|
Written by Anthony Watts, Watts Up with That
|
|
Tuesday, 23 September 2008 |
|
I just finished participating in the press teleconference call in
for reporters with NASA and their panel of solar experts today. There
was a lot of interesting discussions and questions. Unfortunately even
though I put in for a question, I was shut out, and judging from the
order of the questions asked and the organizations represented, clearly
they played favorites for getting maximum exposure by choosing the
larger media outlets first, such as AP’s Seth Borenstein who got the
first question. That’s understandable I suppose, still I really wanted
to ask what they though about the step function in the Ap Index that occurred in October 2005 and has remained flat since.
I took quite a bit of notes, and I’ll write more later from them, but for now I wanted to give my readers a chance to weigh in.
See the written NASA press release here
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Klockarman, Gore Lied
|
|
Tuesday, 23 September 2008 |
|
Anthony Watts recently appeared on Hannity's America discussing his Surface Station Project,
which shows the surface station data to be very unreliable due to poor
siting of a majority of the surface stations, i.e. next to parking
lots, next to air conditioning exhausts, or on roofs. Since the
temperature data is biased towards higher temperatures, that's what
makes the information so useful to Al Gore, James Hansen, et al.
For example click here,
then look at the "Random Image" at the left side of the screen, and
keep clicking your refresh button to bring up a new random image.
Source
|
|
|
Written by Brett Anderson, AccuWeather
|
|
Tuesday, 23 September 2008 |
|
CCF Note: When looking at the glacier in this photograph, also note the dates and the location of each marked retreat.
Those famous yellow, rubber ducks that we played in the tub as young
children (We have 2 of them in the tub for our infant daughter) are now
being put to work by NASA of all places, according to an article from The Telegraph.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Anthony Watts, Watts Up with That
|
|
Friday, 19 September 2008 |
|
This is unusual. A live media teleconference on the sun. Even more unusual is this statement:
The sun’s current state could result in changing conditions in the solar system.
As you may recall, I posted an entry about the Ulysses mission back on June 16th and the findings of a lowered magnetic field in the sun, from the JPL press release then:
Ulysses ends its career after revealing that the magnetic field
emanating from the sun’s poles is much weaker than previously observed.
This could mean the upcoming solar maximum period will be less intense
than in recent history.
We live in interesting times.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by R.Danneskjöld, Global Warming Hoax
|
|
Friday, 19 September 2008 |
|
You'll probably never hear this from the main stream media but the
Arctic is not experiencing record high temperatures. Yet CO2 levels
continue to climb. Since "record ice loss" only looks back to 1979 its
highly likely that the ice loss we're seeing now has occurred many
times before.
Climate is defined as weather over time. When
you're talking about the climate of the earth you have to include all
of the "weather" over a period of time that includes all of its natural
weather cycles. Some of the known cycles are measured in 10's of
thousands of years. There are many important cycles that affect the
planet some as short as 10 years and many that span 50 to 1,000 years.
We don't even know about all of them. So when you're talking about
"climate temperature records" (remember "climate" is weather over time)
you would think the "record" would at least span a period of time that
included all of the cycles at least once. When you're looking at the
affects of "record temperatures" on something like the Arctic ice you
would again have to consider at least one period of all the cycles.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Allan MacRae, IceCap
|
|
Wednesday, 17 September 2008 |
|
Many scary stories have been written about the dangers of catastrophic
global warming, allegedly due to increased atmospheric concentrations
of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) from the combustion of
fossil fuels. But is the world really catastrophically warming? NO. And
is the warming primarily caused by humans? NO.
Since just January 2007, the world has cooled so much that ALL the
global warming over the past three decades has disappeared! This is
confirmed by a plot of actual global average temperatures from the best
available source, weather satellite data that shows there has been NO
net global warming since the satellites were first launched in 1979.
See larger image here.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Mark Paquette, AccuWeather
|
|
Friday, 12 September 2008 |
|
[H/T to Marc] Mark
Paquette, who is a new colleague of mine here at AccuWeather.com came
to me last month and wanted to get involved with the global warming
blog. In addition to being one of our new early morning forecasters,
Mark has a particularly strong interest in climate change. Mark will
pop in from time to time with a blog, especially during one of the
weekend days when I normally would not post anything new. —Brett [Anderson]
* * * * *
As a new meteorologist at AccuWeather I am not going to be pretend to
be an expert at global warming, or maybe more appropriately named,
climate change. This subject has interested me since grade school, and
I even considered studying it at the graduate school level.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
| Results 36 - 42 of 251 |