It’s snowing again – again!

A while back I wrote an article saying it was the snowiest winter we had had. We then got the so called “beast from the east”. That brought Scotland to a standstill. For a few days it looked like it might melt away.

It’s now snowing and settling again.

I will be spending some serious money preparing for next winter.

Posted in Climate | 4 Comments

Small but significant risk of major loss of life in Scotland

Before the snow deluge, this winter had been worse than any in the 20 years we’ve lived in this location. It arrived earlier it remained cold and we had frequent period of snow that lay for a few days. But we had had deeper snow one year. That’s now changed and we’ve still got at least 3 more days of colder weather.

That is not the problem, like most people we stocked up on food and toilet rolls before the roads shut. And having bought snow chains (everyone laughed as we live in a suburb of Glasgow), it would take just five minutes to get to roads that are “drivable”.

The problem is that there is no way on earth the global warming obsessed Scottish government or local government could ever conceive of the amount of snow we’ve already had. They weren’t prepared for the last few winters when people were stuck up to 8 hours of motorways, they aren’t prepared for this. We have certainly got a few more days of this snow, but whilst there’s a couple of days has a maximum of 4C, that may be no where near enough to melt the snow. If people cannot restock their larders, cannot do minor repairs, and then there is even more snow as forecast … Continue reading

Posted in Climate | 3 Comments

BBC Newsnight hit by PIW (Politically Incorrect Water)

For years the BBC have carried what seemed to be an endless propaganda campaign on global warming. I gave up complaining when they falsely called us “deniers” but I can never forgive them for likening those of us who are rightly sceptical of “data” coming from the eco-zealots running NASA to paedophiles. Even for the Biased Broadcasting Company that has become a beacon of bigotry on subjects as wide ranging as Global warming to Scottish Independence (which I disagree with) and Brexit (which I agree with), that was a new low.

So, you can imagine I have been delighted to read the tweets from a well known Scottish BBC presenter Kirsty Wark who is now stuck on a train going no where.

DXHQ8a2WAAEksiA

DXHBgY2WAAcxkIw

Is that snow I see? No it can’t be snow! According to the BBC, that snow disappeared years ago and anyone denying that is a global warming denier.

No that’s not snow – it’s merely politically incorrect water.

Posted in Climate | 9 Comments

It’s snow (again)

I’ve already declared this our snowiest winter in the last 20 years living here. The road is covered again. Whilst we don’t get as much snow as some would think (due to prevailing wind off the warm seas), we do usually get one or two snow falls that settle. We once had several weeks of frost – but that was one large snowfall which turned to ice.

This year however, the winter started early and we’ve had repeated snow showers.

Posted in Climate | Leave a comment

The Anti-Greenhouse Effect (yes it is called that LOL)

This is a little gem I’ve got to share. Apparently not only have academics been daft enough to call the original effect the “Greenhouse effect” – when greenhouses work in completely different ways, but they’ve gone as far as to name something the “anti-greenhouse effect” – thus proving that the name “Greenhouse effect” is a total load of codswallop Continue reading

Posted in Climate | 5 Comments

Analysis of a joke

It is often said that any joke that has to be explained is ruined. However in this case, that might be the joke. So, to add to the excruciating nature of the joke here is my explanation.

There is another joke that goes:

“There are 10 types of people in the world, those that understand binary and those who don’t”.

That of course is what is being referred to by the “two types of people”. However, note that to accurately reflect the original joke it would need to be 10 types of people. That is why this is such a classic. Because you could use the “10” types of people for any base and have three groups:

“there are those who understand binary, those who don’t, and those who know there are more bases than binary and decimal”.

And of course, the number of possible groups can be extended even further … indeed up to an infinite base.

However a base 1 joke  is unique. Because there is only one number in a base one number system and that number is obviously zero.

So, clearly, we could have the joke of the form:

“There are 10 groups of people in the world: those who don’t understand base 1″.

That then fits the general patten of 10 jokes. Thus the humour in this joke is that “two” spelt out as a word does not work. It is clearly wrong – the teller was so bad at jokes they couldn’t even tell it properly. But then again, the pun on “10” only works when written not when spoken. And “those that don’t understand my humour” is only one group. So, the statement is clearly right, because how can anyone understand a joke that is palpably based on false logic and utterly wrong.

And that is the joke …

Which then, when you get it, makes the statement that there is only one group of people false … and it stops being funny.

No, No, No!
Sorry … just kidding!

The real joke is that’s its a a pun on function and dinner part and that the idea that anyone who thought the joke was funny would be invited to a dinner party in the first place.

Posted in Climate | 1 Comment

Our snowiest winter

Having lived in our current house for about 20years, like many people who live pretty ordinary lives, I’m able to reasonably accurately judge what has been happening to the weather in our locality.

