done some “really bad mangling” and “completely misread the NASA study.” Sadly, for Mr. Watts his readership don't agree with him. Comments on WUWT are currently running two to one in favour of PSI.
He points out patronisingly (as if we hadn't noticed) that the NASA article was only talking about the thermosphere. Yet what does the PSI article repeatedly refer to? “Earth's upper atmosphere” and “the thermosphere.”
And what does PSI deduce? “Greenhouse gases actually block up to 95 percent of harmful solar rays.” Clearly we are only talking about the very harmful high intensity rays, such as those in a “burst of solar activity” early in March which NASA said delivered “26 billion kilowatt hours of energy from the Sun.” Obviously members of PSI know that the total percentage of Solar radiation absorbed by the atmosphere and clouds is somewhere between 19% (as shown in the NASA diagram below) and the 33% calculated for moist cloudy regions in this paper in the Journal of Geophysical Research.
Furthermore, when carbon dioxide absorbs such incident radiation, much of it is in the 2.7 micron band, for which each photon carries nearly four times the energy of typical 10 micron photons emitted from Earth's surface. Notice also that the NASA diagram shows only 15% being absorbed by the atmosphere from upwelling radiation, so more is absorbed from incident radiation. That alone would appear to imply a net cooling effect for radiating molecules.
Thursday, March 21st 2013, 10:00 AM EDT
As climatologists increasingly, albeit grudgingly, concede climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide approaches zero John Elliston publishes a telling paper on the UN's disastrously wrong definition of a “Greenhouse Effect.” Aussie geoscientist Elliston, pulls no punches with a new study published this week (March 19,2013) by Principia Scientific International (PSI). 
In no uncertain terms, Elliston, author of several peer-reviewed papers, concludes that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on a definition of the “Greenhouse Effect” (AR4,page 946) which is “plain wrong.”
Monday, March 18th 2013, 6:44 PM EDT
Scientists, like other professionals, are increasingly aware that the UN, man-made global warming and forced mass human sterilization have long been lumped together in the name of "sustainable development.” That there is growing concern about this cannot be dismissed as mere conspiracy theorizing – it is based in fact. Indeed, no less than 178 nations gathered in 1992 at Rio de Janeiro at the first ever UN Conference on Sustainability and the Environment and rubberstamped the UN's proposals on this.
More than 20 years on and the scientific arguments appear irredeemably tainted by politics. In this article we address some of the key issues and present the basic facts hoping it may serve as a guide for more informed rational discussion.
In essence,Agenda 21 is a UN program that references fears about our global environment as the rationale to advance three key UN policy documents: the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development,the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests; and Agenda 21. Here the United Nations defines Agenda 21:
Monday, March 11th 2013, 11:29 AM EDT
Because of the stringent censorship policy of Anthony Watts his award-winning WUWT science blog is not a place you will find articles skeptical of the so-called greenhouse gas theory (GHE). In keeping with that ethos Willis Eschenbach’s recent guest article for Watts provides another defense of what critics say is pseudo-science. Nonetheless, adverse comments there soon began to fly, which was unusual coming from loyal WUWT readers. Below is an edited version of Joe Postma’s impassioned refutation of that Eschenbach piece. If only Mr. Eschenbach and Mr. Watts would engage Postma and other GHE critics in debate. There is no doubt WUWT readers have a growing appetite for it.
The Fraud of the AGHE Part 11: Quantum Mechanics & The Sheer Stupidity of “GHE Science” on WUWT
By Astrophysicist, Joseph E. Postma
On this fairly recent post at “Watts Up With That”, guest contributor Willis Eschenbach developed an explanation for the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect using steel shells, with one inside the other. What Willis does is so intellectually offensive, so mentally incompetent, that it beggars the imagination. Willis takes an inner sphere radiating at a certain temperature as a blackbody, and then surrounds the sphere with a metal shell in order to trap the radiation.
Wednesday, March 6th 2013, 6:51 PM EST
Critics of the greenhouse gas theory and it's supposed role in climate change have presented a fresh analysis of a CIA report that suggests climatologists created a false scientific basis to link global warming to levels of carbon dioxide. An assumption that wrongly fixed cloud cover as a constant factor encouraged scientists to incorrectly assume changes in CO2 rather than changes in cloud cover determine temperatures.
Researchers at Principia Scientific International have put under the microscope an important but widely overlooked 1970's U.S. government climate report by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). ‘A Study of Climatological Research as it Pertains to Intelligence Problems' offers a wealth of evidence to prove the greenhouse gas effect (GHE) was disregarded by the best brains in climatology and the document shows no indication as to why the GHE was trumpeted as the accepted 'theory' on climate a mere half dozen years later. The CIA in-depth study dates from August 1974 and was uncovered by Maurizio Morabito in 2009 and despite tens of thousands of words not one mention is made anywhere of a supposed greenhouse gas effect. 