We’ve had longer periods of ice – that is snow turned to ice and that did not melt, we’ve had a larger single deluge of snow, but there has not been a winter where we have had so many episodes of falling snow throughout the winter. And it is only mid February! AND the Met Office are now warming of “sudden stratospheric warming” which they say tends to lead to colder conditions.

What is different this winter, is that rather than one episode of snow (of varying scale) – which then goes away with no repetition, this winter “normal” amounts of  snow (perhaps just an inch or two) has been a regular feature. And before any alarmists suggest that snow occurs when it’s warmer – we’ve also had numerous days of ice. Instead, what has been happening is that the WARMER days of precipitation have been cooler.

Is that a trend? No. If I ignore what has occurred this winter, I do not think there has been any trend. However if something similar occurs again next winter it may be.

But whether or not it is part of a trend, I am officially declaring this the snowiest winter I have seen in this house (and there’s still a lot of the winter still to go).

(What prompted this post is that it’s start to snow again).

Posted in Climate | 2 Comments

Ball wins: All it took was a few decent people willing to stand up against tyranny.

When the history of these times are written it will be said that a few decent people stood up to a deluge of delusion and won.

Posted in Climate | 1 Comment

On the nature of scepticism: Sceptic versus science

How many times have we heard various people proclaiming that we sceptics are “anti-science”. For those of us taught science at a time when we were taught to be sceptics: to doubt everything until it is proven by experiment, this seems the bizarrest form of insult. Because surely the science is based on the scientific method and therefore to be a good scientist you must be a sceptic?

As a result many sceptics have repeatedly asserted that alarmists are not real “scientists” that they have fallen by the way and are not on the true path of science.

However, what I would like to propose is that whilst science means “knowledge” and scepticism means “doubt” and so they may appear to be contradictory, that scientific knowledge is created through scepticism or doubt as such that they should be seen as complementary not contradictory.

Continue reading

Posted in Climate | 4 Comments

Does this paper prove there is virtually no CO2 greenhouse effect?

By a strange path (reading adverse comments by alarmists in a paper I don’t mention) I came across this paper by Robert Ian Holmes which on the face of it would seem to disproves the Greenhouse effect as commonly stated:

Molar Mass Version of the Ideal Gas Law Points to a Very Low Climate Sensitivity

Stunningly it suggests a climate sensitivity for the doubling of CO2 of about 0.03C.

The change would in fact be extremely small and difficult
to estimate exactly, but would be of the order -0.03°C. That
is, a hundred times smaller than the ‘likely’ climate
sensitivity of 3°C cited in the IPCC’s reports,

The approach is brazenly simple. It starts with the ideal gas law:

PV = m/M RT

If converted to density this becomes:

ρ = P/(R T/M)

rearranged this becomes:

T = P /(R ρ/M)

The author then uses the figures from NASA (space) of surface pressure (P), the gas constant R, near surface atmospheric density and the near surface mean molar mass to calculate the Greenhouse temperature for the following:

Planetary body Calculated temperature Kelvin Actual temperature Kelvin Error
Venus 739.7 740 0.04%
Earth 288.14 288 0.00%
South Pole of Earth 224 224.5 0.20%
Titan 93.6 94 0.42%
Mars (low pressure) 156 218 28.44%
Jupiter 167 165 1.20%
Saturn 132.8 134 0.89%
Uranus 76.6 76 0.79%
Neptune 68.5 to 72.8 72 1-5%

The correlation is excellent as shown by the following actual versus calculated greenhouse effect:

PVNRTThe only substantial error is with the Greenhouse Temperature of Mars.

Discussion

Although this paper does not refer to them, this confirms the finding by Nikolov and Zeller in which they show that atmospheric pressure is the largest factor affecting Greenhouse temperature. But it then expands on their work to show that several other factors are alos important as well these being the molar mass and density.

One caveat I would have, is that these different parameters may not be independent, and particularly for the less well known planets & bodies some of the parameters may be back calculated so that a match is certain. However this argument will not apply to the better known planets.

Another caveat is that the formula clearly fell down with Mars, but the author rightly highlights that Mars is the body with the lowest pressure.

Taken at face value, the suggested 0.03C greenhouse effect for a doubling of CO2, does does seem to drive a cart and horse through any idea that CO2 could be a problem. However it may not be so simple. I need to think about it and do some analysis.

But at the very least, I will be very surprised if this paper doesn’t cause waves.

 ADDENDUM

After a bit of thinking, I’m wondering whether what we have here is that the temperature is setting other parameters. Pressure is set by the mass of the atmosphere divided by planetary surface area, however it may be that in effect the density and molar parameter are being affected by temperature. In which case it should be a perfect fit.

In other words it’s just a restatement of PV=nRT  in the form P=ρ (R/M) T (where ρ is density & M molar mass). In other words the ratio of pressure to density (P/ρ) =  (R/M) T.

Posted in Climate | 40 Comments