The CIA study was regarded by the U.S. Government as a highly accurate appraisal of the best peer-reviewed climate science of the day on concerns of global cooling. This document starkly contradicts a report by Peterson, Connolley and Fleck who misused the American Meteorological Society (AMS) in September 2008 to paint a different picture about global warming. 
When contrasting and comparing the CIA study from 1974 with the 'science' of NASA's lead climatologist, Dr. James Hansen, a mere seven years later (1981), we see a very abrupt and inexplicable switch around from fears of global cooling and no mention of any 'greenhouse gas effect' (GHE) to a scenario of runaway global warming all attributed to a human-accelerated 'greenhouse gas effect.' 
Tuesday, February 26th 2013, 7:59 AM EST
Britain’s deeply unpopular Climate Change Act (2008) may be set for repeal as another politician joins the growing number of MP’s aghast at the damage it is having on the nation’s ailing economy.
Conservative Member of Parliament, Douglas Carswell’s mea culpa today (February 25, 2013) shows dignity and acceptance of the weight of evidence conflicting with the already scientifically dubious notion of human-caused global warming. “My biggest regret as an MP is that I failed to oppose the 2008 Climate Change Act. It was a mistake. I am sorry,” said Carswell on his blog.
The announcement comes hot on the heels of last week’s surprise admission by Rajendra Pachuari, the UN’s head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Dr. Pachauri conceded that we are now into a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, as confirmed recently by Britain's Met Office. Even NASA’s most strident climate doomsayer, Dr. James Hansen concedes there has been "a pause” in any temperature rise.
The 2008 rush to enact the UK’s "carbon tax" is now dismissed by Carswell as “gesture legislation” and like other politicians he admits “this law has turned out to have real consequences.” Like others Carswell has woken up to the stark reality of just how much the UK’s Climate Change Act has pushed up energy prices and is “squeezing households and making economic recovery ever more elusive,” says the MP. Under the Act the government is currently legally committed to cutting CO2 emissions by 35 per cent by 2022 and 50 per cent by 2025. In contrast, the EU is only committed to cutting emissions 20 per cent by 2020.Skyrocketing energy bills have forced 6 million households in fuel poverty and the proposed Carbon Floor Price will increase this number to 12 million - that is 1 in 4 households
Friday, January 25th 2013, 11:19 AM EST
After reading John O'Sullavans Blundering British Met Office Now forecast Nations "Coldest Thaw" I thought I would try and keep track of this forecast, best of luck Piers.
Above latest Met Office forecast for widespread snow cover in the UK for Today and Tomorrow (Saturday 26th January) indicates....according to the Met office.....a thaw will take place very soon as there is a very warm weather system coming to the UK and starting from Sunday there will some heavy rain and warmer temperatures?
Piers is not so sure they have this correct as there is not much mobility going on, and the Atlantic front due to hit the UK does not look as if will pass through from West to the East of the UK in the way the Met Office have forecast......more to follow.
See below latest forecast for Sunday 27th January
Thursday, January 24th 2013, 4:46 PM EST
The cold snap is expected to 'go out with a bang' tomorrow as up to a foot of snow is expected to fall and much of the country will receive a final blanketing.
The Met Office has put out amber and yellow warnings for much of Scotland, the north of England, east of England and East and West Midlands, with yellow warnings in Wales, south west England and London and the South East.
It warned that strong winds will also lead to drifting and blizzard-like conditions, particularly over higher level roads in the north. Head of special operations Darron Burness said: 'It looks likely that the current cold spell will go out with a bang tomorrow....click source to read FULL Daily Mail report
Also read this report from John O'Sullivan Blundering British Met Office Now forecast Nations "Coldest Thaw"
Monday, January 21st 2013, 3:13 PM EST
Astrophysicist and weather expert, Piers Corbyn who runs WeatherAction.com, has been uncannily accurate so far this winter. Londoner Corbyn produces long-range weather forecasts so good that they never cease beating and baffling Britain’s gigantic £200 million-a-year official weather forecaster, the Met Office.
What is truly remarkable is that the details for Corbyn’s daring January 2013 forecast were made 45 days ahead, a task beyond the competency of “traditional” methods. In the early part of this winter this mild-mannered and avuncular upstart had already made fools of the Met Office (MO) for their “Beast from the East” scare. The MO flunked badly while Corbyn’s bold prediction for a mild early winter proved totally accurate.
On January 10, 2013 The Daily Express front page quoted Piers Corbyn when some standard forecasters started to see WeatherAction’s very icy blasts and blizzards coming (see graphic). However although WeatherAction’s very cold weather soon came Met models still dithered about heavy snow / blizzards until they were almost upon us and, lo and behold, on January 15, 2013 there was a dramatic switch towards copycatting WeatherAction – again. Perhaps some bright spark at the MO has decided to sign up to Corbyn’s paid services, at a tiny fraction of the cost of the heavily taxpayer-subsidized misfits.
213 articles foundshowing page 1 of 22« previous 1 2 3 4
. . . 21 22 next »